I don't know how valid Quick's Tweets are, but he is mentioning that the Blazers are interested in two of the candidates they interviewed, as assistants to Stotts. Which was exactly (IMO) why it was a good decision to interview as many people as possible. They were able to get to know them a little better and learn which attributes each could bring to a coaching staff. Lestor Connor and Steve Clifford are two he has mentioned.
Since you asked... '03-'04 Hawks, 28-54 under Terry Stotts '04-'05 Hawks, 13-69 under Mike Woodson '06-'07 Bucks, 28-54 under Terry Stotts (& Larry Krystowiak) '07-'08 Bucks, 26-56 under Larry Krystowiak
When Stotts was Sonic assistant coach, he wasn't considered anything special. Sonic fans were surprised that any team would make him head coach.
How long ago was Stotts assistant in Seattle? Maybe he's learned something since then? Besides, why should I lose sleep worrying about the opinions of fans without a team?
Fans in general know very little about coaches. In all sports. We are not there when the actual coaching is being done. Substitution patterns and clock management is about all we see. So personally I don't put any credence in what any fan says about a head coach or assistant coach. That and the fact that 99% of all coaches are bashed by their fans at some point.
Actually a ton of a what a head coach's job is all about is to make in-game adjustments and make tactical decisions (and how they manage player minutes). If they aren't very good at that part of the gig it's completely valid for fans or sportswriters or anybody to question their performance.
To who? If you are implying that the two options for head coach were really only Canales and Stotts, then there isn't really much to discuss.
Not saying fans and sportswriters can't question a coaches performance. I am saying that unless you are in the huddle or at practice, we don't have enough to know how good of a coach he is. At one point Nate had a great stat in the 4th qtr for scoring out of timeout, and also for winning close games. Easily top 10 in the league. With no Brandon that statistic was not as good. That goes for all coaches. It's a players league. They make coaches look bad or good. But most coaching is from the preparation in practice. (ask Chip Kelly on that) Sure the in game adjustments are important, but it's one aspect. And quite frankly most fans do not even notice when it happens.
He lost to the Nets despite starting Sheed, Przybilla, Diaw, Jason Terry, and Stephen Jackson. He played Jacques Vaughn, whom we could have had instead of Stotts. http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200402180NJN.html