Quick on Przy

by ssa400 on Jan 16, 2008 3:01 PM PST Comment 9 comments

I haven't seen this posted yet, and since the topic was discussed at length right after the toronto game, i figured i'd post the link.

http://blog.oregonlive.com/behindblazersbeat/2008/01/pondering_przybilla_leads_to_b.html

It's a discussion with Nate about why przy didn't play at the end of the toronto game. It's really interesting.

Main points: (according to Nate)

-Joel wasn't stopping Bosh anyways
-We needed offense
-LaMarcus needed to learn how to contribute other ways when his offense is off
-When Brandon wasn't playing well, was Nate supposed to sit him? Nope, and LMA gets the same treatment. He is a cornerstone of the franchise, and he needs to play in those types of situations.

In all reality Przy isn't taht key to future of this team after this year, Nate's reasoning made spot on sense to me.

0 recs | Comment 9 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

already a diary

posted

by jonestr on Jan 16, 2008 3:07 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Pryzbilla may not be key

but I think he's going to be an important piece.

Several folks (myself included) have commented at one time or another that Portland needs a bruising rebounder off the bench. Joel Pryzbilla - could be a poster boy for bruising rebounder. Imagine if Nate told him, "Joel, don't worry about fouls, I just want you getting every missed shot." I think Joel has it in him to be a dominating rebounder.

by timg56 on Jan 16, 2008 3:17 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Besides, doesn't Joel

have the highest + / - rating on the team?

by timg56 on Jan 16, 2008 3:18 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Wow

Glad to see that Jason asked the question (as he should have).

I'm not sure I understand what conclusion Nate came to though. He obviously was second guessing himself, so much so to the point of getting sick. But what is he going to do in the same situation again. What does "Just calm down and coach these guys" mean? Let LMA (or Roy or Martell or ...) play through their struggles (i.e. development) or go for the win?

Are there possibly pressures/expectations from higher up (KP or PA) on Nate that we don't know about? We know that he and KP are not on the same page, possibly not even reading the same book. Is his contract linked to wins? Is he being told to play certain players specific minutes?

This answered some questions, but raises others.

"They were playing the game with a great deal of passion and excitement and it was a real bear's den to be involved in." - Jerry Sloan on the Blazers, 01/05/08

by jorga on Jan 16, 2008 3:27 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I read it as

We're looking to develop young guys. They'll make mistakes or have bad days, and we need to continue to play them with trust so they can trust themselves.

Nate hates losing. He's probably as bad as some of the fans here. I have a feeling a number of players are too. Why do you think they came back and stomped on Jersey so hard? I really wish we'd been playing the celtics next.

"No way. I love this town. We're gonna bring back the glory years. These boys are my boys. This is my team and my town." - Greg Oden when asked about leaving.

by ratbastird on Jan 16, 2008 3:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Why not on the same page?

You said we all know Nate and KP aren't on the same page... where has that been discussed? I mean, if you're talking about whether KP wants to run more and Nate doesn't that's one thing, but I always felt KP and Nate got a good relationship and know what is expected.

I think Nate just hates losing or making a mistake, but we fans should know he isn't just making his coaching decisions arbitrarily. He knows why he does what he does, but isn't so arrogant to not question himself later.

Me, I assume KP prefers the key players be developed over sitting them to win. This season is the best season ever, but even better years are ahead.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jan 16, 2008 3:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Makes sense

Nate sat down, pondered, and came up with the same answer. I respect that and agree with him.

I was one wondering why Joel wasn't in too. It's still not 100% about winning, but about building trust in players and developing.

Aldridge came back the next day and showed that trust was warranted.

"No way. I love this town. We're gonna bring back the glory years. These boys are my boys. This is my team and my town." - Greg Oden when asked about leaving.

by ratbastird on Jan 16, 2008 3:27 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

It made sense to me too.

I like that even with the success they've had, no one is losing focus of the fact that we're in it for the long haul. I think that will really extend the success we have for a couple more seasons, because the guys won't be stunted by feeling like they have to do it all now.

GO BLAZERS!!!!

by timanator421 on Jan 16, 2008 3:33 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I only made half-sense to me...

I'm actually happier by the fact that Nate agonized over the decision afterwards. After all, if this message board is in agony over his decision, I like to see that Nate is too. Makes me feel like we're not so far off base as to be completely absurd.

by Fizbin on Jan 16, 2008 3:43 PM PST reply actions 0 recs