RealGM

Has anyone heard of any candidates being considered for Portland's coaching staff?

The only person who has talked about Portland was LaMarcus Aldridge and that might just him
talking

If you'd like to throw up in your mouth a bit.

Hollins>Brooks>Vinny I’d say would def be my preferred, but not mad at all about trying to pull some new life out of these vets careers.. they’ve all been familiar with success with decent teams involved

Didn't Olshay hire VDN as coach while at the Clips? So yeah I think we know who they are gonna hire.

Is it Olshey or Billips who gets to choose the coaching staff?

In digging around the internet, Ben Wallace gets some mention for one would think Billips might prefer
some of his old team mates or old coaches on any coaching staff he heads.

Hollins wouldn't be a bad hire. His Nets tenure was bad, but it's not like he had a very stacked roster. But his Memphis teams always seemed to slightly overachieve and play solid defense. Decades of coaching experience, which would be a nice compliment to a first-time head coach. Pretty sure the Blazers retired his number, as they did every other player that averaged 10+ppg in the 70s.

So yeah, Olshey is hiring Del Negro.

Great hire in brooks. Really will make life easy on chauncey having that kind of lead assistant.

Indeed, likely a solid hire.

If he can handle the X's and O's, it will leave the motivational stuff to Billips

I agree. A real good hire (and should be some great help for Billups)

I mean the best thing to do with a rookie HC is to surround him with as many former coaches as possible. I hope Billups really impresses though, I want the best possible results with the current team we have.

Adding Brooks was a good move by Billups, would you guys just STOP THAT, getting me nervous !!

It'll be interesting if any of the coaches on the current staff gets retained for continuity reasons.

roy rogers was hired to improve our defense and he works with centers too, so nurk can be pretty happy with how the things are going for now, as i really think they can unlock his full potential which terry stotts pretty much burried (it was not all on stotts, some of it happened due to injuries and some of it due to nurk coming out of shape to the training camp, but the large part was due to stotts making nurk a role player), but billups has spoken highly of him and they know each other privately and all this is really exciting, but lets see how they fill rest of the coaching staff and hopefully our new coaching staff will improve our team, just chauncey billups alone sounds like a big upgrade from terry stotts, based on what hes saying so far, but obviously, he needs to implement it in the actual games and im confident

lets see what neil olshey will do with the roster and if dame forced him to make a big move...

Nurk has been better with the Blazers than he was for the Nuggets (as evidenced by them giving him and a first rounder for Plumley). Offensively Nurk does not finish well, has nothing in the lane shotwise, and has fumblitis. Yes, some damned nice passes and sometimes finishes, but not more than B- offensive threat. ALready two efficient scorers on the starting unit, maybe three. Nurk must learn to be a good and dependable role player (assuming the same roster). Nurk cried about his "limited" role in Denver and now has done the same in Portland. That is whom he is.

Dzon Dilindzer wrote:roy rogers was hired to improve our defense and he works with centers too, so nurk can be pretty happy with how the things are going for now, as i really think they can unlock his full potential which terry stotts pretty much burried (it was not all on stotts, some of it happened due to injuries and some of it due to nurk coming out of shape to the training camp, but the large part was due to stotts making nurk a role player), but billups has spoken highly of him and they know each other privately and all this is really exciting, but lets see how they fill rest of the coaching staff and hopefully our new coaching staff will improve our team, just chauncey billups alone sounds like a big upgrade from terry stotts, based on what hes saying so far, but obviously, he needs to implement it in the actual games and im confident

lets see what neil olshey will do with the roster and if dame forced him to make a big move...

I thought it was promising that Billups specifically mentioned that he thinks Nurkic can do more, and then goes out and hires a big man coach that he likes and has worked with before. Nurkic in the high-post really has some potential to create a different look for us, where our guards can run around off-ball and hopefully create some more efficient scoring opportunities than their usual "break down the defense on my own" method that Stotts was way too free in allowing.

Yea, let's see what the offense rating is with an unleashing of Nurk. Let' watch that efficiency go beyond 2nd and 3rd of the last two years, or the usual top ten of the Lillard years.

Epicurus wrote:Yea, let's see what the offense rating is with an unleashing of Nurk. Let' watch that efficiency go beyond 2nd and 3rd of the last two years, or the usual top ten of the Lillard years.

Offensive rating is not efficiency. Offensive rating is really more like average points per game. Portland was #2 in offensive rating but #15 in efficiency. We were even better rated in the post-season but obviously that didn't do us very much good did it. You can throw all the numbers you want out there but the Blazers did not execute when needed. We scored a lot, but we allowed a lot of scoring, and we were outscored when it mattered. Credit to Denver they are a good team, but saying our offense is fine because our offensive rating is fine kind of misses the bigger picture that despite that offensive rating we still failed to outscore the other team.


Even if our offense is fine, developing new wrinkles is not a bad thing for a team to do. So I'm not sure what you are arguing except to argue.

youre not going to get best out of nurk if you use him as a role player and quite frankly, why would he accept that, hes better than that and thats why he was unhappy with his role and terry stotts system is not favorable for centers

things that billups mentioned (ball & player movement) fits nurks playing style, as hes a good and willing passer and that will make our offense better and obviously we need to run pnr with dame & nurk as much as possible (ill remind you there was a time when these two were the 2nd best pnr duo in the nba, but for some reason, blazers went away from it)

billups also mentioned that nurk can score more, which i absolutely agree and on given nights, he can be second or even first scoring option, when he gets it going or has favorable matchup etc... i want to see him keep shooting 3s (he was 12/30 last season, which is 40% and its small sample size, but it shows improvement in his 3 point shot) and also more low post game

i keep saying that nurk has all-star level player potential (he was becoming that when he broke his leg), but in order fo him to become such player, he needs to be used properly, but also stay healthy... it looks to me like chauncey billups is the right guy for nurk, a guy who will help him become that player and therefore if nurk becomes that player, blazers will become better team

im intrigued to see if billups and his assistants can improve our defense and therefore make it easier for nurk... he alone can improve our defense to certain point, but you cant have your defense depend on just one or two guys, it takes collective effort

terry stotts wasnt the right guy for nurk, at all...

DeBlazerRiddem wrote:

Epicurus wrote:Yea, let's see what the offense rating is with an unleashing of Nurk. Let' watch that efficiency go beyond 2nd and 3rd of the last two years, or the usual top ten of the Lillard years.

Offensive rating is not efficiency. Offensive rating is really more like average points per game. Portland was #2 in offensive rating but #15 in efficiency. We were even better rated in the post-season but obviously that didn't do us very much good did it. You can throw all the numbers you want out there but the Blazers did not execute when needed. We scored a lot, but we allowed a lot of scoring, and we were outscored when it mattered. Credit to Denver they are a good team, but saying our offense is fine because our offensive rating is fine kind of misses the bigger picture that despite that offensive rating we still failed to outscore the other team.


Even if our offense is fine, developing new wrinkles is not a bad thing for a team to do. So I'm not sure what you are arguing except to argue.

The rating is pts per possession ( xs 100). That is pure efficiency. Now you wish to talk about defense. That's a sliding sands argument. New offensive wrinkles are not bad if they increase the offensive rating. They are if they decrease it. That you can't comprehend such basics is not my problem.

Neither was Malone then or anyone who is not wearing rosy glasses, including Nurk, about Nu4k's offensive ability. But like I said, let's see if offensive rating goes up with the unleashing of Nurcic.