Who's gonna be the new Coach?

[Pacersike]

I don't understand the Nate hire. He doesn't seem to fit the general things that the Pacers want to do compared to what Vogel already did. Nate... eh. I mean, we saw his coaching in Seattle and Portland. He plays slow teams which aren't terribly innovative on offense. This isn't an upgrade at all.

Nate is old school and Bird is old school. To me that explains a lot

Bird cares little about pieces that have to fit (look at his rosters). He thinks the most important thing for a coach is that he should be able to motivate his players and that a group of motivated and talented players can win more playoff games than a not so motivated well constructed and talented roster.

If you know the type of person Bird is, shouldn't you be able to understand it, no matter if you strongly disagree with it or not?

[DusterBuster]

5 or 10 years is of little importance when the roster is totally different.

If Nate is willing to start Turner at the 5, play a smallball 4 that Bird is going after and play Ty Lawson, who he mentioned in the presser in a positive way, it will be extremely difficult not to have a very fast pace, cuz those guys like to run and push the tempo.

Portland's Nate had a totally different roster, with one of the biggest 4s in the league in LMA, a point guard like Andre Miller or Blake and a good ballhandling SG as star player, while the Pacers have Paul "let's bounce the ball off my foot out of bounds or make a lazy pass" George.

Pacers fans have seen enough silly turnovers in the last few years to be willing to accept a coach who is willing to hold a player accountable for their lazy pass (PG) or their heroball drives to the basket (Ellis).
Ask George Hill what it means to have a coach who keeps giving faith to guys who are messing up, over and over again, in stead of correcting them and giving the ball to a guy who doesn't commit so many silly turnovers.


McMillan has already admitted that the best way to handle these things is somewhere in between both ends of the spectrum, somewhere in the middle in between the soft approach of Vogel and the no mercy approach Nate had in the past.

Coaches learn a few things as well you know and Nate has learned from one the best, when it comes to having faith in players.
Vogel was great at that.

Hope always springs eternal in the offseason, so certainly good luck. I'm just not exactly one keen on giving Nate the benefit of the doubt after being burned time and time and time again believing what he would say in the offseason to the media only for him to pull back on his word by December.

[tsherkin]

Nate is old school and Bird is old school. To me that explains a lot

Bird cares little about pieces that have to fit (look at his rosters). He thinks the most important thing for a coach is that he should be able to motivate his players and that a group of motivated and talented players can win more playoff games than a not so motivated well constructed and talented roster.

If you know the type of person Bird is, shouldn't you be able to understand it, no matter if you strongly disagree with it or not?

Right, right, I understand that principle, but it's stupid, that's what worries me. I liked Bird as a player and I think he's generally done a good job as an executive as well, but he basically replaced Vogel with another Vogel. Nate isn't a particularly keen offensive coach, and that's the biggest hindrance the team has had to my eyes: lacking breadth of superstar talent, they need a better overall offensive system... which McMillan will surely not provide. Motivational impetus isn't going to magically improve Monta Ellis' chuckery or suddenly grant Paul George the ability to be Michael Jordan (although he damned well tried against us, and was quite impressive), right? So they need more motion from players and the ball, coupled with more shooting and a legitimate secondary offensive player.

I dunno, man. I'm worried about this move. Well, "worried" is maybe a little strong: I think he'll be capable of replicating what Vogel did, maintaining rather, but they're going to need a talent infusion to go any further, not a new coach.

[Wizop]

Those of us who watched all the Knight years believe in sitting players who screw up. He also always started a reserve in the second half if he was best in first half. Call it old school, but I hate substituting by the clock even though pro players like set roles.

[Johnny Bball]

Did bird say he wanted to play at a faster pace or run more? Having a hard time reconciling this choice if he in fact said faster pace given the article on nates teams pace historically.

[Wizop]

Did bird say he wanted to play at a faster pace or run more?

He said he wanted to score more points. I don't remember him saying how he expected that to happen. A faster pace doesn't necessarily score more points if you don't take care of the ball. I'd hope for fewer turnovers and fewer bad shots.

[pacers33granger]

5 or 10 years is of little importance when the roster is totally different.

If Nate is willing to start Turner at the 5, play a smallball 4 that Bird is going after and play Ty Lawson, who he mentioned in the presser in a positive way, it will be extremely difficult not to have a very fast pace, cuz those guys like to run and push the tempo.

Portland's Nate had a totally different roster, with one of the biggest 4s in the league in LMA, a point guard like Andre Miller or Blake and a good ballhandling SG as star player, while the Pacers have Paul "let's bounce the ball off my foot out of bounds or make a lazy pass" George.

Pacers fans have seen enough silly turnovers in the last few years to be willing to accept a coach who is willing to hold a player accountable for their lazy pass (PG) or their heroball drives to the basket (Ellis).
Ask George Hill what it means to have a coach who keeps giving faith to guys who are messing up, over and over again, in stead of correcting them and giving the ball to a guy who doesn't commit so many silly turnovers.


McMillan has already admitted that the best way to handle these things is somewhere in between both ends of the spectrum, somewhere in the middle in between the soft approach of Vogel and the no mercy approach Nate had in the past.

Coaches learn a few things as well you know and Nate has learned from one the best, when it comes to having faith in players.
Vogel was great at that.

Hope always springs eternal in the offseason, so certainly good luck. I'm just not exactly one keen on giving Nate the benefit of the doubt after being burned time and time and time again believing what he would say in the offseason to the media only for him to pull back on his word by December.

Eh that honestly happens with most coaches, they go back to what they feel comfortable with, which is reasonable given the fact that coaches seem to get let go frequently. I mean, we heard similar things from Vogel about the offense each summer and it largely devolved into the iso crapfest we've always had despite us really not having the personnel for that to contribute to sustained success on that end.

[pacers33]

Vogel coaching for Orlando is a perfect fit. I don't know what to think about Nate. I could see him doing a good job but I don't see why he is necessary. At his best he probably won't he as good as Vogel.

[ram8]

I think Nate is a good coach. I didn't like firing Vogel but that doesn't mean that Nate is a bad hire.

The problem, imo, is the roster. It is up to Larry Bird to add the pieces needed for this team to contend. I was very underwhelmed by the moves Larry made last year. I'm hoping the front office does better this summer.

[Wizop]

Looks like Vogel doubled his paycheck.

[Boneman2]

Nick Van Exel? Interesting.

Van Exel just spent the 2015-16 season as the head coach of the Texas Legends, who are an affiliate of the Dallas Mavericks. Indiana Pacers, led by new head coach Nate McMillan, are pursuing former NBA player and current D-League coach Nick Van Exel as an assistant coach.

I wouldn't be mad.

Edit for link:
http://www.todaysfastbreak.com/fastbreak-news/pacers-pursuing-nick-van-exel-assistant-coach/