Really?

[SinceClyde]

Obviously at that point we wouldn't of missed Joels lack of offense. I was thinking the same thing watching the guys come out of a timeout.

Nate's coaching has won several games for us, but last night was a bit of a blunder.

[Mr Odd]

I like Nate as a motivator and to get players to play hard. However, his substitution patterns and X's and O's are terrible! He takes out guys who are hot, doesn't go to obvious mismatches and completely flames on the Joel thing tonight.

+1

Nate at times is one fry short of a happymeal.. .

[Butter]

This is not a simple case of Nate making a bad call. I agree, that was a major contributing factor, but it was not the only issue.

1) The Blazers shot what, 35% from the field and were 2-14 from 3's?
2) Nate made some bad substitution decisions
3) LeBron James: That just happened. Arguably the best player in the NBA decided to take over the game. Like in the old days when Shaq would start slow, and then someone would piss him off, and he'd go for 32/14.

IMHO, the Blazers win as a team. As a team, the Blazers could have beaten Lebron's 17 points in the 4th, but they just didn't step up last night. AND, Nate had the wrong personnel in on the last play.

[TBpup]

enough...I get your point: Nate sucks and the players are never to blame.

If anyone can find where I've ever posted that, beers are on me for you Wizenheimer. And Mr. Odd put up my quote where there are things I like about Nate....and have reiterated over and over again. Come to find out, Nate was undecicive on whether to put Joel in or not first telling him to check in, then pulling him back out.

I have a concern about X's and O's, taking advantages of mismatches, staying with a hot player and certain substitution patterns. If those are invalid concers, I would like to substinatively know why.

[zzaj]

-= original quote snipped =-



The new rule added in the NBA last year was that time outs can be called from the bench by the head coach as long as play is suspended or his team has possession. So while Brandon maybe should have called the time out, Nate absolutely positively should have and could have called that time out but did not.

Thanks Mojo, I didn't realize that was a new rule. Good to know.

[listerine]

Wow, three pages on this topic already.

Here's my take...

The way the play went down, Joel SHOULD have been in the game. But Nate didn't know how the play was going to go down. Everyone knew it would be in James' hands, no question. But Nate was worried about a high screen that would either A. Give Lebron the first step he needed for an open look, or B. Switch and put Joel on Lebron which is a losing matchup for us anyway.

Nate gambled that in case of a screen, Aldridge would be able to stay with Lebron.

The gamble failed because in fact, there was NO screen.

What really did the Blazers in was that Aldridge didn't even try to cut off the lane! He was in perfect position to pick up an offensive foul, but instead, he watched his teammate get beat off the dribble.

I don't blame Aldridge, but hopefully he learned from that.

[R11]

-= original quote snipped =-



enough...I get your point: Nate sucks and the players are never to blame.

get mine...portland should have been up by 20. Cleveland was playing terrible, but they were playing no worse then portland was shooting. And it wasn't the contested shots that portland was missing all night, it was at least 2 dozen uncontested shots they missed that did them in. Make a normal % of those, and it is a 20 point lead.

But that's the flaw of a jump-shooting team. Nate didn't put this team together, KP and nash/patterson did. And I really don't think Nate caused Oden's knee injury. He can't turn steve blake into dave twardzick, LMA into karl malone, or martell into bernard king. Right now the young players haven't fully developed their games yet, and jump shooting is the thing they do best. And struggling and mistakes are the things young players do often. Portland beat Atlanta when they shouldn't have and cleveland returned the favor.

Should Pryzbilla have been in on the last play?...probably, but it wouldn't have helped unless he could grow two more elbows on his arm to wrap around the basket and block a reverse lay-up by the best player in the league. Nate's mistake wasn't the line-up, it was in not immediately double teaming LeBron when he got the ball. Big deal...player's miss shots and coaches employ the wrong tactics. Happens every game.

Anyway, I'm sorry I got involved in this debate again. Debating Nate is as pointless as debating sergio vs jack. People have their opinions and will find things that support their opinions and ignore and dismiss things that don't. I'm positive I'm the same way.

win some, lose some

A man of reason. Props to you Wiz. These whiny threads are always just a friggin' joke... Nate did instruct the players to help on Bron. He ultimately decided not to go with Joel because he was concerned about switching ability if the Cavs ran a screen and roll with Ilgauskas. The Cavs are the best team in the league at coming back to win. There's a reason for that. LeBron stepped it up big time down the stretch. They ran a good inbound to set him up, we didn't recover or respond fast enough.

But clearly, it's definitely still on Nate. If he hadn't stayed so long with the totally ineffective Ole' Boy for nearly half the fourth trying to get him a little extra burn, the lead certainly would have big enough to withstand the LBJ outburst


ron

[TBpup]

I guess it comes down to this, other team's coaches have figured out how to have their players trap/double team Brandon to force him out of his comfort zone...or in the Cleveland game, take a fadeaway 24 footer.

Either Nate or the players didn't get anywhere near LeBron or even contest his 3-pt shots and the best interior defender was not in the game when you needed a stop and the other team did not need a '3' any longer.

Not whining, just simple facts. It is either Nate not coaching it better or our players are that much less intelligent then other players who are doubling Roy.

[Wizenheimer]

enough...I get your point: Nate sucks and the players are never to blame.

If anyone can find where I've ever posted that, beers are on me for you Wizenheimer. And Mr. Odd put up my quote where there are things I like about Nate....and have reiterated over and over again. Come to find out, Nate was undecicive on whether to put Joel in or not first telling him to check in, then pulling him back out.

I have a concern about X's and O's, taking advantages of mismatches, staying with a hot player and certain substitution patterns. If those are invalid concers, I would like to substinatively know why.

I paraphrased and exaggerated...sorry

however, I'll say this: there are some posters here that will post complaints about Nate after every single loss...and some of the wins. It's certain and it's incessant, and it's to the point that I don't find it credible. Especially considering all the various failures of the players in every game. Nate could have called timeout on portland's final play, but brandon didn't have to wait so long to initiate the play...that was his decision, and it was a bad one. I am postive the coaches have stressed blocking out on missed foul shots, so frye's failure to do so last night was his alone. I'm sure the coaches have told Sergio not to leave his feet before he knows where he's passing but he did last night and Cleveland scored off of the turnover. Blake had a couple of really dumb turnovers and Martell forced some bad shots. etc.

There were mistakes aplenty, and the one or two that Nate made weren't any more responsible for the loss then the many the players made or all the bricks they were throwing up all night.

And if it's true that Nate deserves most of the blame for this loss and the other losses, then he deserves most of the credit for the wins, and his team has won 7 more then they've lost, which is a lot more then anyone expected.

I accept the mistakes the players make because I see them improving and can see where they might end up. I extend the same patience to Nate at this point, probably more, because I don't know everything he or his assistants know about their player's, the matchups, or the gameplan. I know some don't agree with that. But it seems to me that questioning every decision he makes from the vantage of hindsight is not much different then venting about the officials after every loss.