The guys play hard for him. I think Kaleb should get a shot. We have a young team and I think we would benefit by having a young coach that grows with the team.
Sure, but why not a young coach with a better pedigree? A young team needs a steadying influence as a coach, not a guy who is blindly feeling his way through head coaching. Kaleb has no experience leading a team in anything. He wasn't a player, he never coached high school or college, and he has only been an assistant for a couple years.
This: And this: What a joke if he is the most qualified candidate who would take the job. Even based on the sub-par final four, he isn't.
Qualified for what though ? Perspective is everything. Perhaps this is simply a transition/rebuilding lottery bound year.
It should be that. Technically though, if there is one thing Stotts has proven it's his ability to guide a team to the lottery
all this ridiculousness, just to remove the "interim" from Canales? What a joke... Frankly, I don't think it matters whether it is Stotts or Canales, either one of them is likely going to be fired if this team is still mired in mediocrity 2-3 years from now anyway....
Maybe the philosophy is to take some pressure off of the team? Look if we give you an inexperienced coach and a bunch of rookies, no one is going to expect you to get a playoff spot. I'm not a fan of this line of thinking. You never give your team an excuse to suck. But, between the 2 finalists, KC makes more sense.
That is a good point. How many of us predicted that the Blazers will make the playoffs? Last time I checked that other thread, most of us chose between 30-39 wins. I know I did. So I guess we are back to which coach can teach the young players best? To me that really comes down to the coaching staff, not necessarily the head coach. So which of the assistant coaches that were interviewed could put together the best staff? I don't know what the answer to that is.
Do you realize how low you've set the bar? "Playing hard" is important, but unless the guy they hire is completely incompetent or an egomaniac (who is also incompetent) players usually play hard for their coach. They don't play hard when they believe that the guy pulling the levers doesn't know how to maximize their abilities or help them win. Far more important to get a guy who actually knows what the fuck he's on about and who can really make these guys better vs. just somebody who can get them to "play hard"
To coach the team. I guess I put more value in having the right guy in the position to get Lillard and our other rookies off to a good start.
We need the best coach to develop our first and second year players. These are the best coaches for that? I highly doubt it. Maybe no one good wants the losses on their record? This looks like a swing for the lottery. With a better coach we might be just good enough to be mediocre. And nobody wants that, man.
The subject of coaches is really a frustrating topic for a number of reasons. But look at this list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_National_Basketball_Association_head_coaches Even the ones who are now considered great coaches like Carlisle and Doc Rivers have been dogged by their fan base at one time or another. There is no way in hell that we will all be happy with the choice. No matter who it is. Do you guys remember how we used to bash Adelman on the radio back in the day?
