RealGM

Well, if leadership is what the team needs, I imagine Russell Westbrook should be very available

Not suggesting a trade for him

Just saying that Westbrook is the type of player you look for, if you want leadership

I feel like Nate McMillan wasn’t the problem

vtime wrote:I feel like Nate McMillan wasn’t the problem

He was/is a good coach. While he might not have been the problem he wasn’t the answer here to get the performance of his team better than a first round playoff exit quality team which is not what management or ownership wanted. Many factors leading to mediocrity while he was here. He now has a superstar player plus a good team and is coaching his talent well.

Pacers Forever wrote:

vtime wrote:I feel like Nate McMillan wasn’t the problem

He was/is a good coach. While he might not have been the problem he wasn’t the answer here to get the performance of his team better than a first round playoff exit quality team which is not what management or ownership wanted. Many factors leading to mediocrity while he was here. He now has a superstar player plus a good team and is coaching his talent well.

Yup. He was, and still is, a good coach. He may have been a problem here, in that he lost the team, and that we had a group that was at a different stage in their careers that the hard driving, kick their butts kind of coaching just didn’t resonate anymore. He’s now gone to Atlanta with younger guys who need more of that tough love, and he has a true superstar talent to just let loose. In Indy, he already let everyone loose, and now they needed more coaching than us “They’ll have to figure it out”.

The other big thing is that this also ignores that most coaches take something to heart from their failures, and learn from each firing. The good coaches take a separation as a lesson to grow from. The bad ones move to the next job and just keep doing the same thing and assume they’re perfect.

vtime wrote:I feel like Nate McMillan wasn’t the problem

You can be not the problem and also not the solution. Even if the Hawks win a championship, that doesn't change his deficiencies while he was here.

And the "he did the most with what he had" is tiresome (not saying you said that, but it's the most used retort lately). We won 61% of games last year (73 games) and 48% this year (72 games). Seems like a good size difference, but it's missing context.

We got the same number of games from Domas and just 2 less from Brogdon. However, we got 63 more games of Warren and 15 more of Myles. We had more games from Caris than we did Vic the year before, but there was little to no Vic distraction during the year and he came back at the end, so no in and out of the lineup stuff.

This doesn't even mention the difference between a rookie head coach with little practice time versus someone whose got 1200 games coached under his belt, along with a terrible staff versus a pretty good one that had consistency for a long time.

We had a far cleaner, simpler season the year before. Nate 2 sucked and was worse than Nate 1. But Nate 1 stumbled and the narrative should not be changing. If Warren was healthy, we probably have a win percentage closer to mid 50s and the difference in wins is minimal with a coach who was way out of his element, alienated players super quickly, alienated staff (to the point where we were down assistant coaches from close to the get go), and micromanaged on and off the court.

Seems more to me like the evidence shows that an average coach should be able to get a few wins above .500 with a healthy Pacers team.

?s=21

Levert had one scrimmage of a couple minutes before Nate told him he was starting. And this was before he even gave the thumbs up he was ready to play.

Scoot McGroot wrote:

Read on Twitter

?s=21

Levert had one scrimmage of a couple minutes before Nate told him he was starting. And this was before he even gave the thumbs up he was ready to play.

I think there were a number of us who figured out early on that Nate2 didn't have a clue what he was doing.

From my friend in Toronto:

Nate TURNED DOWN Nick's offer to come back. Story I heard was that Nate doesn't want to be seen as tied to Nick's apron strings and he doesn't want to AC in the NBA. He's going to do a bit of scouting (team unknown) and try to work back through the NCAA coaching system. He has to garner more HC credits and going back to school seems the best way to do that. Honestly, his coaching style sorta fits with the college system, but it's unknown how he'd come off as a recruiter. If a school needing a coach had a recruiter that was real good on staff, Bjorkgren could succeed.

Wizop wrote:From my friend in Toronto:

Nate TURNED DOWN Nick's offer to come back. Story I heard was that Nate doesn't want to be seen as tied to Nick's apron strings and he doesn't want to AC in the NBA. He's going to do a bit of scouting (team unknown) and try to work back through the NCAA coaching system. He has to garner more HC credits and going back to school seems the best way to do that. Honestly, his coaching style sorta fits with the college system, but it's unknown how he'd come off as a recruiter. If a school needing a coach had a recruiter that was real good on staff, Bjorkgren could succeed.

That only makes sense if the offer from Nurse was for a back bench or developmental position and he felt like it was too much a step down. Even then, he could take credits while working for Toronto to get the degree he needs to coach at major NCAA levels. But, then again, pride gets to us all, sometimes, unfortunately.

I have been wondering what’s happening with Bjorkgren, though.

Most people I know take whatever position will pay them the best, but Bjork is already getting paid like a head coach. Now is the time he can really do whatever he wants for a year.

I was expecting a return to Toronto though.

?s=21

I mean. It really just made too much sense not to happen. He might have flamed out here in Indy, but Bjork was probably more instrumental to the Raps success and championship than we realize.

boomershadow wrote:I mean. It really just made too much sense not to happen. He might have flamed out here in Indy, but Bkork was probably more instrumental to the Raps success and championship than we realize.

Oh, no hate from me. By all accounts, he was clearly a VERY competent assistant, and rose his way to head coaching, where he was not competent, at this time at least. Dropping back down is fine.

The Peter Principle:

The classic #1 New York Times bestseller that answers the age-old question
Why is incompetence so maddeningly rampant and so vexingly triumphant?

The Peter Principle, the eponymous law Dr. Laurence J. Peter coined, explains that everyone in a hierarchy—from the office intern to the CEO, from the low-level civil servant to a nation’s president—will inevitably rise to his or her level of incompetence. Dr. Peter explains why incompetence is at the root of everything we endeavor to do—why schools bestow ignorance, why governments condone anarchy, why courts dispense injustice, why prosperity causes unhappiness, and why utopian plans never generate utopias.

With the wit of Mark Twain, the psychological acuity of Sigmund Freud, and the theoretical impact of Isaac Newton, Dr. Laurence J. Peter and Raymond Hull’s The Peter Principle brilliantly explains how incompetence and its accompanying symptoms, syndromes, and remedies define the world and the work we do in it.

?s=21

Myles with some other details of what happened.

The worst thing about the Bjorkgren experiment is the team had to let go of Dan Burke to make way for Bjorkgren's own staff

Is there any way they can poach him back

Topofthekey wrote:The worst thing about the Bjorkgren experiment is the team had to let go of Dan Burke to make way for Bjorkgren's own staff

Is there any way they can poach him back

I think Burke was out of his own accord. It doesn’t sound like there’s much interest from either side in a reunion. It’s a bummer to lose him, for sure. I think he’s made his own path since.

Scoot McGroot wrote:

Topofthekey wrote:The worst thing about the Bjorkgren experiment is the team had to let go of Dan Burke to make way for Bjorkgren's own staff

Is there any way they can poach him back

I think Burke was out of his own accord. It doesn’t sound like there’s much interest from either side in a reunion. It’s a bummer to lose him, for sure. I think he’s made his own path since.

Wasn't there a rift between Burke and KP? I don't recall exactly or if we got specifics, but could have been due to how prior coaches were treated or that he hired Bjorkgren.

pacers33granger wrote:

Scoot McGroot wrote:

Topofthekey wrote:The worst thing about the Bjorkgren experiment is the team had to let go of Dan Burke to make way for Bjorkgren's own staff

Is there any way they can poach him back

I think Burke was out of his own accord. It doesn’t sound like there’s much interest from either side in a reunion. It’s a bummer to lose him, for sure. I think he’s made his own path since.

Wasn't there a rift between Burke and KP? I don't recall exactly or if we got specifics, but could have been due to how prior coaches were treated or that he hired Bjorkgren.

Burke and KP agreed he wasn’t coming back soon after Nate McMillan was fired. He was already working for Philly well before Bjorkgren got the job.