McMillan was a very limited coach, and nothing without Roy. Pritchard was no help. Maybe both are learning now from Bird and Vogel. Stotts has benefited from Olshey, who I suspect is the big picture architect of Stotts' system.
The fact that he's implemented a system that isn't totally reliant on ONE player bodes well for post season success. Nate was rigidly inflexible and it cost the Blazers in the post season. I agree Stotts hasn't proven anything in the post season, but Nate has - that he can't make mid-game or even mid-series adjustments. At least with Stotts, I feel like we'll have a chance to get past the 1st round. With Nate at the helm, I never felt we'd win a playoff series. At least now, I have hope. BNM
Actually, I like the way Stotts and Olshey seem to be working together to build a roster that matches the personnel to the system. I give them both credit for that. BNM
Maybe, but consider this: Stotts' best season as a head coach (with the Bucks) his top bench scorer was a (much) younger Mo Williams. Did Olshey just happen to make Mo a late acquisition? I suspect Stotts has had some major input.
Yep. I think that if you sum all the Xs and Os rattling around inside the heads of Olshey and Stotts, you get a much bigger mountain than with Pritchard and McMillan.
Dallas ran this and the two-PG lineup was extremely effective with Kidd and Barea. I can't wait to see the Lillard/CJ backcourt.
Once you start breaking down each play, you get a better sense that this is pretty spot on. LMA is being moved around a lot more, which has been successful at times, and not so much others, but it's a process of learning where he can succeed and how defenses react so the Blazers can get the best possessions possible in a given shot clock. Batum being used and able to run the Pick and Roll has been priceless. It has the effect of turning the opponents defensive scheme on it's head and has been extremely effective. The ball movement has benefited Matthews the most. He is so under-appreciated for his ability to find an outlet passing lane and take full advantage of an open shot. He's also doing a little bit more that simply 3 and D, which absolutely wrecks defenses that are already reeling from a 3rd and 4th pass ending up in the hands of a very capable shooter.
I don't disagree with this, but with a PG and Batum in the game, it is even more effective tha 2 PGs in the half court. Batum has the ability, because of his height and length and who is guarding him, to exploit the pick and roll in a way that a PG can't.
I believe our current offense is just as reliant on Lamarcus as Nate's teams were with Roy. Lamarcus draws so much attention inside that it frees up our shooters. If you took out LA our offense would grind to a hault IMO.
The passing on this team is light years better than anything Nate instilled. There would certainly be a drop in production and an adjustment period, but it would be nothing like those McMillan teams
IMO, McMillan's offense, and any success he had, was completely reliant on Roy. I think with Stotts, it isn't that the offense is 'reliant' on LaMarcus, as much as it is that LaMarcus is our best player, so of course he is a hub of the offense. The Stotts offense isn't iso-centric. Everyone is involved, as witnessed by those games where a different player has a big quarter, every quarter, and different players are making big shots during crunch time.
Yeah, and the head coach was a college coach. Clearly they know what's best, and didn't pick good coaches that are used to working with egotistical players...
Of course, losing your best player, whoever that is, will impact your offense - until you make adjustments. But, I strongly disagree that our current offense is as reliant on Aldridge as Nate's offense was on Roy. Just watch the ball movement. In Nate's offense, players like Batum and Matthews would often go multiple possessions without touching the ball. The PG (Blake or Miller) would bring the ball up the court, pass it to Roy, and then he'd pound the ball until about 8 on the shot clock and then try to beat his man off the dribble. In the current system, most of the players (with the occasional exception of Lopez) touch the ball on every possession - often multiple times during the same possession. There is SO much more ball movement and so much more player movement (Batum no longer parked in the corner waiting for the occasional kick out from Roy with less than 3 seconds on the shot clock). It really is night and day. BNM
Aldridge's job is to decoy the opponent's defense away from his teammates all game long by actually producing for a few mid-game minutes. Roy's job was to win games in clutch moments. It's a difference between reputation/fooling people, and actual production.
