Fire McMillan/Pritchard Poll

[Mr Odd]

Nate is lost when teaching offense and
that is the death of us. On the defensive
end switching really hurts us aswell.. .
I believe those are the two biggest
holes in Nates coaching, besides from
those two things Nate is a pretty good
coach. However those two things are
to giant to overcome by the talent of
players, UNLESS you either get three
all-stars or a real superstar.. .It is true
that Nate over the years has improved
his Wins for the most part, but I think
that falls more on the players then Nate.

Nate seems like a good guy, Ive always
wanted him to do well, but he just
seems to be stuck in his coaching,
and the Blazers need a better offense,
or more to the point a better teacher
in it, or they are doomed to be 1 & done.

[CheckThis1]

Nate is lost when teaching offense and
that is the death of us. On the defensive
end switching really hurts us aswell.. .
I believe those are the two biggest
holes in Nates coaching, besides from
those two things Nate is a pretty good
coach. However those two things are
to giant to overcome by the talent of
players, UNLESS you either get three
all-stars or a real superstar.. .It is true
that Nate over the years has improved
his Wins for the most part, but I think
that falls more on the players then Nate.

Nate seems like a good guy, Ive always
wanted him to do well, but he just
seems to be stuck in his coaching,
and the Blazers need a better offense,
or more to the point a better teacher
in it, or they are doomed to be 1 & done.

Nate has done well with the roster he had in his first three years, but no one could realistically expect any better either; he was the steady hand at the helm over many changes and obstacles. But now, this team is expected to go to the next level, however Nate's steady hand is also a two edged sword that manifests not only in his slooooowwwwww and predictable offense and only fair at best defense (possessions is only part of it, you have to minimize the oppositions second chance attempts,) but also in his inability to think effectively on the fly and make the critical changes in response to the opposition (and that's called being "out coached".) For some reason, when he gets shown up like this (too often,) I feel just as stupid being a part of it as a fan, and I don't like that very much!

Nate has an innate (pun unintended) ability to not recognize the qualities of Batum (who plays so much like Pippen it's not funny ) as the first option along with LMA. But since that's a rather new development in the mix, Nate will not incorporate it immediately but waaaaaaait for the off season and next year; he seriously lacks the urgency, immediacy and vision of a strategic thinker. Emphesized with him standing on the sideline, arms folded with his patented stoic (deer in the headlights) stare.

Next season, if he stays healthy (and that's the biggest key,) Oden will make the difference and hopefully help the team overcome Nate's lack of offensive creativity. However, if they get to the finals and have to match up with Orlando [for instance,] it'll unfortunately come back to game by game strategy and adjustments, and class, what did I just say about Nate's ability there? Not very good. Next? We don't need to wait yet another year, if the team plays like a sick roach, replace the coach.

I'm not a whiner, but things have needed to change since the 2009- game six in Houston, I'm a fan (since '75,) I hope for the best and live with the rest. If there are any coaching candidates better than Nate, they should be proven winners at the next level, I'm a little leary with Avery Johnson (his first round elimination,) so I would seriously consider Rudy Tomjanovich (62 y/o) and his two rings. He led a team with very similar attributes to the current Portland roster with an offense that maximized their potential.

[JasonStern]

They lost in 6 games to a superior team while The Natural was busy being The Meniscus.

aldridge, miller, camby, and batum are talentless scrubs? no offense intended to phoenix, who was the better team during the series, but even without roy, portland had way too talented of a roster to lose by 29, 19, 19...

You mean Jeff Van Gundy who can barely coach a team to 90ppg? You mean the Jeff Van Gundy who has on more than one occasion said he's not that interested in returning to coaching?

defense wins championships. plus the blazers barely score 90 points some nights (dribble, dribble, dribble, contested jump shot as the shot clock expires). might as well at least have a solid defense.

and in response to not wanting to coach, C.R.E.A.M. - see rudy tomjanovich's stint with the lakers. hell, I like tomjanovich coaching over nate.

If he gets fired in Dallas, I wouldn't mind replacing Nate with Rick Carlisle. His defensive schemes probably aren't as good as Nate's (although, who can tell with the softies he's got on the Mavs), but his offensive scheme is worlds better in my opinion.

can coaches be traded? I'd trade nate for carlisle.

I would seriously consider Rudy Tomjanovich (62 y/o) and his two rings. He led a team with very similar attributes to the current Portland roster with an offense that maximized their potential.

5 pages and nobody mentioned him, then you steal my idea one post ahead of me!

[CheckThis1]

They lost in 6 games to a superior team while The Natural was busy being The Meniscus.

aldridge, miller, camby, and batum are talentless scrubs? no offense intended to phoenix, who was the better team during the series, but even without roy, portland had way too talented of a roster to lose by 29, 19, 19...

You mean Jeff Van Gundy who can barely coach a team to 90ppg? You mean the Jeff Van Gundy who has on more than one occasion said he's not that interested in returning to coaching?

defense wins championships. plus the blazers barely score 90 points some nights (dribble, dribble, dribble, contested jump shot as the shot clock expires). might as well at least have a solid defense.

and in response to not wanting to coach, C.R.E.A.M. - see rudy tomjanovich's stint with the lakers. hell, I like tomjanovich coaching over nate.

If he gets fired in Dallas, I wouldn't mind replacing Nate with Rick Carlisle. His defensive schemes probably aren't as good as Nate's (although, who can tell with the softies he's got on the Mavs), but his offensive scheme is worlds better in my opinion.

can coaches be traded? I'd trade nate for carlisle.

I would seriously consider Rudy Tomjanovich (62 y/o) and his two rings. He led a team with very similar attributes to the current Portland roster with an offense that maximized their potential.

5 pages and nobody mentioned him, then you steal my idea one post ahead of me!

You must be around my age then, did you vote "OTHER" for him yet?

[mojomarc]

I'm around your age, Check, but I still wouldn't want Rudy T. I remember too clearly his championship teams, which looked a lot like Portland in their reliance on drive and kick, only they had Hakeem to feed for the isolation action instead of Brandon Roy. He only had one team that was really anything better than Nate has had defensively (the first championship team), and that was with a very similar set of talent to what we had, so it's not like he has any brilliant ideas there, and when you look at the guys who succeeded in his system offensively other than Hakeem and Clyde you're stuck with guys like Horry and Reid and Maxwell, all of whom were spot up guys like Martell and Batum.

Without the great talent of Hakeem (and Clyde to a lesser degree, both of which were inherited), Houston wasn't really helped all that much by Rudy T.'s coaching. I'd take him over Nate, but I'd be looking for a door number three rather than pulling him out of retirement. He's too much like Nate 2.0 in my mind to be a coach that could really help this team reach its full potential.

Oh, and if you could trade coaches I'd throw in our first to trade Nate for Carlisle.

[Ripcity4life]

It's a little after 11pm as i write this and there are 3 topics on Nate on the 1st page. Whats it going to take for the powers that be to make one single thread / topic to avoid this in the future.


MAKE A TOPIC JUST FOR NATE .. i will continue to write this until someone gets a clue.

[CheckThis1]

I'm around your age, Check, but I still wouldn't want Rudy T. I remember too clearly his championship teams, which looked a lot like Portland in their reliance on drive and kick, only they had Hakeem to feed for the isolation action instead of Brandon Roy. He only had one team that was really anything better than Nate has had defensively (the first championship team), and that was with a very similar set of talent to what we had, so it's not like he has any brilliant ideas there, and when you look at the guys who succeeded in his system offensively other than Hakeem and Clyde you're stuck with guys like Horry and Reid and Maxwell, all of whom were spot up guys like Martell and Batum.

Without the great talent of Hakeem (and Clyde to a lesser degree, both of which were inherited), Houston wasn't really helped all that much by Rudy T.'s coaching. I'd take him over Nate, but I'd be looking for a door number three rather than pulling him out of retirement. He's too much like Nate 2.0 in my mind to be a coach that could really help this team reach its full potential.

Oh, and if you could trade coaches I'd throw in our first to trade Nate for Carlisle.

I don't recall his offense not working like Nates in the playoffs, he did get two rings and beat the blazers with Rick Adelman and I've since carried much respect for him, both actually. I like Carlisle when he was the Asst. too, you made some great points.

[The Sebastian Express]

It's a little after 11pm as i write this and there are 3 topics on Nate on the 1st page. Whats it going to take for the powers that be to make one single thread / topic to avoid this in the future.


MAKE A TOPIC JUST FOR NATE .. i will continue to write this until someone gets a clue.

CHILLAX.

[DusterBuster]

You mean Jeff Van Gundy who can barely coach a team to 90ppg? You mean the Jeff Van Gundy who has on more than one occasion said he's not that interested in returning to coaching?

defense wins championships. plus the blazers barely score 90 points some nights (dribble, dribble, dribble, contested jump shot as the shot clock expires). might as well at least have a solid defense.

This is not a good excuse. You're also not the first one to use it. Saying "well if our offense is gonna suck, we might as well improve our defense a bit" doesn't fix our problems and you all know that. Yes, defense wins championships, BUT YOU HAVE TO SCORE PEOPLE! You need both. Teams need to be balanced. Defense can only take you so far if you can't score. Van Gundy's offense is arguably worse than McMillan's, and that's saying a LOT.

We can however agree on Carlisle. I think he'd be a fantastic coach for this team. As I've been preaching, he brings BALANCE. He's got a good offensive scheme with a solid defense. I do believe teams can trade coaches, I seem to remember something like that happening at one point and time, but I could be wrong. But, I wouldn't package our 1st round pick AND McMillan for Carlisle.

This is all pointless however as even the most anti-Nate people have to know that he's not getting fired. If Pritchard gets fired, maybe Nate tries to negotiate a buyout of his final season..... MAYBE. But I'd bet a large sum of money on him starting out the season as the Blazers head coach.

For those of us who want Carlisle, I think we all need to hope for the Mavericks to have a terrible start to the season next year. Cuban has a pretty short fuse with his coaches, if they stumble out of the gate, I could see him getting canned. At that point, you may have to hope that the Blazers stumble next season as well, because if they're doing well, Nate won't be going anywhere.

[mojomarc]

I'm around your age, Check, but I still wouldn't want Rudy T. I remember too clearly his championship teams, which looked a lot like Portland in their reliance on drive and kick, only they had Hakeem to feed for the isolation action instead of Brandon Roy. He only had one team that was really anything better than Nate has had defensively (the first championship team), and that was with a very similar set of talent to what we had, so it's not like he has any brilliant ideas there, and when you look at the guys who succeeded in his system offensively other than Hakeem and Clyde you're stuck with guys like Horry and Reid and Maxwell, all of whom were spot up guys like Martell and Batum.

Without the great talent of Hakeem (and Clyde to a lesser degree, both of which were inherited), Houston wasn't really helped all that much by Rudy T.'s coaching. I'd take him over Nate, but I'd be looking for a door number three rather than pulling him out of retirement. He's too much like Nate 2.0 in my mind to be a coach that could really help this team reach its full potential.

Oh, and if you could trade coaches I'd throw in our first to trade Nate for Carlisle.

I don't recall his offense not working like Nates in the playoffs, he did get two rings and beat the blazers with Rick Adelman and I've since carried much respect for him, both actually. I like Carlisle when he was the Asst. too, you made some great points.

I wasn't trying to say that they were exactly the same, but both were slow moving offenses that depended on isolations and spot-up shooting. Hakeem, though, was the focus of the isolation play, not a wing. That was the major difference, and I think we'd agree that was personnel based

In terms of how they played, though, the sheer amount of pop-outs to stationary three point shooters is the major thing that was the same between the two. I don't think you could say that Rudy T. ran an offense like, say, Popovich where the designated three point shooters were constantly shifting into open space to get open looks. He just depended on the defenders needing to triple-team Hakeem if they wanted a shot at stopping him.

[Brandon-Clyde]

This is not a good excuse. You're also not the first one to use it. Saying "well if our offense is gonna suck, we might as well improve our defense a bit" doesn't fix our problems and you all know that. Yes, defense wins championships, BUT YOU HAVE TO SCORE PEOPLE! You need both. Teams need to be balanced. Defense can only take you so far if you can't score. Van Gundy's offense is arguably worse than McMillan's, and that's saying a LOT.

We can however agree on Carlisle. I think he'd be a fantastic coach for this team. As I've been preaching, he brings BALANCE. He's got a good offensive scheme with a solid defense. I do believe teams can trade coaches, I seem to remember something like that happening at one point and time, but I could be wrong. But, I wouldn't package our 1st round pick AND McMillan for Carlisle.

This is all pointless however as even the most anti-Nate people have to know that he's not getting fired. If Pritchard gets fired, maybe Nate tries to negotiate a buyout of his final season..... MAYBE. But I'd bet a large sum of money on him starting out the season as the Blazers head coach.

For those of us who want Carlisle, I think we all need to hope for the Mavericks to have a terrible start to the season next year. Cuban has a pretty short fuse with his coaches, if they stumble out of the gate, I could see him getting canned. At that point, you may have to hope that the Blazers stumble next season as well, because if they're doing well, Nate won't be going anywhere.

I'll agree on a couple points. Our offense needs to be improved and a 1st for Carlisle may be too much(a 1st for Adelman yes but I'd offer Dallas a couple 2nds for Carlisle Nate need not be involved at all)
However as to Nates being fired or not there is another factor to consider and that is Paul Allens health. If Allen is worried about his health he may feel the need to find a better coach. Also IIRC there were rumours at the start of the year that Allen felt the team was already a year behind schedule on challenging for a title and that may also play a role in the decision

[DusterBuster]

I'll agree on a couple points. Our offense needs to be improved and a 1st for Carlisle may be too much(a 1st for Adelman yes but I'd offer Dallas a couple 2nds for Carlisle Nate need not be involved at all)
However as to Nates being fired or not there is another factor to consider and that is Paul Allens health. If Allen is worried about his health he may feel the need to find a better coach. Also IIRC there were rumours at the start of the year that Allen felt the team was already a year behind schedule on challenging for a title and that may also play a role in the decision

Heck ya on Adelman. I'd give up multiple draft picks to get him in Portland.

I really don't how Nate is in trouble with Paul Allen. According to all accounts, Nate his held in far higher esteem within the Blazers organization and within the NBA community as a whole than he is in the Blazers testy fanbase. I'm sorry, but it seems that a lot of people here are just grasping for straws in hopes of finding a way for Nate to be fired. It's not gonna happen. The rumors that Allen felt the team was behind schedule was a rumor targeting Pritchard, not McMillan. Again, the only way Nate is not the coach of the Blazers next year is if HE decides he doesn't want to be.

[Brandon-Clyde]

.

I really don't how Nate is in trouble with Paul Allen. According to all accounts, Nate his held in far higher esteem within the Blazers organization and within the NBA community as a whole than he is in the Blazers testy fanbase. I'm sorry, but it seems that a lot of people here are just grasping for straws in hopes of finding a way for Nate to be fired. It's not gonna happen. The rumors that Allen felt the team was behind schedule was a rumor targeting Pritchard, not McMillan. Again, the only way Nate is not the coach of the Blazers next year is if HE decides he doesn't want to be.

Paul Allen can like and respect Nate a great deal but feel that he isn't the coach that is needed. Now the rumors about being Allen believing the team may be a year behind may focus mainly on KP but he may be only part of what Allen is worried about. I'm not saying that Nate will be fired just that his job may not be as secure as you believe

[DusterBuster]

Paul Allen can like and respect Nate a great deal but feel that he isn't the coach that is needed. Now the rumors about being Allen believing the team may be a year behind may focus mainly on KP but he may be only part of what Allen is worried about. I'm not saying that Nate will be fired just that his job may not be as secure as you believe

Again what I mean by people creating theories with no basis to convince themselves that Nate is on the hot seat. He's not people. Not even close. I know a majority of fans are sick of him, but inside the Blazers and within the NBA community as a whole, he's regarded as one of the NBA best coaches. I know everyone here is sick of him, but I challenge ANY of you to find me recent quotes from people within the NBA who have spoken negatively of McMillan's coaching. Coaches, GM's and NBA analysts all speak glowingly of him.

I'm sorry, but his job just isn't in jeopardy. Not this offseason. Maybe if the team really bombs to open next season, but it's not right now.

[CheckThis1]

...I know everyone here is sick of him, but I challenge ANY of you to find me recent quotes from people within the NBA who have spoken negatively of McMillan's coaching. Coaches, GM's and NBA analysts all speak glowingly of him.

I'm sorry, but his job just isn't in jeopardy. Not this offseason. Maybe if the team really bombs to open next season, but it's not right now.

I qualify a longtime and respected columnist from the couv- Dwight Jaynes as a worthy NBA analyst who isn't afraid to say it like it is:

...My point is, this team continues to use “We need another guy who can get his own shot in the fourth quarter” as a convenient excuse for not coaching. Man, watch the Jazz and see how often they just hand the ball to a player and ask him to beat the defense by himself. It just doesn’t happen. Watch how easy it is for the good defensive teams — like Boston and Utah in the last two games — to lock in on Portland’s stagnant offense. You’ve got to move the ball and move bodies, which the Blazers so infrequently do, to get good shots.

My goodness, the Jazz had 50 points in the paint. It’s not because they’re handing it to one guy and letting him create his own shot, either. It’s because they pass, cut and move the ball. Blowing a 25-point lead in the third quarter? It can’t happen unless a lot of things go wrong. Portland made only four of its last 27 shots over the fourth quarter and overtime. The Blazers, including Roy, missed a lot of big free throws.

Nate McMillan continues to be so stubborn in regard to putting Nic Batum in the starting lineup. What is he waiting for? Batum had 14 points and seven rebounds in the first half. But by the time he made it on the court at the very end of the third quarter, McMillan had managed to cool him off. What kind of crazy stuff is going on here?

http://www.dwightjaynes.com/man-what-a- ... zer-defeat

This took me all of 43 seconds to find...

[Tince]

I qualify a longtime and respected columnist from the couv- Dwight Jaynes as a worthy NBA analyst who isn't afraid to say it like it is:

...My point is, this team continues to use “We need another guy who can get his own shot in the fourth quarter” as a convenient excuse for not coaching. Man, watch the Jazz and see how often they just hand the ball to a player and ask him to beat the defense by himself. It just doesn’t happen. Watch how easy it is for the good defensive teams — like Boston and Utah in the last two games — to lock in on Portland’s stagnant offense. You’ve got to move the ball and move bodies, which the Blazers so infrequently do, to get good shots.

My goodness, the Jazz had 50 points in the paint. It’s not because they’re handing it to one guy and letting him create his own shot, either. It’s because they pass, cut and move the ball. Blowing a 25-point lead in the third quarter? It can’t happen unless a lot of things go wrong. Portland made only four of its last 27 shots over the fourth quarter and overtime. The Blazers, including Roy, missed a lot of big free throws.

Nate McMillan continues to be so stubborn in regard to putting Nic Batum in the starting lineup. What is he waiting for? Batum had 14 points and seven rebounds in the first half. But by the time he made it on the court at the very end of the third quarter, McMillan had managed to cool him off. What kind of crazy stuff is going on here?

http://www.dwightjaynes.com/man-what-a- ... zer-defeat

This took me all of 43 seconds to find...

If you're using Dwight Jaynes to backup you're argument, you might as well give up. The original poster is correct, no national commentator has anything but over the top praise for Nate. The only people that criticize Nate are columnist who need to sell newspapers to idiot fans who think Nate is a bad coach.

By everyone's standards, Coach Pop should also be fired for his lack of offensive creativity and inability to come up with an offensive gameplan to stop the Suns.

[CheckThis1]

If you're using Dwight Jaynes to backup you're argument, you might as well give up. The original poster is correct, no national commentator has anything but over the top praise for Nate. The only people that criticize Nate are columnist who need to sell newspapers to idiot fans who think Nate is a bad coach.

By everyone's standards, Coach Pop should also be fired for his lack of offensive creativity and inability to come up with an offensive gameplan to stop the Suns.

You can have your own opinion and at least try to express it to whatever level you're capable of, but you cross the line when you attempt to invalidate or dismiss other's opinions as being "idiot fans." Not cool, but very typical of those who don't have the substance to make an adequate arguement.

[Tince]

If you're using Dwight Jaynes to backup you're argument, you might as well give up. The original poster is correct, no national commentator has anything but over the top praise for Nate. The only people that criticize Nate are columnist who need to sell newspapers to idiot fans who think Nate is a bad coach.

By everyone's standards, Coach Pop should also be fired for his lack of offensive creativity and inability to come up with an offensive gameplan to stop the Suns.

You can have your own opinion and at least try to express it to whatever level you're capable of, but you cross the line when you attempt to invalidate or dismiss other's opinions as being "idiot fans." Not cool, but very typical of those who don't have the substance to make an adequate arguement.

Duly noted.

I certainly don't think you're one of the fans the Jaynes caters his articles to, so hopefully you're less offended.

What substance is in this thread anyway?

[mojomarc]

I qualify a longtime and respected columnist from the couv- Dwight Jaynes as a worthy NBA analyst who isn't afraid to say it like it is:

...My point is, this team continues to use “We need another guy who can get his own shot in the fourth quarter” as a convenient excuse for not coaching. Man, watch the Jazz and see how often they just hand the ball to a player and ask him to beat the defense by himself. It just doesn’t happen. Watch how easy it is for the good defensive teams — like Boston and Utah in the last two games — to lock in on Portland’s stagnant offense. You’ve got to move the ball and move bodies, which the Blazers so infrequently do, to get good shots.

My goodness, the Jazz had 50 points in the paint. It’s not because they’re handing it to one guy and letting him create his own shot, either. It’s because they pass, cut and move the ball. Blowing a 25-point lead in the third quarter? It can’t happen unless a lot of things go wrong. Portland made only four of its last 27 shots over the fourth quarter and overtime. The Blazers, including Roy, missed a lot of big free throws.

Nate McMillan continues to be so stubborn in regard to putting Nic Batum in the starting lineup. What is he waiting for? Batum had 14 points and seven rebounds in the first half. But by the time he made it on the court at the very end of the third quarter, McMillan had managed to cool him off. What kind of crazy stuff is going on here?

http://www.dwightjaynes.com/man-what-a- ... zer-defeat

This took me all of 43 seconds to find...

If you're using Dwight Jaynes to backup you're argument, you might as well give up. The original poster is correct, no national commentator has anything but over the top praise for Nate. The only people that criticize Nate are columnist who need to sell newspapers to idiot fans who think Nate is a bad coach.

As was pointed out, the idiot fans comment wasn't necessary. It hasn't been pointed out, however, that there's no positive argument that I've seen you make that demonstrates that your opinion, and that is exactly what it is, is more valid than Jaynes' on this subject. Aside from the fact that last time I checked Jaynes didn't have a newspaper to sell, and that he follows the Blazers much closer than the national commentators do, you seem to simply want to dismiss his opinions on this subject because...you don't like them? Am I capturing the factual basis here? I'm just curious what else you have.

By everyone's standards, Coach Pop should also be fired for his lack of offensive creativity and inability to come up with an offensive gameplan to stop the Suns.

Coach Pop's offense is infinitely more nuanced than Nate's offense. Also, Pop should be commended for getting as far as he got with a team that was over the hill two seasons ago. It's hardly surprising that San Antonio is losing because it was actually pretty surprising they even made it to the second round in the first place (and I was thinking in the pre-season they were an 8th seed at best). Furthermore, while San Antonio did lose both games, didn't they lose them to Phoenix in Phoenix by less than double-digits? That's a bit different than losing three games where they were behind by 25 or more points each?

[CheckThis1]

I qualify a longtime and respected columnist from the couv- Dwight Jaynes as a worthy NBA analyst who isn't afraid to say it like it is:

...My point is, this team continues to use “We need another guy who can get his own shot in the fourth quarter” as a convenient excuse for not coaching. Man, watch the Jazz and see how often they just hand the ball to a player and ask him to beat the defense by himself. It just doesn’t happen. Watch how easy it is for the good defensive teams — like Boston and Utah in the last two games — to lock in on Portland’s stagnant offense. You’ve got to move the ball and move bodies, which the Blazers so infrequently do, to get good shots...

Nate McMillan continues to be so stubborn in regard to putting Nic Batum in the starting lineup. What is he waiting for? What kind of crazy stuff is going on here?..

http://www.dwightjaynes.com/man-what-a- ... zer-defeat

This took me all of 43 seconds to find...

If you're using Dwight Jaynes to backup you're argument, you might as well give up. The original poster is correct; no national commentator has anything but over the top praise for Nate. The only people that criticize Nate are columnists who need to sell newspapers to idiot fans who think Nate is a bad coach.

By everyone's standards, Coach Pop should also be fired for his lack of offensive creativity and inability to come up with an offensive gameplan to stop the Suns.

It's interesting how some people can dismiss one of the greatest columnists at least in the Portland area- Dwight Jaynes as not having the credibility and knowledge to warrant national respect. Please explain how you arrive at that conclusion, because every article I've seen of his has been not only spot on (he "calls it like it is," Read his blog) but courageous and ahead of the curve when he reported for the "Big Papers." Where do you think many writers and TV personalities including national get their info? They network, and that includes information and insight from, none other than... Dwight Jaynes. Here is an example (excerpt and link) of two geographically separate columnists coming to the same conclusion independently [arguable] but with a different audience (only Dwight beat him to it.) Granted, it doesn’t show concurrence, but it does show that Dwight deserves the same amount of reverence as national columnists.

Yes, the Atlanta Hawks are also proving that “iso-heavy” offenses aren’t so hot in the playoffs

Thanks to John Hollinger at ESPN (insider) for pointing out that isolation offenses aren’t as effective in the playoffs, where preparation is much easier than it is in the regular season:

I wrote an article recently about playoff myths — things people think changes in the playoffs, but in fact don’t. However, there’s another piece to that puzzle. Perhaps there are things people don’t think change in the playoffs, but in fact do.

I may have accidentally stumbled upon one in observing my two “home” teams, Atlanta and Portland, compete in the playoffs over the past two seasons. Watching the Hawks in particular, nearly every commentator has been shocked by how little ball movement their offense generates and how many times they end up isolating Joe Johnson while everybody else stands around and watches. This complaint might sound familiar to folks in the Northwest, because it’s not altogether different from what the Blazers do with Brandon Roy. Both teams’ fan bases constantly complain about the lack of originality and shameless predictably inherent in such an attack

I guess we all love it when we find others who agree with us. I think I take special delight when it’s someone I particularly respect. Hollinger — along with Henry Abbott and his True Hoop — are two guys, by themselves, worth the few cents a year that ESPN Insider costs. They know what they’re talking about. And man, how long have we all been saying this about Nate McMillan’s “Here Brandon, take the ball one-on-three and score” offense?

http://www.dwightjaynes.com/There's your national attention, do you believe that?