Buzzard wrote:pacers33granger wrote:Carlisle should have been retained but that was a mutual parting after the brawl. Vogel had run his course with Indy, though Bird went about it in a bad way. Nate M had more than run his course and just wasn't the right coach for where the team is at. Nate B has been trying to fit square pegs into round holes all season long. That's half on him for refusing to adapt and half on management for the hire knowing the style and personnel.
Overhauling the staff was a mistake from day one, Burke being the biggest loss (far bigger than Nate M). When Bayno left, it was all new guys.
That said, it's also on the players. They routinely stop playing the system and revert back to Nate M iso-ball when things aren't going well. It says a lot that Brissett came in and made a noticeable impact largely just by sticking to the system and moving the ball.
It's still laughable that people think Nate M was some sort of lynchpin holding it all together though. Much of the same issues were present last year, we just had far fewer injuries. The team needs leadership desperately. Neither Nate has brought that and our top players outside of Myles are not good leaders.
Sent from my SM-A716U using
RealGM mobile app
I think what's laughable is when fans ignore the obvious. People do not want to give McMillan credit for some reason. Its not just funny; its hateful. Nate's has made undeniable improvements in the way the Hawks have played since he took over. On both ends of the floor. And he has done it with the same staff that was losing under Pierce. No so called super defensive or offensive coordinator
How did I know you would pounce on this and play victim. Pacer fans gave him his due and few were hateful in his departure. We all were open about his weaknesses, but also his strengths. Yet all we hear is this junk from people who clearly did not watch his coaching. Look back at the old Portland teams and the exact same schemes were used and the exact same things happened. It's also not disputable that he had little, if anything, to do with the defense for Indy. Dan Burke ran that for decades.
He's consistently hovered around the mid-tiers of coaching. So he's not bad, but also not great. We hear a ton about how he "never lost a series he was supposed to win." Which misses the point that he was awful in every playoff series he coached for us. Don't be shocked to hear "we just need to play our game" when reporters ask how he's going to adjust to a clearly better team. His style, in Indy and Portland at least, was bad for the playoffs. And when you don't change that year after year, it becomes problematic.
And really, you'd think someone whose team fired a coach of the year would understand when a coach has run their course with the franchise. Nate M had lost the lockerroom, refused to adapt, and hit a plateau with the team. Super good dude and wish him all the best, but it was not working out. Just because we hired someone who looks to be worse doesn't mean he's suddenly validated. The results were the results and going forward with him was definitely mediocrity. We're still there, but we needed to try to shake it up. Firing him was essentially the Vuc trade. He's solid, but that's the absolute best he'll be so what's the point and it's not like he was a Jerry Sloan who had been with the team forever.
