Waynearchetype wrote:d-train wrote:I wish I had a transcript of the presser so I could post it here. Name one thing he blamed on Stotts. He said nothing but positive complimentary things about Stotts. He said Stotts was a friend and he did an outstanding job for almost a decade. He also made what he characterized as a tough decision to replace Stotts. And, he believes a new coach will help the team get better. Where is the basis of the BS, "throw him under the bus" narrative?
He also debunked many false stories being made up in the press. He offered to debunk more, but the cowards didn't take him up on his offer. Like the list of coaching candidates that Olshey laughed at and said there is no list, not yet. He asked Lillard who he likes, and Lillard named 2 people he likes, which he noted wasn't good for the candidates. Olshey said eventually a list of 20 or more candidates will be compiled and vetted.
There was decent amount of information shared. Too bad nobody was there to listen. There was a couple good questions, but not enough.
How do you interpret the sentence "The defense was not a product of the roster".
It's very simple and crystal clear. The near last place defensive rating was not a product of the roster. It was a product of Stotts game plan. Stotts himself would admit that. It's also not the best measure of the success of Stotts defense. The best measure would be the average scoring margin adjusted for pace.
A better question to ask Olshey would be to explain the teams poor average scoring margin. He probly would have said (if asked, instead of numerous stupid questions), it was negatively effected by injuries to big players, Nurk's poor condition early in the season, and CJ's injury. He would have pointed to the improvement with Powell and healthy in-shape Nurkic in the lineup.
He could also point out his coaching change as a plan to improve, which he did in answer to a question that was asked. I don't agree with this, but it certainly isn't throwing Stotts under the bus.
Waynearchetype wrote:That's the big thing because it was partly a question about his own job security. That answer is saying "I am responsible for the job of roster construction, but the roster construction isn't the reason why our defense is so bad." Ironically, he then takes credit for the offense by saying "We've benefited from the offense I've cultured, but we've been hit on the defensive side of the culture". So he takes credit for the good, but insists the bad isn't part of the roster (the thing that he is responsible for).
He answered a direct question about his job security. He said he serves at the pleasure of Jody Allen. His job is secure as long as Jody sees value in his work. IOW, what the media and we think of his performance is not relevant. He works for his boss.
He should take credit for the roster construction. He has done a great job. He shouldn't say the Blazers are bad defenders because they are not bad defenders, see above.
Waynearchetype wrote: And at the end of the day, Olshey made the move to get Norman Powell. A starting caliber SG, one who expects to start (and if Olshey was being honest about wanting to retain Norm, was likely promised he could start). In a roster already criticized for its defense with questions about running a combo guard at SG, Olshey chose to go in the direction of getting even smaller. He also chose to get Kanter and Carmelo, both players who are good enough to play but don't really fit together. Both would have been absolutely drama-filled if denied playing time. If the defense is not a product of the roster and the roster is loaded with defensive liabilities and people playing out of position, i'm not really sure what you could have expected Stotts to do.
The Powell addition was great for the team. Olshey should be proud of the addition and should also claim credit. Blazers are a better team because of it.
Melo and Kanter are smaller additions and very good additions in there own relative proportion. They are better offensive players, and Olshey hinted more attention to defense off the bench could add value. Blazers don't have any defensive liabilities, unless you count Kanters defense against Joker, which is a dumb argument. 99% of NBA players are a defensive liability against Joker.
Olshey also said his philosophy is to get the best 5 players he can get. He doesn't believe in building a team by the numbers, a prototypical 1-2-3-4-5. He could have just said the Earth is round, everyone that knows basketball, knows he is right on this point.
correction: he doesn't believe in prioritizing a prototypical roster over talent.
Waynearchetype wrote:And at the end of the day, it doesn't even matter. If you have ever been in a management position, you should know that you need to choose your words carefully, and you are expected to take the blame for those under you. Even if he did not intend to shift the blame onto Stotts, most normal people would interpret it that way, and its entirely his fault for doing so.
Olshey did a fine job of answering all the questions, even the dumbest ones, he was respectful. There was one question that was so stupid he rightfully dismissed it. One time he had to remind a reporter the NBA has rules about what he can talk about. Again, he didn't blame anyone. He spoke glowingly about Stotts. He was asked about his plans to improve the team and you can agree or disagree that replacing Stotts is a good idea. I disagree with Olshey on this point. But, it's possible Olshey and Stotts were at an impasse on the right game plan. If this is true, I respect Olshey for allowing Stotts space to do his job his way.