"Dunleavy has had more up-tempo teams, especially with the Lakers and Trail Blazers, using full-court defenses to create tempo. Van Gundy's Knicks excelled at a half-court game, especially defensively. " Get Dunleavy. I dont want to see the same offense (or worse offense) that has kept the Rockets out of the playoffs for the past however many years. It doesnt work with this squad. The team always relied on what they were comfortable with: isolations that made Rudy famous during the Dream years. Hakeem was automatic. No one on this team is automatic. Say no to boring, half-court, can't score because we dont know how to pass, offense. Is it just me, or is Steve the worst defensive PG in the game? It seems he gets burned night in and night out. I challenge him to make 1st Team All Defensive. I dont think he can do it.
I bet that if Baker was playing to the same level before his cursed trade, we'd be pining for a Mobley + MoT for Baker trade right now. Why are you saying that MoT and Cato are worthless? If not for them, Yao would be played to the max in games without any cover help. Cato was busting his ass out there, maybe to prove that he was worth something after Yao came in. And MoT, can you really say bad things about a guy who is coming back from a non-season the previous year and trying to adjust back to the game schedule? These 2 guys provided, i wouldn't say good, but reasonable frontcourt cover and help for the team. No way are they worthless.. take them away from our roster, and we'd be looking at 11-12 seed, and maybe just above the Nuggets this year.
Agreed. Not sure what your point is as I never claimed that. I said the Rockets have a solid 1-8 rotation and the Blazers are solid 1-8. And the Blazers didn't have two dominant guys to build a team around like we have in Yao and Steve (and please don't say Wallace is a team you build around). Ultimately, Portland had much more of a solid talent base than we did. However, we are alot closer to them than we were to the Bucks. BTW, Moochie is a decent (note I said decent, not great or good) backup PG (compare his production with that of other backup PGs (Ihave and with the exception of his PPG, the rest of his stats fall in the middle of the pack). Moochie dribbles too much and makes stupid mistakes, but the same can be said of alot of Blazer players). Agreed. I never said the Rockets had more talent than these teams. Not sure what that statement of yours has to do with this discussion. Great comparison. So is Phoenix and Minnesota closer in talent level to the Bucks or the Blazers? Agreed. You just proved how good of a coach Dunleavy is. In his years, the Blazers were seeded 6th, 3rd, 2nd and 7th. After Dunleavy left, they were seeded 6th and 5th. It would appear to be that those Portland teams slightly overacheived as a group in two of Dunleavy's years and pretty much maintained the status quo in the other 4 years. In these 6 years, Portland's talent base has stayed pretty much the same. This article again proves one of my points. That is, Portland never had a consistant go to guy. They went with whoever had the hot hand. You don't win titles with those type of teams. You proved my points for me by saying the Rockets talent level should put them at a 5th or 6th seed at best based on their talent level when Portlantd was the 5th or 6th seed, 4 out of the last 6 years (actually, one of those years they were 7th, only 1 game out of the 6th seed). Looks like Portland has two overacheiving seasons under Dunleavy (seasons where they had no HOFer or true go to guy like other teams did; yet still had one of the top 2 or 3 seeds). BTW, quit mixing my words up. Ive always maintained that the Rockets were more similar in talent level to the Portland teams than they were to the Bucks. There is a difference between that and saying that one team is flat out similar to another. I am disappointed in you Riet. You are only responding to a snipit of my last post. I suspect you didn't respond to the rest because you can't. I have responded to all of your points. I thought for sure that you would afford me that same privelege.
Francis has had a better career than Robinson, although only slightly. Based on their careers as a whole, would you trade Francis for Robinson straight up? Who would you rather build a team around, Francis or Robinson?? Ummmmmm, no that I have heard. (just because the rest of the BBS wants to do something, doesn't mean the Rockets feel the same way; I would expect you to know the difference) BTW, Baker was benched and is on the verge of being out of the league @ 31 years old. I can't believe you can try and compare the two. No it doesn't say enough. Based on their careers as a whole, would you trade Mobley (an overacheiver) for Baker (an underacheiver)? I didn't think so. The only difference is Yao, he is the lone factor that makes this team better. [/QUOTE] This post right here is a joke. Please elaborate in order to justify this silly point. Name one coach would woud rather have a bench of Avent, Brickowski and Edwards over Taylor, Cato and Rice? Name one. I suspect you won't.
I'm not sure about the rest of your post...just got up, and haven't really woken up yet, but this part doesn't wash... The average seed for the Dunleavy Portland teams was 4.5. The average after he left was 5.5, or a difference of 1.0 seeding which according to the average seeding differential of the that period ( or almost any, in fact) corresponds to between .7 and 1.4 games. A statistical insignificance when measured over 82 games. Add to that the fact that, Dunleavy's fault or not, it was during his tenure that the Portland team is supposed to have imploded, and that those personality conflicts which arose during that time have never since been resolved, and the fact that his years were the years of greatest age/career cohesion ( ie more players in or close to prime years) and the difference is, if anything, less than it should be given statistical probability. Also, during MD's tenure was when the Trail Blazers were head and shoulders the highest paid team in the league...since then, Dallas and Sacramento have joined that level, and Jackson has established another dynasty in L.A., and the drop of exactly one seed spot doesn't speak all that well about Dunleavy's coaching now, does it?
What a coincedence. I just woke up too. I would not call it insignificant by any means because your math is "fuzzy". Taking those two high seed years (where they were 2nd and 3rd), there winning %s were 70% and 72% (average win total of 58 games based on an 82 game season). Post Dunleavy, the two Blazer teams won 49.5 on average. That is an 8 game difference. This clearly proves that this team was at its best under Dunleavy. Furthermore, the average win% under Dunleavy was 65%, or, 53 wins. Post Dunleavy, the Blazers average win% was 60%, or 49.5 wins. To expand on that, if you take away Dunleavy's 1st seasons (one where alot of personel changed over; new schemes implemented, etc.), their win % is 68% or 55 wins (a 5.5 game difference). Lets not forget, just to reiterate, that this was all done playing in the toughest division in the NBA and without a true go to guy or HOFer. So where you see a 1 game difference (based on the average record of those 4th and 5th seeds), I see see a 3-4 game difference based on actual win and win%. Wasn't it during Brown's tenure that Indiana's players quit on him and vice versa?? Why do you not hold this against Brown, yet hold it against Dunleavy (Dunleavy didn't quit on his team)? How can anyone solve those personality conflicts on that team? Bonzi Wells - busted for pot; insults the teams fans Wallace - led the league in technical fouls a few seasons; threatens referees on loading docks; busted for pot; numerous suspensions Stoudamire - busted for pot; asks to be traded almost every season because he is not a very good PG Patterson - pedophile Pippen - perennial malcontent; never been a team leader; constantly blames others rather than himself McGinnis - steals Charles Oakley's girlfriend and gets his ass whooped by Oak (just a lil joke; obviously this does not make McGinnis comparable to the rest) You make it sound as if Dunleavy transmored these players into the fine and upstanding people that they are. The fact that he could control this group and get them focused enough and come together to win they way they have is quite remarkable. Yet, none of those Blazer teams had the HOFers or go to guys that other teams had (Sac may be the exception (Webber is much better than Wallace though)); but you see also that they can get to the cusp, but not over the hump). You are still failing to consider this as a factor in why Dunleavy could not take those teams farther than they went. No, but an average drop of 4-5 wins from Dunleavy to Cheeks does speak well for his coaching (not to mention a high of 59 wins to Cheeks best season of 50 wins) considering that team has had the same talent base during both of their tenures. Also, having the highest payroll does not mean you are the best team in the league and hardly equated to automatic or guaranteed success (especially when the coach of the team is not the one making the personel decisions). Go ask the Braves, Dodgers and Yankees. In fact, go ask Larry Brown (your favorite). His team (with the 5th highest payroll) lost to a team with the 5th lowest payroll (Detroit)). Yet, Detroit fired their coach and hired him. Your whole theory about payroll and utilizing that to judge a coaches legacy is so way off base. I suspect that you realize as much.
Gee, ya'll makein MD and JVG look worse than Rudy T.They are basically leftovers.We are stuck with them.Why don't the mangement give carlisle a shot. The reason why the are so many negative reports on the guy is to make sure he doesn't get hired by this team. We need him anyways. I won't settle for a ex-coaches who has not even been mention by teams looking for a coach.We should have gotten LB.But nooooo we are suck with ex-coaches who being away from the coaching area for more than a year. It's pitful.
I still maintain that we should at least interview Carlisle, but since the Rox management seems to have decided that MD and JVG are the guys, I guess I prefer JD, and not just because his initials remind me of Elie. From my perspective, Dunleavy was a player once, and played for the Rox at one time, which makes him a sentimental favorite for me. Looking at all of the stats that people have thrown out, it appears that Dunleavy tends to get good performances out of the players he has, even when they are clearly second (Baker) or third (Day) tier players. Dunleavy also seems to concentrate on the two R's that I think would improve our team the most, Rebounding and Running. Can you imagine what Steve, Cat, Posey (if he stays), and Griff could do on a fast break if they were encouraged to run first? I don't know if anyone else has noticed it, but Griff has a tendency to be out in front on the fast break and I have always maintained that if Cat and Wink would just look for him, EG would finish a lot of fast breaks. I also have respect for MD's ability to handle the difficult players he had on those Portland teams. I think that he might be able to rein Steve's tendency to act like a baby (dribble now, dribble later, and dribble some more after that). Who knows, maybe he will even have the ba11s to move Stevie to the 2 and sit Cat on the bench as second unit firepower. As for JVG, I do admit that his teams in NY played some pretty awesome defense. That is the reason that they went to the finals in the short year, they just didn't have the talent to keep up with Duncan/Robinson that year. I always wondered, however, how much of that defense was just left over from Riley. Personally, I have seen enough ugly ball to last me a while and even though I would love to see the Rox play the kind of defense we saw out of NY those years, I would rather that our guys get every board and run like a Cat, flash like a Wink, and move like a Blur (my nickname for Posey).
Which coach coached a David Robinson Spurs team to their worst year? Which coach coached Reggie Miller's Pacers worst year in the '90s and beyond. According to win/loss results, no one has flawless methods except, apparently, Phil Jackson.
What happened to you? I can't believe you haven't responded earlier. Did your wife lock up your computer? By the way, who cares about Brown. He's gone. Let's get Carlisle, a coach who has proven he can turn a loser into a winner.
Somebody explain this to me please... What makes JVG so intriguing?! All he did was take the Knicks to the finals ONCE and they got their ass kicked! Mind you, that was a team which included, Ewing, Spreewell and Allan Houston. So he inherited a team of winners too, just like Dunleavy did in Portland. But what turns me off on JVG is the fact that he bailed on his team in the middle of the season. Not to mention he said he had "lost the fire that it takes to be a head coach!" I'm just worried he won't get respect from guys like Steve and Cuttino! Will someone who knows what the hell their talking about calm my nerves please!
We can't calm your nerves about Van Gundy's down side. I have the same feelings about him you do. His upside is that he is an acknowledged defensive guru and has been getting a lot of exposure in the media as an announcer this last season. Face time on TV heals a lot of wounds and gets the buzz back up. Given the fact that he prefers a half-court, slow down the tempo offense (or has so far) I don't think he fits Les's stated objective to find an uptempo coach. He may be able to adjust his offense with an assistant but Les may not be willing to gamble on that.
Keeping the peace: Dunleavy has league's toughest job MARCH 14, 2001 Sean V Deveney The Sporting News Bob Leverone/TSN Mike Dunleavy - Portland Trailblazers get this photo Erase all previously held notions of what a basketball team is. The star player, the solid complement, the scrappy point guard, the hustling sixth man. Gone. The cheerleading doofus who gets the crowd riled at the end of blowouts with his earnest effort? Forget him. He doesn't exist here. The Trail Blazers are not a basketball team, not as we have come to know basketball teams. This is the Knights of the Round Table in high-tops. This is the hardwood's Death Star, the NBA's Goliath. Top to bottom, this Portland team is a collection of some of the best players of the past decade. One coach says the Blazers' second five could win 35 games on its own. As forward Detlef Schrempf says, "This is the All-Star traveling squad." So have pity for coach Mike Dunleavy. That's right, pity. See, the reason certain things are expected of basketball teams -- star, scrapper, doofus -- is because those things work. They have been hallmarks of past winners. But for the Blazers, it's difficult to determine star from doofus. It changes from night to night. Even first-year Vancouver coach Sidney Lowe, whose Grizzlies trailed the 42-21 Blazers by 22 games in the Western Conference standings after beating them twice last week, sympathizes. "I feel for him," Lowe says. "People think it's an easy job because he has got a lot of talent. Really, that makes it one of the tougher jobs there is, having all that talent and trying to keep those guys happy." Pity Dunleavy because he must manage a team whose first and second units are an average of 31.6 years old, with 8.6 years of NBA experience and 1.9 All-Star games apiece. He is dealing with veterans who have a sense of entitlement when it comes to playing time and scoring opportunities. He must juggle talents on the court and egos off it. His All-Star roster comes with high expectations, but expectations are a long way from wins. Remember, the Knights never found the Holy Grail, the Death Star blew up and Goliath was knocked cold by a kid with a slingshot. "Yeah we're deep, but that does not guarantee anything," Dunleavy says. "You put the five best players you think you have on the floor, and that's all. You can't play all 12." Dunleavy says he makes substitutions on basketball principles -- simple things such as matchups, foul trouble and defense. But every substitution Dunleavy makes is also an exercise in psychology. Every minute played by one All-Star is a minute taken away from another. Hoping to preempt vitriol, Dunleavy has been conducting regular one-on-one meetings with his players to talk playing time. "Certain nights, certain guys are going to get a certain number of minutes in our lineup," Dunleavy says. "There are other guys who are pushing for a role, but I can't put them in. I have to juggle the minutes. It's not going to be consistent, but I try to let them know, you might play 10 to 15 minutes one night, you might not play the next night." The only uncontested slots in the Blazers' rotation are the ones held by small forward Scottie Pippen and power forward Rasheed Wallace. At each of the other three positions, there is a nearly head-to-head conflict for playing time, plus a fourth conflict for time within the second unit. Though the Blazers stick to the "all-for-one," rhetoric, in some cases tension is obvious. Take a look at the tensions and the juggling act you would have to master to be head coach of the Blazers. Then sigh. Then say, "Poor Mike Dunleavy." Conflict No. 1: point guard -- Damon Stoudamire vs. Rod Strickland Stoudamire is accustomed to the role of Blazer whipping boy. His aggressive style is not compatible with Dunleavy's offense, which accentuates the forwards. Stoudamire is supposed to get the ball across halfcourt, then to the forwards. He is supposed to take jump shots when available. At 5-10, Stoudamire is not able to play, or defend, in the post. His relationship with Dunleavy has been cold, but he has tried this season to become the kind of point guard his coach wants, and communication between the two has improved. Stoudamire has improved his outside shot and has limited his rushes to the basket. He has had some streaks of shoddy play but is enjoying his best year as a Blazer. At least he was, until the team acquired Strickland, waived from the Wizards early last week after two months of pouting. Strickland is more conventional than Stoudamire. He is 6-3 and a better passer and better floor general. Strickland still must work into playing shape, but when he does, Stoudamire's minutes will dwindle. Another player who will be in the mix eventually is Greg Anthony, who has been out with a shoulder injury. Stoudamire admits the addition of Strickland adds pressure. Watch Stoudamire, and you'll notice he often twitches toward the bench when the substitution horn sounds -- he is playing like he is afraid to be benched. In the first three games after Strickland joined the Blazers -- all losses -- Stoudamire shot 41.1 percent (14-for-34) with nine assists and nine turnovers. "There is always pressure on me," Stoudamire says, "because regardless of anything, I am always the one that everybody comes to ridicule about my play. I am not going to look over my shoulder, but at the same time, (Strickland is) going to be a question that will always linger." Conflict No. 2: Center -- Dale Davis vs. Arvydas Sabonis It was Christmas, and the Blazers had just beaten the Lakers on the road. But Davis was fuming. He had played five minutes against the Lakers. Sabonis, feeling stronger as he continued his return from offseason ankle and knee surgeries, had played 33. So Davis ducked the team flight to Utah. He skipped practice, staging a one-man playing-time protest. Davis knew his minutes would decrease when he was traded to Portland from Indiana in August. But five minutes? "I knew they had a lot of guys, but it took me a long time to accept the role," Davis says now. "I don't like it. I was frustrated. I don't like sitting on the bench. But everybody knows we have to make sacrifices." Davis has been making fewer sacrifices lately. He has been a starter in 17 of the past 21 games and is forming a versatile combination with Sabonis. Davis is limited offensively but is a fierce rebounder and defender. In contrast, Sabonis is a sharpshooter and the league's best passing center. In addition to his two offseason surgeries, Sabonis, 36, has missed time with a sprained knee, back spasms and a toothache. His health is a delicate matter. Having him back up Davis allows Dunleavy to keep Sabonis rested for the playoffs. Conflict No. 3: Shooting guard -- Bonzi Wells vs. Steve Smith For the first two months of the season, folks in Portland waited for Smith to snap out of it. Coming off his Olympic stint, Smith hit a slump in mid-November. He shot 38.2 percent in a 22-game stretch. On December 29, Smith took a game off with a viral infection, and he was snapped right out of the starting lineup. Wells replaced Smith as a starter, and the Blazers have benefited. Wells is better at initiating and finishing the fast break, and the Blazers run more when he is on the floor. Though he is three inches shorter than the 6-8 Smith, Wells is thicker and stronger and is better at working in the post. His accuracy is astounding for a shooting guard -- he shoots 53.8 percent. For Smith, a lifelong starter, the move to the bench has come without complaint. It hardly can be called a demotion -- Smith plays 30.3 minutes per game off the bench, compared with 33.2 as a starter. He shot 41.7 percent as a starter but shoots 47.5 percent as a reserve. Conflict No. 4: Reserve forward -- Shawn Kemp vs. Detlef Schrempf Kemp, predictably, has been late or a no-show for meetings, practices and even an exhibition game. But when he missed practice on December 19, it was classic Kemp. After waking up early, the excuse went, Kemp fell back asleep, right through practice. It got better, though, when the portly Kemp explained why he was so sleepy. He said he was feeling woozy thanks to a new diet and weight loss. So of course, he had to sleep through practice. Give Kemp credit, though. The quality of his play is catching up to the quality of his excuses. Where he had been lazily firing jumpers, he is becoming more aggressive, working inside and rebounding. He is playing just 16.6 minutes per game, after averaging more than 30 for his career. Complicating matters is the unretirement of Schrempf, 38, who retired last year but was persuaded to stay on Portland's injured list for $2.2 million for this season. The Blazers made one stipulation: Schrempf had to stay in shape, and if the team had an emergency, he would come out of retirement. When Pippen needed elbow surgery at the end of January, Schrempf was called into duty. Pippen has returned, but Schrempf will finish the season with the team and frequently has logged more minutes than Kemp. "It's frustrating sitting there watching," Kemp says. "It's a challenge. I knew it would be before I got here, but I did not expect it to be this much of a challenge." Making Dunleavy's job even tougher is the omnipresence of team owner Paul Allen and general manager Bob Whitsitt, who watch each home game a few yards from the Blazers bench, in floor seats. In foisting this group on Dunleavy, Blazers management has made a mockery of the league's salary cap. The team's roster runs almost $90 million, by far the NBA's highest. In any sport, only the Yankees' $92.5 million payroll was higher for 2000. "If the criticism is that we have too many good players, well, then, I love that criticism," Whitsitt says. "I am proud Portland has that many good players, like I am sure the Yankees are proud of their players." Little wonder Dunleavy often wears the harried look of a coach who is closer to last place than first. The Blazers, for all their players, are locked in a five-team struggle for the West's top seed but too often play as though they were headed for the lottery. "Some nights our defense is absolutely awful," Dunleavy says. "We don't play with energy. We don't make our reads and rotations. We give up too many easy baskets -- layups, dunks, wide-open jumpers. I don't know the answer to it." "They are deep as hell," Golden State's Marc Jackson says. "They're the best team in the league by far. I guess that can make it tough, because you're expected to be the best team all the time." Ah yes, pity from the Warriors, whose record is worse than Vancouver's. Poor Mike Dunleavy, indeed. Sean Deveney is a staff writer for The Sporting News.
Couple of points about Dunleavy. The 2000 Portland team had the ring in hand (up by like 10 late in game 7) and folded. They were expected to win, not the Lakers, that year. The 1999 team made it to the WCF, had the Spurs beat in game 1, only to watch Elliott drop a desperation heave. Well that happens. What shouldn't have happened is that team also folding thereafter (three strait loses, 2 at home I believe) among much more evenly matched teams talent wise. That same year was also the year if I recall that JVG took a roster with less than half the talent of the Blazers, made the Finals, at least tested the Spurs better than Dunleavy's more loaded team did. Dunleavy was handed two of the elite teams in the league, and could not meet expectations. He was handed a mediocre team--and could not get them to improve (they actually did worse as another pointed out--and yes Baker was a stud then, no question a top 5 PF, which is why he was worth enough to be traded for a total monster top 3 PF at the time in Kemp). The Rockets may fall somewhere in between--but given no great success across all those situations that does not bode well. I would have concerns about Carlise or JVG--but at least they have shown something no Dunleavy team ever has, overachiving as a team relative to their individual talents. Dunleavy has "lead" 3 teams, not one team has exceed expectations (yes I know expectations were extremely high witht he Blazers and Lakers), and he was fired from all them. I don't see anything good about his "performance trends', I'll be sick if they hire him as anything more than an assistant coach.
Just saw this online.....interesting... (hope it works, I'm not too great on computers! www.nypost.com/sports/36009.htm
Why would you put Brown in a class with Phil Jackson? Has brown won a single chapionship? Sure brown has coached lesser teams. His best shot was probably with the Spurs, and he didn't even get them to the finals. I still wouldn't classify him with Jackson. He's in a league by himself.
