That's oversimplifying it. If all teams were created equal in terms of talent, sure, but they're not. In theory we have a roster with some good defenders on it. Norm, DJJ, RoCo, Nurk, etc. There was no reason for our defense to be as horrible as it was.
There was a LOT of talk at the beginning of the season that this was a championship contender team - and at minimum a Top 4 team in the west. I personally didn't think so.... but to say they "overachieved by anybody's standards" is a gross mischaracterization of the past.
There was also a lot of talk that the Blazers would not make the playoffs. I want to say ESPN said both. (Blazers would suck and the Blazers would be contenders)
We didn't have Nurk or Powell for most of the season. Talent is actually pretty even across the board. You have to get everyone to buy in better than the rest of the teams. We had no players who had been there before. So the guys didn't know what it took. Stotts can't lead by example. There is only so much talking about something can teach somebody. It's different when you see someone doing it. Even more unique when you see somebody doing it who has won a title.
I don't think anyone outside of blindly optimistic Blazer fans and Charles Barkley thought this was a championship contending team. I believe Vegas had them finishing 6th in the West at 41.5 wins. We finished T5 with 42 wins despite missing CJ/Nurk for 60 games.
Just countering no substance in 9 years. I doubt the best playa in franchise history would agree with that.
"I mean, I see every year when we get to this point as pivotal,” Lillard told The Athletic. “Because at every point, it’s an evaluation: Where do we go from here? Like, can we get the job done as we are? And if not, where do we go from here? What is the change that needs to be made? That’s just what it is. And I don’t know where that change comes from, you know, maybe we … I don’t know if it’s moving players, I don’t know if it’s a coaching change … whatever it is that happens in the NBA, the changes that are made when you look at the postseason and what you consider success and failure, and things like that, and what changes you have to make to improve or give yourself a better chance. I think we’ve done a lot, and I think every year we get to this point and it’s like ‘What is it that will get us to where we want to be?" This is like the first time i hear Dame talking about another Coach
I guess I’m just different. Talking about firing a coach when he just pulled off a huge turn around for a team that was struggling due to injuries and minutes played by essential players and that just won another coach of the week to end the season seems off track? I just wouldn’t put that kind of stipulation on anyone? WCF or your fired. If an owner/boss said that to me I’d probably tell him where he could go. Glad I don’t work for you guys.
I can rephrase that. The team just turned around and played very well to end the season under his leadership. Is that more inclined to what you are thinking?
I could see how it might appear that way. My thought would be something more like, "the team turned around and played very well to send the season and Stotts was there."
Both those teams did well, stayed realatively healthy, and deserve praise. Lakers and Raptors were much lower than there projections. Of course not every line will be perfect, but I would take a vegas line over an emotionally invested fan in terms of unbias expectations.
More than half the teams in each conference make the playoffs every year. This is not some crowning achievement, especially when we get swept year in and year out.
Depends on how. If its obvious the bigs hsve an advantage and stotts makes changes and we win, id say he is growong/improving. If not... hes a gonner.
