Olshey

[PDXKnight]

olshey said defensive issues were quote “not a product of the roster.” It appears he scapegoated times 100 here, i wonder if he will be fired if his new hire doesn’t fix the d?

[d-train]

Olshey said the teams poor defensive rating was not a product of the teams personnel. I think Stotts would agree. Defensive rating is a statistical value. Defensive rating can be improved by changing the game plan to allow fewer good quality scoring opportunities for the opponent by doing things that reduce our own offensive opportunities. This is really a disagreement between Olshey and Stotts about how to play. Stotts wants to win by creating the maximum amount of scoring opportunities and outscoring the opponent. Olshey believes limiting the scoring opportunities of the opponent would yield a better result even if doing so costs us scoring opportunities as well.

I don't know if Olshey really believes this, or if he is just presenting his best argument to give the team another season. We will find out next season by how the team plays.

I believe the team is going to be better next year with no changes at all, including coaching changes. I hear Olshey saying the coaching change will make a difference. I've been around long enough to not believe everything that is said. I will believe Olshey wants a new game plan when I see a new game plan. New coach doesn't mean a huge change in game plan.

Olshey also said he believes Blazers underperformed on offense against Nuggets. He said Nurk was under utilized and Joker was allowed to attack Nurkic and have nothing coming back at him. And, Nurkic had to play too much 1on1 defense against Joker. I agree more with the latter statement than the former. Obviously, Olshey has some disagreement with Stotts game plan. I would note, this only happens when a coach is allowed the latitude to develop his own game plan.

[d-train]

olshey said defensive issues were quote “not a product of the roster.” It appears he scapegoated times 100 here, i wonder if he will be fired if his new hire doesn’t fix the d?

The defense is going to be better with a more healthy Nurk. It will be just as bad, or worse, with a less healthy Nurk. Just replacing Stotts isn't going to make the defense better. Olshey didn't say it would and I think the questions should have flushed that out better. Instead of harping over defensive rating, the more relevant stat is scoring margin. A good team has a better scoring margin than Blazers have.

I think our scoring margin will improve with more healthy minutes from Nurkic. Our opportunities on offense are better when Nurkic is involved and playing well. And, the opportunities for the opponent are worse when we are making a better percentage of our shots. When our good offense decreases opponent opportunities, our defensive rating improves.

[whatchaknow]

Why can’t you let go of a coach while also not throwing him completely under the bus? That was an absolutely pathetic press conference, way to appeal yourself to prospective candidates. I thought stotts time was up but a new coach isn’t gonna fix this team. Olshey needs a damn wake up call

[d-train]

Why can’t you let go of a coach while also not throwing him completely under the bus? That was an absolutely pathetic press conference, way to appeal yourself to prospective candidates. I thought stotts time was up but a new coach isn’t gonna fix this team. Olshey needs a damn wake up call

How do you fire your coach and not say you believe a new coach will do better? This is all Olshey said. He didn't volunteer a statement saying a new coach will do better than Stotts did. He was asked how things are going to be better with essentially the same roster. Olshey believes changing the coach is all the change that is needed.

Some would call a HC a big change. I call it a small almost insignificant change. I also believe the Blazers don't need to make any change to get better. They just need Nurk healthy all year. Collins healthy is an extra big plus.

[Norm2953]

Unlikely we'll see a healthy Nurk or Collins again this coming season. We've seen this all before, the constant
waiting for the current Blazer big to get and stay healthy. Think about all the previous Blazer bigs who got
hurt and were always sitting on the bench in street clothes (1973, 1978, 1984, 2007, 2017) and now Nurk
seems to be joining them. LA continues to the only significant Blazer big who had a long, productive
career.

[d-train]

Unlikely we'll see a healthy Nurk or Collins again this coming season. We've seen this all before, the constant
waiting for the current Blazer big to get and stay healthy. Think about all the previous Blazer bigs who got
hurt and were always sitting on the bench in street clothes (1973, 1978, 1984, 2007, 2017) and now Nurk
seems to be joining them. LA continues to the only significant Blazer big who had a long, productive
career.

What would Norm do with Nurkic and Collins if he was Blazers GM for a day?

[hondaaccord]

I don't have a high basketball IQ. However, Oshey blaming Stotts for everything is poor form, and bad leadership.

Furthermore, at this point it is painfully obvious that Lillard and McCollum do not work together as a back court. They are both sieves defensively, and do not complement each other offensively. At this point, I am wondering if dumping McCollum in exchange for two solid defensive role players would make the team better.

I am disappointed to see Olshey still around, he has done a much better job as GM than his predecessors, but the team has clearly stagnated and he seems to have an unhealthy affinity for his guys. McCollum could help other teams more than he helps us - he needs to go and or Lillard needs to go.

[whatchaknow]

Why can’t you let go of a coach while also not throwing him completely under the bus? That was an absolutely pathetic press conference, way to appeal yourself to prospective candidates. I thought stotts time was up but a new coach isn’t gonna fix this team. Olshey needs a damn wake up call

How do you fire your coach and not say you believe a new coach will do better? This is all Olshey said. He didn't volunteer a statement saying a new coach will do better than Stotts did. He was asked how things are going to be better with essentially the same roster. Olshey believes changing the coach is all the change that is needed.

Some would call a HC a big change. I call it a small almost insignificant change. I also believe the Blazers don't need to make any change to get better. They just need Nurk healthy all year. Collins healthy is an extra big plus.

The blazers just getting better with the same roster isn’t gonna make any difference. They’ll lose in 7 games in round 1 instead of 6. Olshey is delusional and anybody that believes in this roster makeup is just as delusional. Zach Collins being healthy doesn’t change this teams outlook and any MLE player they end up signing likely doesn’t change their playoff fortunes. This team needs to make a drastic roster change, can’t keep running into a wall and not changing direction, that borders on idiocy

[Norm2953]

Unlikely we'll see a healthy Nurk or Collins again this coming season. We've seen this all before, the constant
waiting for the current Blazer big to get and stay healthy. Think about all the previous Blazer bigs who got
hurt and were always sitting on the bench in street clothes (1973, 1978, 1984, 2007, 2017) and now Nurk
seems to be joining them. LA continues to the only significant Blazer big who had a long, productive
career.

What would Norm do with Nurkic and Collins if he was Blazers GM for a day?

Make contingency plans to play large portions of next season without either player. Likely neither player
can be counted upon to play more than 60 games in an 82 game season

[Epicurus]

Unlikely we'll see a healthy Nurk or Collins again this coming season. We've seen this all before, the constant
waiting for the current Blazer big to get and stay healthy. Think about all the previous Blazer bigs who got
hurt and were always sitting on the bench in street clothes (1973, 1978, 1984, 2007, 2017) and now Nurk
seems to be joining them. LA continues to the only significant Blazer big who had a long, productive
career.

What would Norm do with Nurkic and Collins if he was Blazers GM for a day?

Make contingency plans to play large portions of next season without either player. Likely neither player
can be counted upon to play more than 60 games in an 82 game season

Bingo, that was a major flaw of Olshey this season.

[d-train]

Unlikely we'll see a healthy Nurk or Collins again this coming season. We've seen this all before, the constant
waiting for the current Blazer big to get and stay healthy. Think about all the previous Blazer bigs who got
hurt and were always sitting on the bench in street clothes (1973, 1978, 1984, 2007, 2017) and now Nurk
seems to be joining them. LA continues to the only significant Blazer big who had a long, productive
career.

What would Norm do with Nurkic and Collins if he was Blazers GM for a day?

Make contingency plans to play large portions of next season without either player. Likely neither player
can be counted upon to play more than 60 games in an 82 game season

In 2019, he had Leonard and Like a genius savant, he added Kanter right before Nurkic broke his leg.

In 19-20, he got Whiteside, and when Collins went down and Gasol couldn't play, he added Melo.

In 20-21, Olshey got Kanter and Giles. He added RHJ at the end of the season.

We are headed into a new season, Norm. Who specifically would you rely upon to be our big men, and how would you get them?

[d-train]

Why can’t you let go of a coach while also not throwing him completely under the bus? That was an absolutely pathetic press conference, way to appeal yourself to prospective candidates. I thought stotts time was up but a new coach isn’t gonna fix this team. Olshey needs a damn wake up call

How do you fire your coach and not say you believe a new coach will do better? This is all Olshey said. He didn't volunteer a statement saying a new coach will do better than Stotts did. He was asked how things are going to be better with essentially the same roster. Olshey believes changing the coach is all the change that is needed.

Some would call a HC a big change. I call it a small almost insignificant change. I also believe the Blazers don't need to make any change to get better. They just need Nurk healthy all year. Collins healthy is an extra big plus.

The blazers just getting better with the same roster isn’t gonna make any difference. They’ll lose in 7 games in round 1 instead of 6. Olshey is delusional and anybody that believes in this roster makeup is just as delusional. Zach Collins being healthy doesn’t change this teams outlook and any MLE player they end up signing likely doesn’t change their playoff fortunes. This team needs to make a drastic roster change, can’t keep running into a wall and not changing direction, that borders on idiocy

Any drastic change that makes the roster better is of course something Olshey would do. He will also not make drastic changes that don't help the team improve. This is what Jody pays him to do.

[d-train]

Here is a good and short clip:

Watch on YouTube

He makes the same old sad small market argument that I disagree with, but listen to his last statement. He says if you do a good job building a program, people will want to join. In his last statement, he admits the small market argument is bull. He said, if you build a good program, IOW if you draft well and develop players, the more premium free agents will want to join successful teams.

[d-train]

Here's a long one. I recommend skipping it if listening to Olshey angers you. The best part is he says, small market teams can't trade RFA's for players they don't control. Kind of like trading GTJ for Powell.

Watch on YouTube

[d-train]

Brooke Olzendam, at the end when she had to listen to Olshey talking about himself, must have been thinking, they don't pay me enough.

I liked the interview because Blazers were in the middle of this teams development and Olshey talked about the weaknesses of Lillard and CJ, and the need for players that helped Lillard and CJ overcome their weaknesses.

[Epicurus]

Whatever one may think about Olshey, in his selection of Meyers Leonard and Zac Collins, Olshey has proven himself the best gm in drafting seven foot cheerleaders. Both have been magnificent cheerleaders on the bench.

[d-train]

Whatever one may think about Olshey, in his selection of Meyers Leonard and Zac Collins, Olshey has proven himself the best gm in drafting seven foot cheerleaders. Both have been magnificent cheerleaders on the bench.

Whatever one may think about drafting 7 footers late in lottery, or even later, actual success appears to be random. One might say it is a lucky event, like winning a lottery.

What isn't random is how you come to own a draft pick. Most teams get good draft picks as a reward for being awful. In Olshey's time here, Blazers have little experience being awful. Olshey has been awesome maximizing Blazers opportunities, making the best out of opportunities, and maintaining advantages gained from opportunities, when matters are within Blazers control.

The loss of Aldridge and the built-up associated opportunities were out of Blazers control. The fast recovery resulted from Olshey's skill building and capitalizing on opportunities.

[Epicurus]

You're joking, right? The replacements for the ALdridge 4 (plus first off the bench) were chosen to place the Blazers in the lottery. Lillard's heart and talent and the coaching staff's brains prevented that from happening.

[d-train]

You're joking, right? The replacements for the ALdridge 4 (plus first off the bench) were chosen to place the Blazers in the lottery. Lillard's heart and talent and the coaching staff's brains prevented that from happening.

I'm not joking, are you? The players, including Lillard, were added to the team by Olshey. The coaches might have brains, but the coaches of other teams have brains too. The Blazers did expect to lose and accumulate some lottery picks, but the job Olshey did adding players was too good.