2001-02: 89.0 (24th of 29) 2002-03: 88.0 (28th of 29) 2003-04: 89.9 (15th of 29) 2004-05: 87.9 (27th of 30) 2005-06: 87.6 (28th of 30) 2006-07: 88.3 (29th of 30) 2007-08: 87.9 (29th of 30) 2008-09: 86.6 (30th of 30) I think that your first statement is accurate... he DID run with his Seattle team more. Of course, I would imagine that the last four seasons in Portland is about as low-paced as any four year stretch for a team in NBA history, so that's not saying much. Your second statement I disagree with. In spite of being in the NBA for over 8 years, and in spite of innumerable statements about running more (and a yearly offseason debate about whether this time he REALLY means it), Nate McMillan teams simply are not running teams. I find it almost impossible to believe that he's going to change based on a single acquisition of a veteran point guard. Ed O.
I think it comes down to D. If we are getting stops and rebounding the ball we'll be more likely to run. Taking it out of the basket makes it harder to run.
not really. I can honestly never see Nate winning a title. I hope i'm wrong but I just don't think he's that good of a coach
Facts are that running PG turn over the ball. They have a hell of a lot more posessions at risk, it just goes with the territory. Sure better one's turn it over less. But overall, running PG turn over the ball more.
TOV% ignores totals (numbers) - it shows percentages - so you can ignore the number of possessions. Facts are that Miller at a fast pace is much better than Blake was at a fast pace. What these numbers tell you is that Blake at a slow pace protects the ball a lot better than in a fast pace. In a fast pace - one out of 5 possessions he lost, at a slow pace one out of 8.5 possessions he lost. What we see, also, is that Miller, at a pace much faster than the Blazers played last year - was about as good at protecting the ball as Blake was in the Blazer's snail-pace. What this should tell you is that Miller will be a much better PG to push the ball and protect it at the same time. So - again, the crux of the matter remains that for this team, in it's current incarnation - Miller is the first PG that can actually push the tempo and play efficient basketball. Blake is not good at it, Jack was not good at it in Portland, Sergio was just god-damn awful at it. My gut feeling is that a Miller lead Blazers team will probably be around 20th-22nd in the league in pace, up from bringing up the rear. The fact of the matter is that our best player is still Roy who thrives in half-court and our biggest potential mismatch is still Oden who is not a running player, offensively. So - I suspect that we will be faster - but I do not think anyone will consider us a fast-pace team.
Maris, you shouldn't have chosen to be a mailman for your career. You would have made a much better comedian. I love it! Sergio sure proved it worldwide last year in the Olympics. Oh wait... he couldn't even make the team.
not saying I agree at all with Maris.. but I didnt see him say anything about last year in the Olympics.
I dunno. It ignores four years in Seattle, where three of the four the team plodded along. Was Nate saddled with PGs unable to run there, too? It seems weird that people keep looking for a reason to think that Nate is finally going to change. Ed O.
McMillan had one good PG in his tenure as head coach in Seattle - and he had him for a year and a half with the half part being pretty disgruntled to the tune of being traded. If you really want to argue the merits of Kevin Ollie, Luke Ridnour, Mateen Cleaves and Antonio Daniels as elite NBA point guards that excel in fast-pace basketball (or any kind of basketball, to be fair) - be my guest.
What kind of coach can only run with an elite NBA point guard? Did the 23+ teams that have run more than his teams in 7 of the 8 years he's been coaching have elite NBA point guards? That's bending over backwards to explain why he doesn't run, in my opinion. Making up a nearly impossible standard to explain past behavior and justify that suddenly things are going to change THIS time. Ed O.
seems like everyone skipped over the most reasonable post in the thread. some people here appear to care a lot more about running than they do winning.
And remember when Nate said Taurean Green would be the factor that would help us win more games, yea that never panned out.
Well I sure as hell hope Miller improves it. Because up anything at this point is improvement. My problem being, I don't buy that Nate is going to let it happen. I have seen what happens when something goes down he doesn't like. All of you have to. You know what happens. The bench. I'll believe it when I see it.
Whether we care about running or not is an entirely different question than whether we believe that we will run more or not. It's entirely possible to go into ANY thread and say, "Who cares?" It just doesn't add a lot of value. I don't see many people in this thread saying we SHOULD (or should not) run. Just discussing whether we will or not. Ed O.
