Didn't Chicago do the same thing with Thibs? I do not think Stotts is worried about keeping his job and is more concerned about the Rockets.
I have such little faith in Paul Allen's ability to not self-destruct that I can see where Canzano and Quick are comi g from on this contract situation. Also, NB3 brought this very point up earlier this season, so it's not like the fans here haven't already discussed how this delay could potentially become a distraction. As for Chicago doing this same thing, yes, that happened, and yes, the media in Chicago made a big deal of it. The national media even talked about it at length, and lo an behold, the Bulls haven't jerked Thibs around contract-wise since.
this will be a non issue in two months after we win the championship...just kidding but all jokes aside this will be a non issue. i think if we lose in the first round we exercise his 3rd year option and if we go further he receives an extension.
Why the hell would the Blazers give the coach a contract extension before seeing how he performs during his most crucial assignment: the playoffs? I wouldn't. Furthermore, the Blazers are about to begin the playoffs. Stotts and the Blazers should be thinking about one thing: the playoffs. The only way Stotts' contract is a distraction would be actually talking about his contract at the most crucial point in the season: the playoffs. Ergo, the only one causing a distraction is: Quick and Canzano. I'm really sick of those two douchebags. The worst part is their smarmy know-it-all condescension. They are the reason I stopped reading the Oregonian, and the Oregonian will not get my business or a click on their web site until those two are gone. And maybe not even then.
Olshey was very transparent about the way the front office does business and it's never aired in public or during the season when there's still basketball to play. They like to address these things after the exit interviews and that's what they did with Canales. I think Stotts is a lock. Olshey will do his "due dilligence anyway.
Quick really seems like he hates his job, he needs to take my advice in going to Europe and writing a novel.
It's not really a contract extension. It's a team option for next year; any extension could be negotiated this summer.
Thanks for the clarification. IMO, still not appropriate to discuss it during the playoffs and before the end of the season.
Ropp and Barrett actually having a decent conversation on this topic right now on 1080. Both are actually reasonable. This show is so much better with Barrett on it than Big Suck.
I have no problems with the Blazers waiting to extend Stotts. If the Blazers get swept out of the playoffs Stotts should be gone. If the Blazers make it to the second round Stotts should be kept and given a longer contract.
Again, it's not an "extension," per se. Stotts will have the option picked up by the Blazers, and it will be another case of Vulcan management making a mountain out of a molehill.
And if the Blazers get swept they shouldn't pick up the option. I think it's smart to see how the team does in the postseason before any decisions are made.
What should we wager on Stotts' extension being picked up? I think even if Portland gets swept, he is back next year. Getting rid of a coach that LMA likes prior to LMA signing an extension makes no sense to me. What's the wager?
I've seen the Vulcans and Paul Allen make enough boneheaded moves that I don't put anything past them, though, so it's not like it's a sure think Stotts comes back.
LOL! First I don't think the Blazers will get swept. We have the talent to win this series. That said, we watched Nate get out coached against Phoenix a few years back. If and I'm saying if, not it will happen, if that happens with Stotts you have to see if there is something better out there. I like Stotts, I think he's done a fantastic job but I also believe that this team is damn close to winning a title. We've seen how quickly championship windows can slam shut. If Stotts can get us there, great! As far as LMA goes he said he wants to win. If a coaching changed is deemed necessary that's on Olshey to make it acceptable to him.
That's not a wager. Saying it's on Olshey to explain to LMA why the Vulcans can't think past tomorrow seems like it's unfair to Olshey and Stotts.
This is new. PapaG is the only one here on the side of Canzano. His method is to cast the Oregonian as victim Olive Oyl, his eternal foil Paul Allen as Brutus, and himself as the neutral bystander Wimpy, eating a hamburger while educating us. I've never seen PapaG try this before. Right.
