Three Nate Things that Bother Me about Losing to the Mavs
by LaoTzu on May 10, 2011 3:04 AM PDT
Email
PrintI don't know whether others are bothered by these same things, or not. Anyway, for discussion, here are three things Nate did that bothered me, and may bother you, in losing to the Mavs.
1. Nate told his players and the media that what his team had to do was play under control.
Anyone who watched that series will tell you that when the Blazers tried to play into the Mavs half-court control game, something that experienced team had matured into, the Blazers got worked. When the Blazers played with desperation, they challenged the Mavs athleticism, which is not the Mavs game. This gave the Blazers the extra energy the desperately needed to have a chance at outplaying the Mavs. Right up through the Blazers getting worked in game 6, this was Nate's mantra.
Right decision: At some point, Sarge should have recognized that the only chance his team had was for him to send his guys onto the court pumped up and loose, ready to run and press and beat the Mavs with superior athleticism and heart.
2. Nate blamed his shooters for missing the open shots that his offense generated.
Nate's offense is efficient. But in this six game set, the Mavs tried to make Portland beat them from the outside. It didn't always work, but when the Mavs did hold the Blazers on the perimeter, even in spurts, they grew some nice leads. So we got open shots, we missed them, and maybe you are asking yourself, "Why is this a Nate issue?" That's easy. It's because the outside shots his players missed are pretty much the same outside shots they missed coming down the stretch of the regular season. The Blazers are not the Mavs. The Blazers coach's willingness to make this at times a three-point shooting contest with the Mavs was really asking for the beating the Mavs gave him. That's why this is a Nate problem. And it's not like there weren't other things to emphasize. But if you don't set picks and you don't force double-teams, it's hard to get the opponent out of their set defense.
Right Decision: Nate gave up too early trying to ride specific mismatches, e.g. Miller and Matthews in the post, in favor of too much reliance on his stock offense. We had mismatches. We could have forced them in addition to running more to get more mismatches in the early offense. (Posting Camby for instance to make Dirk work on defense might have been tried.)
3. Before game 6, asked what his team could do differently, Nate said it's game 6, the teams know what each other was doing and the game would come down to execution.
This is wrong on so many levels. First, it does not account for the need for the Blazers to play with energy and to get the mature Mavs squad out of their comfort zone. It also is basically telling your players that the coach is not going to try anything new, and that you will be forced to beat the Mavs at their own game, a game they have controlled through large stretches of games 1-5, and if you don't make it work, it will be on you. It's also plain wrong: people should make it a goal to learn something new every day of our lives, and Nate violated this principle. It is my firm belief that there were changes to be made to give the Blazers a better chance in the series. It was up to the head coach to find a few new wrinkles, even if they amounted to throwing frying pans and the kitchen sink. [And for those who argue Nate's statement to the press was a ploy on his part, watch game 6 again and tell me what he brought that was new or improved.]
Right Decision: If a coach doesn't have any new ideas, he has players and assistant coaches -- he might even ask the man on the street for help.
Staying the course with the plus/minus the Blazers had toward the end of the series was a horrible decision. We had not shown that our players and our system could beat theirs; we had shown that it took a heroic effort to try and justify the strategy Nate rolled out from the regular season to beat a less-vulnerable-than-thought Mavs team who it turns out were still playing into form.
I am not saying that, recognizing these problems, the Blazers could have necessarily solved them. But it is frustrating watching another first round exit where serious questions about Nate's coaching and creativity come so readily to mind. I mean, 2-4 and out, 2-4 and out, 2-4 and out. Is that simply coincidence?
83 comments
|
10 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Thank you, thank you
Thanks for repeating my sentiments in a much more detailed and analytical way.
by DevotedBlazer on May 10, 2011 4:43 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
De nada.
Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM
My 3 problems with Nate
Love Nate. He is the best coach for us now and the best coach for our immediate future.
BUT
1) The teams “will” and the teams “inspiration” are on the coach. Yes, any pro athlete should have self-motivation to succeed but this needs to be enhanced by the coach. I love Nates even keel but I would love to see him get fired up about something some time. Call a few players out when they are struggling (looking @ u Rudy) and demand results like a boss demands results.
2) Jump shots. I understand that the players “need to make shots” when they are open but this is a phrase that we have heard ALL SEASON LONG. Is there no drill that will help the players improve in this area? No assistant coach who is accountable for lack of production? A basketball coach whose team consistently fails to shoot the basketball cannot be a complete basketball coach.
3) This is my biggie. Cohesion. As stated by Nate himself, he has never been able to get the ENTIRE team going on any given night. There are always acceptable numbers from ’Dre and Aldridge but on any given night we only get substantial numbers from one other player. Sometimes its Roy, sometimes Matthews, or Batum but never EVERYBODY. This is a coaching failure of the highest order and the number one fix Nate needs to take care of in this offseason.
we can still win........
by RastaMonsta on May 11, 2011 11:01 AM PDT up reply actions
Thank you for making substantive comments!
I wish more posters take your lead.
I mean, it gets old reading, “Nate good. Mavs good. You suxors.”
Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM
I'm with you
Great post.
And I would add starting Roy as part of number 3 and something he should have changed. At the very least Roy could have been a decoy to take the pressure off of Wallace and Aldridge.
Even though I agree with everything and would even add that tidbit about Roy I’m o with the Trail Blazer’s overall effort. Very few playoff series are won with adjustments made in game 5. Nate needs to diversify the team’s system so adjustments are more subtle, practiced, and easy to make on the fly.
I was always bothered by the 'Gee, I hope we get a split" sort of attitude before the series even started
I would’ve much preferred a “We refuse to lose in the first round again and we’re going to blow these guys away no matter what the cost” sort of attitude.
But alas…
I think the Blazers saw themselves as a huge underdog, and for most of the series they played like it.
The Leeroy Rule: being insistent >>>> being correct
In all fairness, these Mavs are playing out of their minds.
If we had any real chance of beating them, it was lost on me. I definitely don’t think we lost that series because Nate was out-coached. It’s a talent thing. They make their jumpers, we don’t, and they are playing the best basketball of anyone in the playoff right now.
This
The Mavs simply beat us by playing better and harder. Nate was not outcoached, his players either didn’t step up, or their step-up wasn’t as good as the Mavs.
Pretty much all our outside shooters shot below their season and career averages, while the opposite was true of the Mavs. Be honest, how many people thought we’d get torched by Jason Kidd and Peja Stoyacavitch from downtown? People like to blame the pick and roll defense, but we were just trying to make someone besides Dirk beat us, and they did. You have to pick you poison, and unfortunately there isn’t a good defensive option against the Dallas PnR.
In hindsight, we drew the toughest team in the WC. I will not be surprised to see this Dallas team either win the championship or at least be very competitive against the LeBrons or whoever else comes out of the east.
I agree that Dallas was the better team that deserved to win this year.
But that doesn’t change these problems with Nate.
Jordan's not a bad guy.. he gave us Gerald Wallace.
by Berkeley on May 10, 2011 11:19 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Well, one could argue
That Phil Jackson, arguably the best NBA coach in the game, just lost to the same Mavs in a more dramatic fashion, with superior talent to work with. Do you really think a different coach would have got the current team past the Mavs?
Personally, I think they could have beat the Mavs had they shot just a little better and put out a little more hustle. Those aren’t coaching issues.
by superfly05 on May 10, 2011 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
right you are..
The Better team won. Pretty simple.
its not nates fault
although he isn the best coach in the world, hes a pretty dang good one. i think it has to do with how we practice… and the moral. when we get down.. we fall. when we miss shots. we keep on missing shots.
"Tommy: Did you hear I finally graduated?
Richard Hayden: Yeah, and just a shade under a decade too. All right. "
Exactly right
As much as I might question Nate’s decisions (and I often do), I think it’s safe to assume that he’s an expert of the game in a way that none of us will likely ever approach. He’s got league-wide respect as one of the very best coaches, and he’s earned it by winning games despite having to adjust to the absence of key players. He knows the game as a player, too. A floor-leader.
When he makes decisions that don’t work out, it’s frustrating for all of us—especially the players. But I have to trust that Nate has a pretty good reason for trying that particular play—again and again and again. I imagine’s he’s waiting for something to pop loose, for someone to be able to get past that defender.
Naw, this Dallas team was just so much better than we are right now. Amazing shooting—and apparently they lead the league in playoff defense this year. (Of course, that doesn’t explain the wide-open shots we missed.) I think Nate did what he could, with what he had, against the hottest team in the playoffs.
by VTDuck on May 10, 2011 4:38 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Thank you...I can't stand the Nate is inept talk. I'm not saying there aren't better coaches for us, but we treat the man like an imbecile
As much as I might question Nate’s decisions (and I often do), I think it’s safe to assume that he’s an expert of the game in a way that none of us will likely ever approach. He’s got league-wide respect as one of the very best coaches, and he’s earned it by winning games despite having to adjust to the absence of key players. He knows the game as a player, too. A floor-leader.
"If I had a dime for every basket I made today, you'd still suck!" - from the book 'John Dies @ the End'
by sammymohawk on May 11, 2011 10:08 AM PDT up reply actions
We are stuck with Nate...
but that doesn’t mean we have to like it. Nate seems to have reached the pinnacle of his coaching ability. I don’t see him changing enough to continue to develop after all of these years in the league. I guess his nickname is pretty apt. “Sarges” often don’t know how to change and, frankly, don’t see a reason to. Apparently, Paul A. is afflicted with the same problem. He doesn’t like to change (coaches) either. So, we’re in a real pickle here.
Sure, Nate could probably win with a super talented roster, but then, who couldn’t? And, by the way, just WHAT do all of those guys in suits sitting next to Nate do, anyway? If there was a correlation between the number of guys in suits and the number of Blazer wins, that would be great. However, I’m not seeing it. Nate’s sure not Jack Ramsay with just one guy by his side.
I’ve posted a few comments about not wanting Rick Adelman back. At this point, what the heck? I’d give him another shot. We’re desperate here!
You are in error, my friend.
Nate has exhibited remarkable flexibility and growth during his coaching career. His nickname only captures one dimension of his personality.
Nate is the best coach for this team. He has gotten the most out of his players.
This is my signature. Do you like it?
Nate wouldn't let the team alley oop until Miller got here
That’s one example. His system takes the place of on-the-court performance. That is great if you are young and need alot of structure, but I’d like to think our team is maturing. And for that, you need a coach who can go past setting limits.
I don’t know what you see as far as Nate changing, but he certainly is yet to evince an expansive and open philosophy.
Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM
wouldn't let them?
sorry but that’s silly.
there were alley oops before miller, see sergio to rudy. there just weren’t as many because that wasn’t blake or jack’s game.
That's what the players were saying, that they didn't feel free to create before then
But there are counter-examples, you’re right.
Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM
who throws the most lobs now?
andre miller and camby.
who did they replace in the rotation: blake, jack, przybilla.
do you think nate was holding blake, jack and przybilla from throwing lobs?
we just haven’t had very good passing in the past, roy handled a lot over the past few years but his strength is the kick-out. sometimes it takes some talented veterans to show a team how to play – coaches can’t do it all.
not all players have court vision and anticipation
Segio had it, at least with Rudy
Miller and Camby had it before they came to Portland
Rudy has it with LMA on that left hand curl
Basically if it works, Nate will let the players keep doing it. But if the high-risk passes result in TOs, not so much
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Where was the motion on offense
UNless Nate told all his players to stand around in one spot when you don’t have the ball I can’t belive Nate is solely at fault. When the Blazers cut, they got good shots. When they stood still, a hurried long shot inevitably followed. That looked to be a result of tired players. When the Blazers looked good, they were moving with and without the ball. Same is true for Dallas. Player movement opens up cracks in the defense. Maybe cutting back to an 8-player lineup for the last several games of the season wore the Blazers out prematurely. But I can’t place too much blame on Nate for our small ball line-ups getting overworked.
Ok, here's the "intangible" you were searching for:
Rockets, gross. Bottom feeder team, too. Ok. Scola was killing us, what can you do? We could’ve (read: should’ve) had it.
Suns, ugh. Not a great team. Steve Nash. Stoudamire. What are you gonna do? Disheartening loss for this franchise that I love.
Mavs? Ok. 57-win team. Look where they’re going after we gave ’em hell (sic) this year.
Lost to the Rockets w a health BRoy, put up our dukes w/o a healthy Roy v Suns, and bowed out after a mighty effort against one of the League’s best teams w/o a healthy Roy (the 4th in game 4 aside.)
Roy or no Roy, giving the Mavs a run for their money was a good step for us. Unless the Grizz can pull off the upset of the century, I’d like to say we lost to the 2011 NBA champs.
It’s tangible to construe a positive outlook from our chronological performances in the playoffs in this post-jailblazer era.
What’s intangible is blaming a coach for playing the cards he’s dealt. An inspirational speech here, a motivational rant there…it’s really up to the players to step up. (Unless Nate can activate himself to be our PGOTF, that is…)
It’s gonna take some getting use to existing in this post-BRoy-dominating era, but I think we’re getting there. Nate’s getting there.
We’ll get ’em next year.
Q: "Why are the Heat losing?"
'Dre: "That's for them to figure out. We did our job."
by Oh. Em. Gee. on May 10, 2011 9:38 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
I disagree
1. He didn’t say stand around which is what the Blazers did. Nate said attack the rim and get offensive rebounds. Under control means playing your game and executing the plan. Not standing around staring at #7 for 12 minutes a game waiting for an open shot to fall out of the sky. Definitely not playing every 3rd quarter with zero spark. No coach tells his players to suck.
2. His shooters shot horribly. There is no denying that. Every time the Mavs went into a zone defense the Blazers looked confused and stopped attacking. Nate wasn’t telling them to hold the ball until there were 10 seconds on the shot clock, pass 2x, and take a three. Again he said they needed to attack, get offensive rebounds, and second chance shots.
3. The Mavs coach said the same thing. Before game 6 they had played the Mavs 9 times and were 4-5 against them. The Blazers didn’t execute on the court. They looked tired and played with no heart. If you don’t think Nate is talking with the assistant coaches then that’s crazy. He’s definitely not on Blazersedge.com looking for coaching advice though.
I’m not saying it was a perfectly coached series. But I completely disagree that coaching lost the series. There are serious gaps in the Blazers game that no coaching will be able to fill.
by Uprised on May 10, 2011 9:59 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
I agree
1. Playing with poise/control does not mean you play without desperation.
2. For us to be successful, at some point we will either need to hurt teams from the outside when they’re not respecting our ability to do so, or get them to respect our ability to do so therefore re-opening the interior. The first part would lead to the second part.
3. This one bothers me the most. What Nate says to the media and the fans is NOT what is going on behind closed doors. Neither coach is ever going to tip their hand, and being bothered by that is absolutely silly to me. We saw Nate make adjustments this series (to varying degrees of effectiveness)…we saw Patty in and out, we saw Roy have different roles, we saw a twin tower lineup of CJ and Camby which was never once utilized in the regular season, we saw a game 6 gameplan centered around Gerald Wallace (which was very smart). Never once did you get an indication of those moves prior to the game. Why the heck would you?
I’m not saying Nate coached a stellar series, but this feels like sour grapes to me.
"If I had a dime for every basket I made today, you'd still suck!" - from the book 'John Dies @ the End'
by sammymohawk on May 10, 2011 10:59 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
dallas was...
bigger
meaner
hungrier
deeper
more talented
i think coaching was about even. rick carlisle loses serious points for not taking the ball out of roy’s hands in game 4.
by SaveOden on May 10, 2011 10:40 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
very true.
it’s hazy in my memory and i can’t remember if the blazers were heavily denying dirk or if they just went away from him because they had a big lead.
Excellent observations - I quite agree
On a general level, I am particularly frustrated with the overcontrolled nature of Nate’s approach.
It is like running a race with a choke collar on. Nate is like a elemenal training coach… careful with the ball kiddies, don’t hurt yourselves. In the NBA playoffs it is time to take the training wheels off. That’s how Brandon had his big game… let’s ‘open it up’. I really think it is a personality thing, that I really clash with. I want to play jazz, Nate wants me to read sheet music.
It is a limiting factor to my vision of the most exciting and devastating play – spontaneous, improvisational, fluid. Yeah, if you don’t know what you are doing it is ‘slop’. But if you achieve greatness, it is the most beautiful thing to see. Nate doesn’t even seem to want to try for it.
This is not instead of all the structural issues that are repeatedly pointed out, it is on top of them. There is a creativity on top of the basic skills, ‘sets’, options that a team should be developing all season, and stretching in the playoffs. Not tight fisted clinging to each individual win as if that is all that matters. The whole season should be building winning style for the playoffs, not just getting there.
I just feel so strongly that it is past time for another voice and vision to be guiding the team to new growth. I think they got more than enough of the Nate message. I just continue to view Nate as a limitation on the team. I wish we would let him give what he has to offer to a team that can more use it. PA is a great owner as a true fan with resources, but sometimes the decision making is dissappointing, as in the Nate contract – a gross blunder IMO.
Jordan's not a bad guy.. he gave us Gerald Wallace.
by Berkeley on May 10, 2011 11:07 AM PDT reply actions 3 recs
I want to play jazz, Nate wants me to read sheet music.
This^
Andre Miller plays sax, Nate plays Sousaphone
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
patty plays the didgeridoo, rudy plays the castanets.
somehow, they’ve managed to work it out.
new fanshot idea
if the Blazer’s players ever formed a band, what instruments would they play?
based on his yell when he’s bumped, Roy grabs the mike and sings the tenor part
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Valid points.
The players sucked, but so did Nate too. One or the either have to make each other look good. If the end result is the means by which we can judge someone’s job performance, then Nate is good to great during the regular season, but quite a bit of a failure in the playoffs.
The better team won but I don't think Nate coached a good series either
The players never found their groove. The starters did pretty well but when we went small we would go in a horrendous offensive drought. We lost confidence and theirs grew exponentially. Nate was too slow to realize how to fight this – I am not sure he ever figured it out? We needed bigs to help on the boards and guard the hoop. He let us be small for too long and four times out of six we never recovered. As weird as it sounds, a guy like CJ could have really helped with more minutes. Even game six CJ was doing a great job and Nate pulled him after the hard foul on Dirk. He should have congratulated CJ not put him on the pines for the rest of the game. We needed the D. We should have had more hard fouls on Dirk earlier in the series. Not cheap Bynum fouls but real playoff fouls. Problem is we have no one to do it and that is not going to scare any one..
by LicketyBrindleDowntheMiddle on May 10, 2011 1:14 PM PDT reply actions
i think fans over-diss Nate sometimes but I agree with all of this
I think there’s a certain aspect of Belichek-esque secrecy to his statements of “they know what to do, they just need to execute”. I am sure they worked on new things and tried different strategies (although it often looked like they didn’t), but he didn’t want to give anything away.
But yes, he could have done so much more to help our team. Our less, as you pointed out.
I think Nate should have challenged his players by telling the media that his team was going to take it to the Mavs in game 6
Start to amp up the pressure before the game even began. In game 6, Wallace seemed like the only person in the Blazer organization aware that it was win or go home.
Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM
that would have backfired on him if we had still lost
"If I had a dime for every basket I made today, you'd still suck!" - from the book 'John Dies @ the End'
by sammymohawk on May 11, 2011 10:10 AM PDT up reply actions
wallace didn't listen to nate
wallace came in hungry,,,,he didn’t needed to be coached for what ever reason the blazers players have been conditioned in a way not to be coached and listen to nate..which one can look at is still nates fault
Either it's the players didn't listen or they didn't perform
Nate insists on having the team play within his rigid structure. I’d like to hear some acceptance of responsibility from him when they do and things still go the other team’s way. As they have in Game 6 in each of the last three first round exits.
Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM
or the players listened and performed.
and got beat.
If Nate ever openly accepted responsibility I would be more willing to take this loss like a man
But he did blame his players for failing, never hinting that some of the responsibility for their flat play and scoring droughts came right out of his precious system not working in the playoffs.
His system is simple. When teams game against it, rather than our players, they can beat Nate’s system and take the players more or less out of the equation.
Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM
Too bad Allen/Cho extended Nate in March
otherwise he might really be in line for the L*kers job, now.
He obviously game-planned for the Mavs better than Phil
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I would love it if he went to the Lakers, although I don't think he'd last more than 2 seasons before they chewed him up and spit him out.
Unlike Portland we tend to stick to things that do not work for far too long.
by loyal_blazer on May 10, 2011 4:04 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
It didn't used to be that way
Like I’ve mentioned a few times, Nate hasn’t done anything that PJ Carlesimo or Mo Cheeks weren’t also able to accomplish (especially in regards to post-season results) but those former Blazer coaches were shown the door after 2-3 first round exits
The difference? McMillian is a Seattle legend and Paul/Bert have watched him play or coach since 1986. Mr. Sonic is covered with teflon, as far as Vulcan, Inc is concerned
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Yeah...."Mr Sonic" has already left the town and team he was so legendary in.
If the Lakers come a knocken, he’ll bounce. I hope that’s the scenario.
by loyal_blazer on May 10, 2011 8:23 PM PDT up reply actions
Different scenario
Back when he left Seattle, Nate didn’t feel wanted by the Sonics front office (Wally Walker, etc) McMillian can’t say that he hasn’t been given everything that he’s asked for by the Blazers
which is part of the problem, there’s no one in Portland to tell him that he’s plateaued, except for Jaynes and Vance
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
all circumstances are not created equal
"If I had a dime for every basket I made today, you'd still suck!" - from the book 'John Dies @ the End'
by sammymohawk on May 11, 2011 10:11 AM PDT up reply actions
I don't know about that
give Nate an elite roster and I’d bet that they don’t under achieve..but I don’t consider him a dope of a coach either, maybe that’s just me
"If I had a dime for every basket I made today, you'd still suck!" - from the book 'John Dies @ the End'
by sammymohawk on May 11, 2011 10:12 AM PDT up reply actions
Disagree especially with 2.
Nate went to mismatches a lot and got away from Aldridge. The mismatches and Aldridge would have been more effective if the Blazers could have hit outside shots. I don’t know why it is so hard to understand that no offense is really going to be effective if guys do not hit shots. Nate isn’t “blaming players” for missing shots, he is stating the obvious. The more shots you miss, the more the other team can pack the lane, deny penetration, and also take advantage of a team working to transition back into defense. You design offenses to get guys shots they can make. You can’t make the shots for them
PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04
The problem is that whenever they went to those mismatches the team looked uncomfortable.
They became a 1 on 1 team. Attacking mismatches needs to be more systematic.
by Kaanyr Vhok on May 11, 2011 12:18 AM PDT up reply actions
i agree that they looked uncomfortable.
but i don’t follow your systematic comment. what’s more systematic than posting up whoever is guarding barea?
i was actually calling for the team to stop going to mismatches so much – at least ones involving batum who still looks very uncomfortable in the post.
i would rather see aldridge posting up chandler than batum posting barea – unless he has very deep position. if dallas was playing against barea, they would run pick and rolls until he was guarding dirk and then post him up… is that what you meant?
What about posting up Camby on Dirk?
Or have the man Dirk’s guarding cut to the hoop — make him work some on D?
Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM
Marcus has no post moves
after 15 years in the legue, he’s a face-the-basket high post player
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Yeah, Marcus Camby's back-to-the-basket game is nada, zero, zilch.
"They say it has no memory. That’s where I want to live the rest of my life. A warm place with no memory."
I've personally often thought that Nate was a better regular season coach than a playoff coach
The Houston series especially felt as though he almost refused to adjust at all.
The Phoenix series was better, but it still felt like to me like he was very slow to adapt.
This series seemed A LOT better in my eyes. Still he has plenty of room to grow. Wallace should have been a focal point much sooner than game 6. But I honestly don’t think you can deny that his in-series adjustments were much more frequent and much improved this year than the last two.
All things considered, Nate’s not perfect, but what coach is? And I’d hate to see him coaching the Kobe show against us so I’m glad we’ve got him locked up for now.
Great Post
I think the Lakers were eventually the easier task for the Mavs,because just as the Blazers,they settled for a halfcourt grind it out game against the best Power Forward in the Game and the best 3-Point shooting support.What I’m sorry about,is that the Lakers couldn’t play more athletic,but the Blazers just didn’t do it,though capable of.Needless to say the Lakers and the Blazers lacked PnR Defense.Just to emphasize it:Pick and Roll Defense.
by defense_first on May 12, 2011 1:01 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I am a Nate supporter but one thing really got to me
it was the way he handled the transition between games 4 and 5. right after the game he basically said in the press conference that the emotional win didnt change anything about the series and how the Blazers need to turn the page on this game and look to game 5 as a separate challenge.
I can understand the idea of taking it one game at a time, but that was a moment to tell a young and inexperienced team that anything is possible and we can take these guys. Dallas was getting drilled by media after the “meltdown” and Nate just said, eh lets get ready for the next game. Even the players reiterated the idea saying that nothing was accomplished except holding home serve. Now its back to Dallas where they are going to win. That was the feeling i got from listening to guys.
Nate should have said we got them on the run, now lets go out there and crush them…beat them down and humiliate them. But as we saw both teams came out flat and sloppy. Terrible opportunity lost for the Blazers, but a very good team in Dallas.
The Blazers need some emotion, period. They needed to be fired up and needed to go for the jugular in that game 5, not just prepare for it.
by SuperFan #7 on May 12, 2011 1:25 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I think your frustrations are misplaced
Nate didn’t get outcoached. Carlisle did nothing special. He just put his best 5 players on the court and they won the game.
“Right decision: At some point, Sarge should have recognized that the only chance his team had was for him to send his guys onto the court pumped up and loose, ready to run and press and beat the Mavs with superior athleticism and heart.”
…but these Blazers play absolutely awful basketball when pumped up and loose. The ball goes everywhere but in the basket when they try this kind of style.
nate.game 6 pre game comments
when he made that statement about game 6 what they needed to do I said well boys this season is done….4 quarters later we were leaving the sports book……
Nice getting down on that one.
Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM
I only wished I would of bet after I heard how he was going to approach game 6…my friend even “though he wouldn’t do it” said…we my as well throw our bet tickets in the trash…I was then telling him how wrong he was when I saw wallace come out like he did…but then nates leadership came in to play in Game 6 and the rest is history
Being a fan is tough at the ticket window
Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM
Nate is going to be in the Hall of Fame
Excellent coach, excellent character. We are fortunate to have him.
This is my signature. Do you like it?
All I am hearing you say is, "Nate good."
Any reasons? Examples?
Concerned at all with these early playoff exits?
Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM
consistent overachiever in the regular season.
most coaches in this league don’t get a 54 win season out of the 08-09 blazers, or playoffs in the last two injury riddled seasons.
nate has yet to overachieve in the playoffs with the blazers, but i don’t think he has underachieved there either. they’ve never lost a series that they were expected to win and have never been a playoff no show ducking out in 4 or 5 games.
what they need to do is either find a way to get really hot at the end of the season and pull off an upset, or just get more talent or health and earn homecourt during the season so they’re not starting off at a huge disadvantage and playing a better team.
by SaveOden on May 15, 2011 5:57 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
They lost with home court advantage. Look it up. That's the definition of expected to win.
Houston. Phoenix. And Dallas was picked as the most likely upset in the first round.
The reason “he” overachieves in the regular season is because he runs his guys into the ground. While Hollins in Memphis understood the need to rest his players, and that team is one game away from the WCF. Nice sixth seed, wasn’t it?
Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM
they had zero playoff experience
and were matched up against a veteran team with excellent wing defenders in artest and battier – it was really the worst possible matchup.
houston, phoenix and dallas might have been picked as most likely upsets, but that just means people were wrong. in hindsight all of those teams surged and went on the wcf’s against all expectations.
and does nate run his guys into the ground, or does he end play the only talented guys he has left after half of the team goes down with season ending injuries? what are you supposed to do in that situation? the key players could have had a lot more rest, but they might have missed the playoffs entirely, which would have been a disaster for nate.
like i said, they need more health and talent. if they come in as a 2 or 3 seed and still can’t get out of the 1st round, then that is a huge black eye for nate. but right now, i don’t think it’s a nate problem. i think we’ve all overrated the talent or at least the healthy talent on the team the past few postseasons…
by SaveOden on May 16, 2011 5:49 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
all of those teams surged and went on the wcf’s against all expectations.
WC coaches would be wise to arrange their playoff seed to face Portland in coming years, we are a bonafide springboard to the finals!
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on May 17, 2011 9:25 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
it's starting to seem that way.
is there any way the blazers can play…
insert dramatic hamster here
the blazers?!
by SaveOden on May 18, 2011 5:44 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
hall of fame?
nate for President!!!! he will save us!! I agree it could be worse. hes not the worse coach but please hes not even in the top 10 and your talking about hall of fame!!! being a great player does not make you a great coach…to many examples to list
no hall of fame based on current accomplishments, for sure.
i imagine scaredcow is projecting some big things for nate and the team in the future. a couple of titles would do the trick. let’s all hope for that!
I am with you, here
Nate is the Blazers coach. I just hope that he learns some things. Deciding there was nothing left to learn before Game 6 did not bode well for that, however.
Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM
Even ignoring all of the currently active NBA head coaches who've got a better Hall of Fame resume ...
than Nate McMillan, I can rattle off ten retired NBA head coaches who are more deserving than him.
1. Don Nelson
2. Dick Motta
3. Bill Fitch
4. Gene Shue
5. Larry Costello
6. Rudy Tomjanovich
7. Cotton Fitzsimmons
8. John MacLeod
9. Doug Moe
10. Al Attles
Heck, even Paul Westhead has more of a case than McMillan.
Although I don’t think that any of those guys are truly Hall of Fame worthy — as I feel the place is already too watered down — they’ve all still got a better chance than McMillan, who’s name shouldn’t even be mentioned in the same breath as the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame.
Shoot, that’s not even counting men’s college coaches, men’s high school coaches, women’s pro and college coaches, or international coaches. That also doesn’t count active NBA head coaches who may get enshrined someday, which includes Gregg Popovich — who’s a shoe-in — and maybe even George Karl, Rick Adelman, and/or Doc Rivers.
Oh, and last but not least, I personally hope that the 2011 Basketball Hall of Fame Curt Gowdy Media Award (Electronic/Broadcasting) goes to a former NBA head coach, Mike Fratello, who deserves to be honored in the same respect as guys like Hubie Brown and Doug Collins in the past. The other 2011 Basketball Hall of Fame Curt Gowdy Media Award (Print/Sportswriting) should go to Seth Davis of Sports Illustrated, as he’s a talented college basketball sportswriter.
"They say it has no memory. That’s where I want to live the rest of my life. A warm place with no memory."
...
Heck, even Paul Westhead has more of a case than McMillan.
…
by No Words on May 16, 2011 8:53 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
At least he's got a ring.
Heck, I’m even a guy who detests Paul Westhead’s run-and-gun slopball. I’ll give credit where credit is due, though. Westhead has also accomplished more at other levels of basketball, too, including men’s college, women’s college, and even the WNBA.
Not only is Nate McMillan nowhere near close to being a Hall of Famer, he also didn’t deserve to have his jersey retired by the Seattle SuperSonics. In a million years, I’ll never understand how a run-of-the-mill, garden-variety role player managed to receive the “Mr. Sonic” moniker. It’s one of life’s mysteries, even as an ex-Sonics fan.
"They say it has no memory. That’s where I want to live the rest of my life. A warm place with no memory."
by AK1984 on May 16, 2011 7:40 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I always thought it's because he was one of those lunch pail guys who bled home colors
His hard feelings when Payton came into town seemed to scar his ability to make effective coaching decisions with his point guards and now challenge his ability to handle Brandon-2Kn.
Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM
In reality, you're right that Nate McMillan being a blue collar player is the reason why ...
he was admired as “Mr. Sonic” by many fans in Seattle for all of those years. Still, I don’t think McMillan deserved to get his jersey retired, for that honor should’ve been bestowed upon only two players of that era: Shawn Kemp and Gary Payton. It’s a shame they never received that recognition, either, because they deserved to be held in the same esteem as Lenny Wilkens, Spencer Haywood, Fred Brown, Gus Williams, and Jack Sikma.
"They say it has no memory. That’s where I want to live the rest of my life. A warm place with no memory."
by AK1984 on May 17, 2011 6:03 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Larry Steele, Dave Twardzik
Portland has at least two “Nates” hanging from the rafters
Both of those guys were a blast to watch back in ’76-78, BTW
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on May 17, 2011 9:27 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Behind the Box Score, where the Boston Celtics are moving on to the conference finals
- NBA Playoffs Fan Fiction: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
- The Indiana Pacers? Gone till November
- Shaquille O’Neal is in a Chinese beer commercial, too (VIDEO)
- ‘Deep Thoughts’ and Cheap Thoughts: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
