You can really STFU about something I wrote wrote a year ago that you're JUST now responding to anytime....
I've always liked Stotts for many reasons, but the iso ball the team is playing this year has me so disinterested that I wouldn't be upset if he was fired. This offense reminds me of the Sargent Nate iso ball offense that I also hated.
If you look at the assist numbers over his career here, they weren't that bad. And the first few years, the ball moved well.
interesting notion that I haven't looked at before....Blazer NBA rank in assists/game: 2012-13 - 21st (Stotts 1st year; Dame's rookie season) 2013-14 - 9th 2014-15 - 12th (last year of Aldridge team; Injuries to Matthews and Lopez) 2015-16 - 21st (CJ's 1st year as starter) 2016-17 - 23rd 2017-18 - 30th 2018-19 - 25th 2019-20 - 29th there does seem to be a correlation between when CJ became option 1b and when the Blazers passing game cratered
It's better known as the McMillan methodology. Step 1: Have superstar guard Step 2: Iso superstar guard Step 3: Ride superstar guard to success Step 4: Fail when teams trap superstar guard Step 5: Rinse and repeat until team finally fires you or you wear out superstar guard.
What’s even more depressing is that Stotts has been the Blazers coach for eight seasons now. Eight seasons. Let that sink in. No, this is not Greg Popovich (.680), Erik Spoelstra (.595), or Rick Carlisle (.548) - coaches that have won championships with their current teams. This is Terry Stotts - he of the 0.510 career winning percentage, ZERO championships, and career 20-36 playoff coaching record (including sweeps in the last three postseasons). Some of you will point to the .510 winning %age and say that’s good, maybe even great for a coach. However, it took Stotts a full 10 seasons before he even reached .500. That’s not good by any metric. Extrapolated out, his current career winning %age equates to approximately an average of a 42-40 record over the course of his entire head coaching tenure. Mediocre at best and hardly the sign of a HOF coach like many in this forum make him out to be. Heck, even the two guys behind him on the list of longest tenured NBA Coaches have a better winning percentage - Doc Rivers (.579) & Brad Stevens (.556). You would have to get to Brett Brown before you found a coach on that longest tenured list with a worse career winning percentage. And I don’t think anybody in this forum would consider Brett Brown a good coach. So why the f&$k does Terry Stotts still have a job? What has he accomplished in his 8 years with the team? And why does the organization feel so blindly loyal to this man? I’m genuinely asking because I can’t, for the life of me, understand why he’s been retained for this long.
Simple answer - Dame wants him around. It's that simple. If Dame wanted him gone (which will never happen) he would be gone.
I agree with all of this, except I think Brett Brown is kind of a good coach, lets face it his “bad record” is mostly due to, “The process”. I think Dame is loyal to a fault with Stotts, I can sort of appreciate that, IMO Stotts is gone after the Pelican series if Dame wanted that to happen.
Meyers comparing Portland's offense to Miami's. The problem is if you know who the final option will be when you follow a system then your opponent most likely knows it as well. And this is our problem. We don't surprise anybody. There is no movement. Miami is so fun to watch this year and although they don't have the shot makers we do they manage to post a very good Off Rating which together with their great D makes them a team very tough to beat.
Doing well in the playoffs last year was a double edged sword, because while it was exciting to watch, it kept this group around another year. I think last summer was the time to break things up. But Neil isn't going to blow it up after a WCF run. Dame has been carrying this team through many chances and honestly more appropriate times to make significant changes.
