Really?

TBpup · Post #1 » by **TBpup** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:54 am

No Joel in the middle for the last defensive posession? (After stuffing LeBron twice) Are you kidding me? Bonehead coaching move of the night. :banghead:

No assemblence of a defensive rotation on the high pick-and-roll to where Lebron shot 3 of his final 4 shots uncontested?

That is excusing the abyssmal late posession where Brandon threw up a 24' fadeaway airball with basically no other movement or option.

:starwars

J~Rush · Post #2 » by **J~Rush** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 5:02 am

Yeah, the late game execution wasn't as crisp as it usually is. That being said, I have no idea where I'm going with the rest of this post.

UGotThrilled · Post #3 » by **UGotThrilled** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 5:02 am

Here is the thing. Joel should have been in on defense at the end. Other than that, its not Nate's fault. He has been criticized for controlling his players too much. Defensive rotations on high pick and rolls are something that players should know how to do. Nobody credits McMillan with Roy's stop on Joe Johnson, which they shouldnt. But they also shouldnt criticize Mcmillan when the players cant come up with a stop.

TBpup · Post #4 » by **TBpup** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 5:04 am

Other coaches have figured out to trap Brandon 20-25' from the basket but Nate can't run an extra defender or even have players step out on a pick-n-roll let alone make LJ give it up.

Brutal! :banghead:

Post #5 » by **mojomarc** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 5:07 am

I have to agree, Pup--with 4.9 seconds left and a one point lead, there's no excuse not to have Joel in there. Once Lebron got that step on Brandon the defense was essentially a cowering Outlaw, who is outweighed by about 30lbs in that matchup. Bad decision by Nate.

Fitz303 · Post #6 » by **Fitz303** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 5:11 am

mojomarc wrote:I have to agree, Pup--with 4.9 seconds left and a one point lead, there's no excuse not to have Joel in there. Once Lebron got that step on Brandon the defense was essentially a cowering Outlaw, who is outweighed by about 30lbs in that matchup. Bad decision by Nate.

+1 There was absolutely ZERO reasons why Joel shouldnt have been in the game

TBpup · Post #7 » by **TBpup** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 5:21 am

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.

:starwars

PDXKnight · Post #8 » by **PDXKnight** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 5:22 am

Joel definitely should have played. Everyone in the building expected Lebron to drive to the basket but nate insisted on Keeping him out of the game.

Butter · Post #9 » by **Butter** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 5:36 am

ESPECIALLY after Joel blocked Lebron TWICE. You know that Joel could have at least altered that shot attempt, if not block it.

Wizenheimer · Post #10 » by **Wizenheimer** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 5:41 am

if portland was going to double-team Lebron, then Joel shouldn't have been in because he's not fast enough to rotate out to shooters.

But since they decided not to double Lebron, yes...Joel should have been in.

But the game was lost in the first 47 minutes, not the last 1.

TBpup · Post #11 » by **TBpup** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 5:44 am

But the game was lost in the first 47 minutes, not the last 1.

Yes but they were up by 11 through the first 44 minutes.

:starwars

Wizenheimer · Post #12 » by **Wizenheimer** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 5:46 am

TBpup wrote:
But the game was lost in the first 47 minutes, not the last 1.

Yes but they were up by 11 through the first 44 minutes.

I'm sure you've noticed...it would have been better if they had been up by 13

TBpup · Post #13 » by **TBpup** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 5:56 am

I'm sure you've noticed...it would have been better if they had been up by 13

With reasoning, it would have been better if they were up 20, 30 or 50. At some point, you have to expect that with an 11 point lead with 4 minutes to go, you should get the win. With the lack of strategic timeouts used and the obvious biff in not having your best interior defender in the game at the end....when you have the lead, it could have been handled much more intelligently from a basketball coaching and exectution standpoint.

This is a game the youngsters could have used a helping hand from their coach and got nothing.

:starwars

PDXKnight · Post #14 » by **PDXKnight** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 6:19 am

TBpup wrote:
I'm sure you've noticed...it would have been better if they had been up by 13

With reasoning, it would have been better if they were up 20, 30 or 50. At some point, you have to expect that with an 11 point lead with 4 minutes to go, you should get the win. With the lack of strategic timeouts used and the obvious biff in not having your best interior defender in the game at the end....when you have the lead, it could have been handled much more intelligently from a basketball coaching and exectution standpoint.

This is a game the youngsters could have used a helping hand from their coach and got nothing.

I agree. Nate coached terribly down the stretch. You can't expect a young team, or any team for that matter, to win a game with they type of coaching that Nate exhibited today. I know he'll improve with time but I'm beginning to wonder if Nate is the right coach to win this team an NBA title. I'm sure many coaches would be intrigued to go to Portland with our nice young core and if nate can't get the job done, I have a feeling that ultimately, KP won't hesitate to fire Nate McMillan. I'm still rooting for Nate to become the coach we first envisioned as long as he's with this team but I can't help but wonder how this team would be under the control of a Rick Carlisle, Jeff Van Gundy, or possible Larry Brown.

zzaj · Post #15 » by **zzaj** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 6:31 am

I haven't been a Nate basher and i'll give him the benefit of the doubt on the lack of a timeout on the last possession. Brandon should have called that.

Tonight was the first night I have really seen the dramatic effect of his Sloan-esque substitution pattern where everybody gets taken in and out at roughly the same times every game.

Tonight I felt like Nate taking Blake out when he had it going in the first was a mistake. It just seemed like nobody really got in a groove with shots. And if they did hit a couple in a row, Nate would pull them out because it was time to "conserve" them.

Again, Nate does the vast majority of things right...but I thought the sub pattern tonight was partly to blame for the shooting woes.

Norm2953 · Post #16 » by **Norm2953** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 6:38 am

Nate had another brain cramp but ten months from now,
this board will go crazy if Oden is sitting on the bench next
to JP at the end of games.

Napoleon7 · Post #17 » by **Napoleon7** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 6:46 am

Nate should of had Przybilla in this game at the end. Period!

That being said 35% shooting is why we lost.

Post #18 » by **magee** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 7:45 am

Now you know how Hawks fans felt after their game on Sunday, sans the substitution patterns.

Wizenheimer · Post #19 » by **Wizenheimer** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 3:26 pm

TBpup wrote:
I'm sure you've noticed...it would have been better if they had been up by 13

With reasoning, it would have been better if they were up 20, 30 or 50. At some point, you have to expect that with an 11 point lead with 4 minutes to go, you should get the win. With the lack of strategic timeouts used and the obvious biff in not having your best interior defender in the game at the end....when you have the lead, it could have been handled much more intelligently from a basketball coaching and exectution standpoint.

This is a game the youngsters could have used a helping hand from their coach and got nothing.

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

Post #20 » by **mojomarc** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 3:32 pm

zzaj wrote:I haven't been a Nate basher and i'll give him the benefit of the doubt on the lack of a timeout on the last possession. Brandon should have called that.

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.