on Nate and player limitations

<!-- @page { margin: 0.79in } P { margin-bottom: 0.08in } -->

So we're a quarter of the way through the year everybody is abuzz with the question “What's wrong with the Blazers?” Is Brandon being too selfish? Not aggressive (re. selfish) enough? Where's the defense? Where's the Offense? Why doesn't G.O. get the ball more? Etc.

I am in the camp that says the issue lies with Nate and adjustments that he must make. That said, I am not saying he is bad coach... in fact there are things that he does very very well. In all the rips on Nate, I am amazed at the short term memory people seem to have. Though he has flaws, player underachievement is not one of them. In fact, Nate's gift is that he gets players to overachieve.

Exhibit A) Did anybody but the most steadfast Blazer fan really think last year's team would win 50+ games? The starting lineup featured a point guard that any NBA team could have grabbed, but passed on (with reasons). Don't get me wrong, I like Blake, but he has severe limitations as a player. Ditto with Pryzbilla, who alternated with a rookie who had half a year of college experience and was coming off microfracture surgery. No player has ever played well the year after that surgery. Oh, and our starting small forward was an unknown, untested 19 year old rookie from France. Again, did anybody really think that team would win 50+?

Exhibit B) How about the year before, when a 30 win Blazer team had just traded their leading scorer to NYC for a non-rotation player and a shorter-term cancer that we could pay to simply go away. If we could have traded Zach for 3 pastrami sandwiches instead, we would have done so. So how did that Blazer team win 40+ games when they had no business even winning 30 again?

Exhibit C) Let's take a look at the Sonic team Nate took deep in the 2005 playoffs; the year before he took over for the team whose future was Sebastian Telfair. If memory serves, the rotation players that year were Luke Ridnour, Earl Watson, Ray Allen, Rashard Lewis, Vlad Radmonovich, Calvin Booth and Jerome James. Watson and Booth played 20 minutes or less and so were so talented that while both left the Sonics while young, neither has done anything of value since then. Take a look at the other 5 players and ask yourself “How could I make this team worse defensively?” You will be challenged. Yet Nate took them to the conference semis, where they gave the eventual champions (San Antonio) all they could handle.

That Sonics team is the perfect example of what Nate does as a coach and what he has never had to do.

What he does is get players to play their role with complete dedication and hustle, and when there are no more than two real options offensively, this works. The last two Blazers team had Brandon and LaMarcus (and Travis when one of them was on the bench). There was no confusion on offense- you got the ball to Brandon, you spaced yourselves properly and were ready to hit an open jumper. That's it. Playing hard meant scrapping and playing defense, because neither Blake or Brandon was going to push tempo. That Sonics team was a bit different in that they were physically incapable of playing D, so husting meant getting your ass up and down the floor, so when the other team scored 105, you'd score 110. Aside from transition though, Ray and Rashard were shooting, unless the defense cheated, and everybody had clear roles.

Now, for the first time as a coach, Nate has the luxury of having a team with more than two real options on offense. Miller can pick and roll. Oden has turned into a beast in the post. Brandon and LaMarcus are just as skilled and a year more knowledgeable than last year. Problem is, they aren't on the same page as to who should be doing what when. And the role players.... they don't seem to know what their role is anymore, especially when that role is constantly changing along with rotations. When that is still true this far into the year, that is on the coach. It's time for Nate to do what all good coaches must eventually do: adjust. This will be the year we find out if he is a good (or great) coach or a one trick pony.

Good news is we have a team with several legitimate ways to win. That is a good, good thing. The issue with the two options system is that it can get you deep into the playoffs, but you generally can't win with it. Sure, if you have the two best players in the league (Shaq and Kobe) and some lucky breaks (yup, those Lakers were a couple of breaks away from losing out to the Blazers and Kings through those years), you might win it all. If you have the two most charismatic players in the league (Shaq and Wade), the refs may just present a gift-wrapped title to you. If your conference is weak, you might make it to the finals (Malone and Stockton, Payton and Kemp), but over a 7 game series a good coach/ good team will take away one or two options, and where does that leave you?  Even those Jordan dynasties saw him surrounded with All-stars in Pippen and Grant.  Go through every championship team of that you can remember (and yeah, mine only goes back to the mid-80s) and tell me how many had only two solid options on offense.

Right now, the Blazers could pick any number of scoring strategies and win with them. More important than choosing the best one though, is that all the players know what strategy they are using at any given time. Letting the players figure it out isn't going to work, especially with a team this young.  The role players must know where the pass should go, where they should spot up (or cut), and this depends on who the first option is. It is the job of the coach to make sure the players know who the first option is at any given time. This can work. Remember the 99-00 Blazers? That team team could beat you senseless in the post with Smith, Wells or Wallace, at the 3-point line with Smith and Stoudemire, with good passing via Pippen and Sabonis, and on and on. That team was a couple of breaks away from winning it all (they were also short a go-to guy in the clutch.... we now have several), and had many more options than the Blazers do. The difference was partly experience, but also partly Mike Dunleavy, who always had an eye on what to exploit, and made sure his players knew it.

The Blazers rotation now has only one guy who could be labeled a veteran. They need to be told what the strategy is in clear, uncertain terms. This can, and should, change throughout the game, but it is on the coach to make sure the Blazers know what they should be doing at any time.  Confusion should be occasional, not the norm.

Alright Nate, time to step up, so your players know how to do the same.