This was posted by a guy named blue on O-live. I wanted to copy and paste it here to see what you guys think. It's kinda interesting. -------------------------------------------------------- First I need to say that this was written a while ago, when I was giving Nate a little benefit of the doubt. It needs to be rewritten (especially this intro!), which I'll probably do after the season to include all of the 11/12 data. But here it is: I’ve long argued that Nate McMillan is not a good coach. But I suppose that is too broad of a statement. He’s is a fine regular season coach. As with most coaches, the wins and losses of the regular season are largely dependent on the roster. After all, the regular season is about the players. It’s the Playoffs where coaches are truly measured. Yet even looking at the regular season you can see how Nate will fail in the Playoffs. Lately his rosters have been good enough to win more than they lose, even with key injuries. And to be sure, Nate has generally done a good job in keeping his players focused during tough times. But there’s more to coaching than keeping players focused and motivated. Below I will discuss the areas where Nate’s coaching has been inadequate. Nate's Deficiencies - Defense McMillan has the reputation of a defensive coach. Upon becoming coach of the Blazers his first order of business was defense. After each day of training camp, when asked by the media what they focused on in practice, Nate would talk about defense. And his reputation was born. It never mattered that he didn’t get good defensive results – just that he talked about defense. The national media would pick up on the stories reported by the local media, and Nate’s reputation as a defensive coach grew larger. But all one has to do is look at the product on the floor to see that Nate has done a terrible job at either (1) creating a sound defensive concept, or (2) teaching his defensive concept to his players. Either way, it’s a major failing. From 2000 through 2011 Nate’s defensive ranking is 20.45 out of 29.69 (there were only 29 teams when he first started coaching). For someone known for his defense, that’s atrocious. As a comparison, Mike D’Antoni ranks 19.75 out of 29.75 teams – yes, D’Antoni actually has a higher defensive ranking than Nate McMillan. These numbers are based off of Defensive Rating, which is points allowed per 100 possessions. If you’re like me and prefer something a little less abstract then let’s look at Opponent’s FG% - I like this as the most pure measure for a team’s defense, as it weeds out intentional fouls and focuses on how well a team does at keeping the other team from scoring while the ball is in play. McMillan fairs a tiny bit better here – he ranks 20.18 out of 29.69 teams (OppFG% = 45.8%), whereas D’Antoni ranks 20.25 out of 29.75 (OppFG% = 46.2%). As another comparison I ran the numbers on Mike Brown. I picked Brown because he’s also known as a defensive coach, but I was dubious. Also, during his 5 years with the Cavs his rosters, aside from LeBron James, were average at best. However, his ranking is 7.8 out of 30, or 8.6 out of 30 for OppFG%. Color me impressed! What McMillan is lacking is the understanding of how to stitch together all 5 players into a single unit – team defense. You can’t win the defensive battle on individual defensive performances, you need a sound defensive philosophy that’s based on players knowing when to cover for their teammates, and where to move as the ball and players move around the floor. Nate's Deficiencies - Offense Nate has never been known as an offensive juggernaut. He’s always preferred to set up in the half-court and run the clock down to make the opposing team play defense and then hope to find a breakdown. It’s been called an efficient, if low-scoring, offense. And while “efficient” might be too strong of a word, he certainly fares a bit better at offense than he does defense. Here his ranking is 11 out of 29.69 teams (as with Defensive Rating, Offensive Rating is points scored per 100 possessions). And because I prefer a more concrete number his FG% ranking is 15.18 out of 29.69. Based on these numbers I would call his offense average – at best. I would argue that his numbers would be much lower if he didn’t have Brandon Roy playing an effective isolation game for several years. And now that Andre Miller is no longer running the team, we’re seeing that the offense is a mess. What I see when I watch his teams play is that there is very little ball or player motion. His offensive sets are heavily reliant on one player creating a scoring opportunity. There are 3 main ways this is done: (1) the ball-handler goes 1-on-1 and shoots a lay-up or step-back jumper, (2) the ball-handler goes 1-on-1 and kicks out to a spot-up shooter, or (3) the ball-handler passes into the post and lets the post-player work 1-on-1. To augment these three “sets” you’ll occasionally see some off-the-ball screens – typically a double screen, where a player will run off both screens and receive a pass after running off the second. What you don’t see are the “screens” moving into scoring positions after they’ve completed the screen – McMillan’s set is designed to get a specific player a specific shot. If that shot is sniffed out and shut down by the defense there aren’t any other options built into the set – the players are left with a broken play.Shot LocationsAnother important part of the offense is where the shots are coming from. Your FG% increases as you get closer to the hoop. Unfortunately, McMillan has always coached for the jumper rather than the lay-up. Where most teams run a pick and roll, McMillan runs a pick and pop. The pick and roll is one of the most effective plays in basketball, but Nate turns it into a mid-range jumper – the least effective shot in basketball. The data for shot locations (available starting in 06/07) is broken down into 5 categories: (1) At Rim, (2) 3-9 feet, (3) 10-15 feet, (4) 16-23 feet, and (5) 23+ feet. Unfortunately Nate’s lowest rank is in the At Rim category, and his highest rank is in the 16-23 feet category – opposite of what you’d like to see. In shots At Rim the Blazers average rank is 23.6 out of 30 – meaning that roughly 23 teams shoot more shots “At Rim” than the Blazers. For 3-9 feet the Blazers rank 15.8. For 10-15 feet they rank 12.6. For 16-23 feet they rank 10.6. And for 23+ feet they rank 17. Ideally a teams shot selection would look like: (1), (2), (3) or (5) depending on personnel, and lastly (4). Unfortunately Nate’s teams shot selections are nearly opposite of ideal – (4), (3), (2), (5), (1). Nate's Deficiencies - General To this point I’ve discussed fairly tangible, measurable ways in which Nate McMillan misses the mark. But there are numerous other ways that call into question whether he has the skills needed to move the team beyond a 1st Round Playoff exit. For the past three years we’ve seen Rick Adelman, Alvin Gentry, and Rick Carlisle out-coach Nate McMillan in the Playoffs. In each case, after Game 1 the opposing coach made a key adjustment to take away our offense. Typically that’s where the chess game begins, and coaches duel with adjustments. But while the opposition is playing chess Nate is playing checkers. He hasn’t shown any ability to make adjustments between games, let alone in-game adjustments. Our franchise cornerstones – Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldridge – never developed into a potent 1-2 punch. These were the guys that we were relying on to win us ball games, and eventually a championship. Typically a coach, when given two players of this caliber, would develop an offensive system that relied on the two best players working in tandem – Williams and Boozer, Parker and Duncan, Nash and Stoudemire, Kobe and Shaq. However, that was never seen with Roy and Aldridge (and now it never will be seen). What we saw was Roy dominating the ball, and Aldridge relegated to 18’ jumpers – no pick and roll, no give and go, no off-ball slashing towards the hoop. These were two great players playing as individuals. Nate McMillan also demonstrates poor decision-making and mixed messages when it comes to dealing with his players. He wanted to start Blake over Miller (and did!). He wanted to start Outlaw over Batum (and did, though it was short-lived). And even though this is a moot point, he wanted Przybilla to start over Oden before it was known that Oden was injured. And how about the mixed message of making defense a priority, yet giving Outlaw, Roy, and Aldridge a free pass to take it easy on the defensive end, ultimately leading to foul trouble for the bigs? And surely we’ve all pulled out our hair when Nate takes the “hot hand” out of the game because, according to the clock, it’s time to make a substitution. Nate's Deficiencies - Conclusion Nate McMillan may not be a bad coach – but he certainly isn’t a good coach either. Lucky for him there’s a dearth of truly great coaches in the NBA. The vast majority of coaches are mediocre at best, and so mediocre becomes the “average”, and the average are labeled “good”. Nate McMillan may keep his team working hard. He won’t let them quit on a season, when other coaches might. But he doesn’t have the chops to go up against the best teams and the best coaches in a 7-game series. He lacks the ability to create a cohesive 5-man unit on either end of the floor, and as a result is dependent on his best players having great individual performances. That’ll certainly lead to a good number of wins, and a Playoff berth, but it won’t lead to a championship.
He also doesn't develop young talent. Who knows where Nic would be right now if it weren't for FIBA summer games.
IMO, Nate has only been good at two things, which is motivating and being a hard ass. Now that the team has seemed to turn somewhat of a deaf ear to him, and we have no knuckleheads to speak of, he is absolutely useless as our coach.
I don't like his offense, but I also don't like the argument presented in this fashion. Here's his DRtg and DefFG%. Agrees with the numbers, Nate a bad coach. ORtg shows that he has ran a very efficient offense, not "average, at best". If you take out his first 2 years here, when we overhauled a crap roster, that ORtg would go up even higher. But then, he also adds in the, I think it'd be worse without Roy. No shit? Remove a team's best player, and the coach looks bad afterwards? Go figure. Of course, while we've started to slip a little, we are still 7th in ORtg this season. So no Roy, and minus Miller, it's a mess......but 7th in the league in ORtg, and 11th in FG%. Seems like he expected something different there, and ignored the fact that it didn't happen, because his eye says it is a mess. Again, i don't care for his offense, but seems dumb to try to make a point with stats that don't back up the argument.
I don't think Aldridge or Roy needed to be "developed". Do you? Batum seems to be the one player that has developed under Nate, and most everyone in the world points to Monty Williams as the guy who developed Nic
no, I agree, I just think it is a foolish argument. But most teams have a developmental coach. I guess to say he's at fault for NOT developing young people seems odd to me. Sure, D'Antoni looks like a genius for making Lin look good. So now he's a great developmental coach? He didn't make their last lotto pick Jordan Hill look good at all and they dumped him. Why didn't he make Alando Tucker look good in Phx? i'm sure there's other dumb examples i can use. how many head coaches are primarily responsible for the development of their young players? Versus bayno types?
Guys I was just passing the info along. I thought it was very well thought out and wanted to share it on S2. There are things I disagree with as well, but it kinda sums up a lot of my frustration on a lot of things this season. It's like Nate isn't a bad coach, but a coach that lost connection with his team. That spells disaster for teams. That's why coaches that never made it past the first round never make it to the seven year mark.
Rondo had the 3rd 15-15-20 game in NBA history yesterday with Lin 'defending' him. The other two players with games like Rondo's? Oscar Robertson and Wilt Chamberlain. Rondo is a nice player, but he's nowhere near those two, yet Lin handed Rondo one of the greatest single game performances in NBA history. I also like to us EFF ratings instead of Ortg/Drtg to assess team defense, but those numbers are much higher for Nate's tenure in Portland, so it would fit into the meme.
yeah, should have said have people thinking he is a genius again. A week before Lin blew up, there seemed to be a countdown to how soon he was going to get fired. Two weeks later, it's all forgotten, and he is amazing. It'd be like us going on a 6 game win streak on the back of Nolan Smith right now, and all of a sudden, everyone thinks Nate is great.
Nate McMillan pretty much summed it up perfectly a few weeks ago when he said "if you're gonna go down, you go down your way." He's just a stubborn, hard-headed person that has difficulty adjusting. And being stubborn and having difficulty adjusting is not a successful quality as a head coach. As a head coach its your job to make adjustments throughout the game and season. We're a team that absolutely gets exploited on pick and roll defense. Nate continually coaches switching on screens which always results a defensive mismatch. When a team runs the pick and roll, their objective is to get you to switch. This results in mismatches and the defense is then in scramble mode. This is exacerbated by the fact that Portland does not play good team defense failing to rotate and help teammates. That's why in the past 3 playoff series you saw Houston, Phoenix and Dallas pick and roll us to death. Good coaches see where they can improve and develop strategies that fits their roster. For example, take Erik Spoelstra. In the Finals, Dallas slowed downed the game to force Miami's athletes to execute a half-court offense, which was not their strength. So what did Spoelstra do? He tried to find ways to improve the offense that fit the players on his roster. Its been said that he went to Oregon and consulted Chip Kelly about the nuances of the spread offense. He realized that with the speed and athleticism of Lebron James and Dwyane Wade Miami would thrive if he opened up the court and spread out the floor. Now look at Miami's offense, they're running teams out of the gym. Adjustments.
Did Phil Jackson adjust the triangle, or did he wait until Kobe was ready to take over the MJ role? Did Jerry Sloan adjust his pick and roll offense after 20 years of no titles, or did he keep at it until he lost his best player, Deron Williams? Did Mike D'Antoni adjust his approach, even when it became clear in PHX that his style does not equate to playoff success? Based on the Blazers' rise in Pace and Fastbreak points this year, it's obvious that Nate has adjusted, quite a bit. Yet guess what? The team is playing poorly. Seems to be an argument against adjusting, doesn't it?
Why would you need to adjust anything when it results in 11 NBA titles? Oh, and how many NBA titles have Sloan and D'Antoni won not adjusting?
That makes little sense. he got shut down in the halfcourt game so the adjustment he made was to....just ignore the halfcourt game?
Nate adjusted this year. It's obvious if you look at the Pace of the offense. In doing so, he's landed himself firmly on the hot seat. People bitched for years here about wanting to watch a faster team that scored on fastbreaks, even if it meant the team wasn't winning as much. If I have to, I'll go back and find some of those posts. Yet now, with the Blazers 7th in Pace (9th on ESPN), running the break more, and still in the playoff hunt, this board is having a collective hissy fit. The primary problem with Nate changing his style is that Portland is also 28th in Fastbreak EFF, and is blowing too many scoring opportunities when they run. Nate can let them run, but he can't put the ball into the fucking basket for them. That's what the players are paid to do, isn't it, and they are just flat-out horrible at it.
One thing Nate has not changed: for long stretches, the Blazer offense features 3 or even 4 guys standing around like topiary. It's fine to talk about needing a "closer". It's even better to play well for 48 minutes and not need one to bail you out at the last minute.
Miami has a Pace factor of 94.9 according to Hollinger (8th in the NBA). Portland is at 94.7 (9th in the NBA). Huge difference, isn't it?
Here's an idea. Miami is playing better than Portland because Wade, James, and Bosh are really fucking good players. Just throwing that one out there.
