# Porter just got fired



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

breaking news on espn news
this sucks


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

cimalee said:


> breaking news on espn news
> this sucks


Is this what Portland was waiting for?


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

So another name is thrown into the ring of possible coaches?


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

Man this sucks I thought he did a fair job with that roster ,and I know he did not want to leave because hes from there


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Terry is free!


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

I've always thought TP would be good with young players. Nash and co. are at least obligated to give him an interview, right?


----------



## DrewFix (Feb 9, 2004)

they just said that the Bucks let him loose so he could have an opportunity to get in on the coaching search in Portland. 
hmmmmm...


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

So Jerome Kersey and Mike Schuler were fired too. We can hire all three along with PJ Carlesimo and maybe even Rick Adelman. It's the All Former Blazers Coaching Staff. 

Somewhere, Mike Dunleavy is crying because I don't want him back.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Schilly said:


> Is this what Portland was waiting for?



Could very well be.... I think its probably a very close net circle in the GM world


Bring him on... 

would we take him over Iavaroni??? I think so.. Nate? yes...


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Schilly said:


> Is this what Portland was waiting for?


This was my first thought as well.

I'd rather have TP coaching our Blazers than McMillan too. Where's the poll? :biggrin:


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Well, John Nash said it would be obvious as to why we waited. This would be obvious. But then again, so would Nate McMillan or PJ Carlesimo.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

WOW!

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2092506


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Cool! Another hot topic to burn up the web! :banana: 

How am I supposed to get any work done? :angel:


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

Story from ESPN.com....Bucks looking at Saunders? 
Now is it getting interesting isn't it? :biggrin:


----------



## jwhoops11 (Nov 26, 2003)

Everything Mo Cheeks is to Philly, TP is to Portland. Terry had marginal success with a terrible roster in Milwaukee, I would much more prefer him then an assistant coach with no head coaching experience, or even Seattles favorite son, Nate McMillian.

So how about it Nash, bring Terry home where he belongs?

Not to mention, who better to mentor Telfair then one of the best Blazer leaders of all-time....


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

I'd love to see Porter as our next coach. 

What do you guys thing about Grgs sticking around if Porter got the job?


----------



## DrewFix (Feb 9, 2004)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> WOW!
> 
> http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2092506


i just said this


> they just said that the Bucks let him loose so he could have an opportunity to get in on the coaching search in Portland.
> hmmmmm...


 above and this is what i was trying to put out there that i heard on the ol' telly from ESPN


> Another motivation, sources said, was giving Porter the chance to make a run at the Portland job. The Trail Blazers, who drafted Porter out of Wisconsin-Stevens Point in 1985, still have an opening. Porter was entering the final season of a three-year contract with the Bucks but with no extension offer on the table.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

jwhoops11 said:


> Everything Mo Cheeks is to Philly, TP is to Portland. Terry had marginal success with a terrible roster in Milwaukee, I would much more prefer him then an assistant coach with no head coaching experience, or even Seattles favorite son, Nate McMillian.
> 
> So how about it Nash, bring Terry home where he belongs?
> 
> Not to mention, who better to mentor Telfair then one of the best Blazer leaders of all-time....




True I would rather have Terry than Nate


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Another thought that comes to mind...I can't imagine that Milwaukee would fire their head coach just 6 days before the draft, unless they had a very very legitimate lead.

Also Portlands perspective on being so Hush hush is probably because they were not allowed to disclose andy negotiations with an coach curretnly under contract.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

man, I'd love to get Terry Porter. it was only a year ago that he got that sad franchise into the playoffs. this year he had very little to work with and still won several more games than a much more talented Blazer team. 

what a surprise this would be. to think we could have another former PG coach who could actually coach a little.


----------



## DrewFix (Feb 9, 2004)

jwhoops11 said:


> Not to mention, who better to mentor Telfair then one of the best Blazer leaders of all-time....


that would make up for "PiP" going to freakin' L.A. (if he truelly does)


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

This would instantly sell more tickets....

just to see TP introduced as head coach on opening night... would almost be priceless


a huge PR move if this is made....

now will he be a good coach? :whoknows:

but Telfair learning under one of our best PG in franchise history is certainly a great thought


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

DrewFix said:


> they just said that the Bucks let him loose so he could have an opportunity to get in on the coaching search in Portland.
> hmmmmm...



Yeah they had Marc Stein on the phone and he said that , The bucks let him go and wasnt planning on extending his contract so they let him go so he can get in the blazers coaching mix .


He also said I guess they are going after Flip Saunders or Nate Mcmillain


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

it'd definitely be a great PR move for the Blazers. it'd get a lot of people remembering the great teams we used to have back in the early 90's, before the "Jail Blazer" stigma. 

the only thing that makes me nervous about a deal for him is that it's another guy who'd be really damned hard to fire if he didn't work out. as Ed mentioned in another thread about paying McMillan $8 mil/year, if it took us all that time to dump Cheeks, how long will it take to dump this guy if he doesn't work out? 

still, though, it seems to me he's our best option.


----------



## OntheRocks (Jun 15, 2005)

"Not to mention, who better to mentor Telfair then one of the best Blazer leaders of all-time...."

Amen!


----------



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

Oh my god this would be a nightmare if we got Terry to be our coach. I can almost guarantee you he would do a horrible job here, which would really suck. I like Terry as a person and I like him as a former player. He's one of my favorite former Blazers. To see the guy come here and fail would be a curse.

Not only that, if he does come here and fail, the organization would feel compelled to keep him around so they wouldn't suffer the PR blow from firing "beloved Blazer Terry Porter."

This is just wrong on so many fronts. God I hope this isn't what the Blazers are going to do.

-Pop


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

COME HOME TERRY!

Terry Porter gets fired, and there's thunder and lightening in Portland right now... hmmmmm. 

Since he was fired... we wont have to compensate the Bucks with a draft pick if we hire him, correct?


----------



## DrewFix (Feb 9, 2004)

cimalee said:


> Yeah they had Marc Stein on the phone and he said that , The bucks let him go and wasnt planning on extending his contract so they let him go so he can get in the blazers coaching mix .
> 
> 
> He also said I guess they are going after Flip Saunders or Nate Mcmillain


so, i wonder if this move will set off the charges under all of the buildings in the surounding areas. chain reaction if you will.


----------



## Storyteller (Dec 31, 2002)

Schilly said:


> Is this what Portland was waiting for?


I'm trying to remember where, but there was a post recently (by that I mean in the last couple of weeks) where someone with "inside information" said that the Blazers were looking at someone who:

1) Had head coaching experience
2) Had a tie to Portland
3) Was not in the list of rumored prospects

And said that we would be surprised when we heard the name.

So, yes, this could be what the Blazers were waiting for.

And, yes, I am surprised.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

not that many of us really need help in figuring out who Terry Porter is, but here's the NBA's bio of him: 
http://www.nba.com/coachfile/terry_porter/?nav=page


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

one interesting note from my link that I hadn't realized: 



> Porter has played for five of the top 36 coaches (games won) in NBA history: Pat Riley (1,110), Jack Ramsay (864), Rick Adelman (603), Gregg Popovich (339) and Flip Saunders (328).


not a bad pedigree. also, he's been a bit role player and a big star, so he can see both sides of the player coin.


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

that was one of the first thoughts that came into my mind... If it didn't work out with Terry it would be REAL hard to fire him. Harder than Cheeks. 

I just really wish we'd get someone who's been around for a while. Seen things. Done things. Getting guys who are still really early in their coaching careers seems like a bad idea to me. I love Terry, and I would love to see him back here, but just not now. Maybe in five or six years after he's proven himself a bit more.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

How about this....

our beloved trio... Terry, Clyde, Jerome

Terry as head coach and tutoring Telfair
Clyde tutoring Gerald Green
Jerome tutoring Outlaw along with Girgurich


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

Porter gets fired, and Green is in town today for a workout. What a day!

I'm curious to know the whole story in Milwaukie... maybe Terry insisted that they pick Bogut, and the owner/GM want M.Williams.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

Hey guys...you all are probably interested in Coach Porter....from my 2 seasons of watching him coach the Bucks, I will tell you that he is a very good players coach, but he isn't the brightest at the substitutions, x's and o's, or gameplans. 

He always gets the most out of his players, which is a good thing, but I think that he needed another year or two of being an assistant before becoming a head coach....well he got that experience now.

I think he would be a great fit in Portland.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> I'm curious to know the whole story in Milwaukie... maybe Terry insisted that they pick Bogut, and the owner/GM want M.Williams.


I think it was the opposite...Porter really liked Williams, and GM Harris and Kohl seemed to really like Bogut....Porter was a lame-duck coach anyways, so with the #1 pick, this should be the time to make a move, instead of going through a season and firing him.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

SodaPop: How do you define 'fail' in this context? How will we know if he fails? No matter who the coach is, unless the Blazers trade for a top veteran, the Blazers are going to lose a lot of games. Our next coach needs to be able to lead, guide, teach, develop and motivate young players. I think Terry will do fine.

Storyteller: Was that Mediocre Man with the description you cited? I don't recall. As far as being surprised, yeah, when the Bucks recently made an announcement that he was not going to be fired, I (disappointedly) took him off my list.

Surprise, surprise, surprise! :banana:


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

What are you talking about SodaPop?

I'd rather have Terry Porter than the overated Nate Mcmillan....IMO Porter is a very smart man, and was a very smart player.....I think he would be a fine choice for POR, better than any of the other "rumoured" finalists.....

Explain why Terry would be a bad choice here? I'll bet he does a much better job than Mo did here...


----------



## DrewFix (Feb 9, 2004)

AJ Prus said:


> Hey guys...you all are probably interested in Coach Porter....from my 2 seasons of watching him coach the Bucks, I will tell you that he is a very good players coach, but he isn't the brightest at the substitutions, x's and o's, or gameplans.


sounds way too familier.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Trader Bob said:


> How about this....
> 
> our beloved trio... Terry, Clyde, Jerome
> 
> ...


 With all due respect, T.B., I don't want Clyde tutoring anybody on our team. The guy got by on pure natural talent alone. He was neither the smartest player around nor the kind of guy who lived in the gym working on his game.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

DrewFix said:


> sounds way too familier.


true... but thats just his opinion.


----------



## Storyteller (Dec 31, 2002)

As for whether Porter is or can be a better coach than McMillan... :shrug:

I do remember when the Sonics first drafted Nate. My brother was going to PLU at the time and he told me that the fans and the media up in Seattle were hoping that McMillan would be the Sonics' version of guess which player?

That's right, they hoped he would be the Sonics' version of Terry Porter.


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

AJ Prus said:


> I will tell you that he is a very good players coach, but he isn't the brightest at the substitutions, x's and o's, or gameplans.


That sentence right there scares the bajeezus out of me :eek8:


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

DrewFix said:


> sounds way too familier.


ACtually anytime a team is not successful the coaches substition patterns and x's and o's are questioned.


----------



## DrewFix (Feb 9, 2004)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> true... but thats just his opinion.


i know, i know, i just meant that the concenious in here when folks asked us about Mo we all said almost the exact same thing.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Blazer Bert said:


> With all due respect, T.B., I don't want Clyde tutoring anybody on our team. The guy got by on pure natural talent alone. He was neither the smartest player around nor the kind of guy who lived in the gym working on his game.


Not a problem.. one of the reasons I even put up the parallel is that we tend to think GG will be an atheltic freak.. and reminds me of Clyde in that way.

I know Clyde may not of been the sharpest tool in the hall of fame shed. But he could not of done too bad. He and Jordan going at it in the Finals was amazing. His coaching reacord is bad, but that does not necessarly mean he hsa bad head knowledge.


But the late 80's parallel with this young team seems to grow uncanny. Especially if Porter is made head coach

if we score Green and Bynum in the draft.. we can do a banana dance too


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

Schilly said:


> ACtually anytime a team is not successful the coaches substition patterns and x's and o's are questioned.


Yeah....but this team went from a playoff team to the 6th worst team in the NBA over a course of one season....there are many factors, but one has to be Terry's coaching. They definitly over-acheived in 2003-04, but the team wasn't that dramatically different to see a 15 win decrease....

We weren't as talented as 2003-04, but when we don't have a coach running good plays or making the right substitutions, our defieciences became more evident, and we were easily beat night after night.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

AJ Prus said:


> Hey guys...you all are probably interested in Coach Porter....from my 2 seasons of watching him coach the Bucks, I will tell you that he is a very good players coach, but he isn't the brightest at the substitutions, x's and o's, or gameplans.


I cant help but ask, how much of the X's and O's of basketball can a 19 year old kid understand?


----------



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

AJ Prus said:


> Hey guys...you all are probably interested in Coach Porter....from my 2 seasons of watching him coach the Bucks, I will tell you that he is a very good players coach, but he isn't the brightest at the substitutions, x's and o's, or gameplans.
> 
> He always gets the most out of his players, which is a good thing, but I think that he needed another year or two of being an assistant before becoming a head coach....well he got that experience now.
> 
> I think he would be a great fit in Portland.


Sounds like a carbon copy of Maurice Cheeks.

Funny how we all thought Philly fans were idiots when they were ecstatic that their beloved former point guard and Philly favorite was coming home to coach the Sixers, and they disregarded all his faults and chocked it up to Portland being a "bad situation."

Aren't we doing the same thing with Terry Porter?

I'm as much of a Porter fan as the next guy, but do we have any reason to believe his coaching abilities are what will take this team to the next level? And shouldn't that be what we're looking for?

-Pop


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

Green's workout just started... so I'm sure shortly after its over, KXL's Jay Allen will be asking Nash about Terry Porter... someone tune in and let us know what Nash says, and what he say's about Green's workout.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> I cant help but ask, how much of the X's and O's of basketball can a 19 year old kid understand?


LOL...good point...but watching multiple last second sideline plays, where the game is on the line, and the ball ends up getting thrown out of bounds, I have to question what the play was designed to do......


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

AJ Prus said:


> Yeah....but this team went from a playoff team to the 6th worst team in the NBA over a course of one season....there are many factors, but one has to be Terry's coaching. They definitly over-acheived in 2003-04, but the team wasn't that dramatically different to see a 15 win decrease....
> 
> We weren't as talented as 2003-04, but when we don't have a coach running good plays or making the right substitutions, our defieciences became more evident, and we were easily beat night after night.


Well the injury factor is pretty substantial (TJ Ford) and the roster was quite a bit different from year to the next. The Bucks were filled with basically cast offs like FIzer and what not. 

Suprisingly the Bucks were said to have overachieved under porter in 03 and 04 and I think it could be argued that based on the roster did this year as well.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

SodaPopinski said:


> Oh my god this would be a nightmare if we got Terry to be our coach. I can almost guarantee you he would do a horrible job here, which would really suck. I like Terry as a person and I like him as a former player. He's one of my favorite former Blazers. To see the guy come here and fail would be a curse.
> 
> Not only that, if he does come here and fail, the organization would feel compelled to keep him around so they wouldn't suffer the PR blow from firing "beloved Blazer Terry Porter."
> 
> ...


man, you see the glass as empty, don't you? 

not half full..not half empty...empty...


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

I'm with Sodapopinski on this one. I think Terry's a great guy and was a terrific PG, but I'm not sure that he brings anything more to the table than Mo did. I do think that Nash & Co. may be regretting not having hired Iavaroni last week. Now they'll have to deal with these TP expectations. Talk about a no-win situation. Tell the fan base that their beloved TP isn't up to the head coach task and feed the media scorn, or cave in and take a guy who you may have to turn around and fire in a couple of years.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

Schilly said:


> Suprisingly the Bucks were said to have overachieved under porter in 03 and 04 and I think it could be argued that based on the roster did this year as well.


We didn't overacheive at all this season....for the 1st half of the season, we had a very good squad out there, with Mike James filling TJ's role. Besides that, the only significant player we lost from the 03-04 roster was Brian Skinner.....we had injury problems, but by the trading deadline, where it became evident we weren't a playoff team, Harris gutted the team, and that is when guys like Marcus Fizer and Anthony Goldwire got playing time.

With the squad Porter had for the 1st half of the season, we should have been in good position for a playoff run, but it was obvious we were a lottery team.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

e_blazer1 said:


> I'm with Sodapopinski on this one. I think Terry's a great guy and was a terrific PG, but I'm not sure that he brings anything more to the table than Mo did. I do think that Nash & Co. may be regretting not having hired Iavaroni last week. Now they'll have to deal with these TP expectations. Talk about a no-win situation. Tell the fan base that their beloved TP isn't up to the head coach task and feed the media scorn, or cave in and take a guy who you may have to turn around and fire in a couple of years.



I think, if they hire TP, it'll show how even more inept Dumb and Dumber are, and show that maybe Nash and Patterson actually do know what they're doing and have reasons why they don't tell Dumb and Dumber.

If Dumb and Dumber had a ounce of understanding of the CBA, like not being able to actually talk about certain things, maybe they wouldn't be known as dumb and dumber.

So media scourn? big deal. Dumb and Dumber (and certain fan types) will hate the hire no matter who they hire. Thats how they get their jollies off.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

I do agree with Soda and eblazer a little. If Terry succeeds here, its GREAT... but if he doesnt, its going to be a rough ride in many ways. By coming here, in a way, Terry really has nothing to gain, and everything to lose. 

If its true that Terry isnt the best X's and O's guy, then get him an asst. coach who is.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> I do agree with Soda and eblazer a little. If Terry succeeds here, its GREAT... but if he doesnt, its going to be a rough ride in many ways. By coming here, in a way, Terry really has nothing to gain, and everything to lose.
> 
> If its true that Terry isnt the best X's and O's guy, then get him an asst. coach who is.


I don't think he has anything to lose, he really isn't a prat of our community here anymore, and he will always be remembered as Terry Porter the PG. Many great players fail at coaching but it isn't held against them.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Let me ask this

When Porter was playng for us... do you think it was his smarts that helped us succeed or just the influx of talent? or was it Adelman?

What made the early 90's team? Porter was a big part of it... and he was running the plays.

He may be like Mo... and he could end up being better than Mo too....

on the flip side of it.. I like Iavaroni's big men experience

Heck... do a Porter, Iavaroni, Hollins shared coaching.. LOL


----------



## DrewFix (Feb 9, 2004)

> *Blazers reveal their next move *
> Portland hopes to talk with Seattle's Nate McMillan before naming a head coach
> Saturday, June 18, 2005
> JASON QUICK
> ...


in your face *** hat!


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

AJ Prus said:


> LOL...good point...but watching multiple last second sideline plays, where the game is on the line, and the ball ends up getting thrown out of bounds, I have to question what the play was designed to do......


Why do you keep bringing up Mo Cheeks? J/K. Kidding. :biggrin: It was a joke. But based on a scary truth. 

Soda and e-blazer: The "loyal opposition." Thanks for keeping it real and providing a balancing argument against my beloved T.P. I think you are right about this making it harder to hire Iavaroni, though. And I'd still take Terry over McMillan.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

Not gonna happen, but I can dream:

Head coach: Terry Porter
Asst. coach: PJ Carlisimo, Pippen, Iavaroni, Grgs.

That'd be the highest paid staff in the league.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Trader Bob said:


> Let me ask this
> 
> When Porter was playng for us... do you think it was his smarts that helped us succeed or just the influx of talent? or was it Adelman?
> 
> ...


But we have Grgs who is a big man guy....ANd Our future is lies in the Backcourt with Telfair and Green/Webster, so I have to ask, do we need a guy who can teach big guys (Already fairly successful) or one who can teach guards (Needs a lot of help)


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> I do agree with Soda and eblazer a little. If Terry succeeds here, its GREAT... but if he doesnt, its going to be a rough ride in many ways. By coming here, in a way, Terry really has nothing to gain, and everything to lose.


him being from Milwaukee surely stopped the Bucks from letting him go, right?

I think people need to get off the "oh no, media scourn" aspect. If the team has to let TP go, they'll let him go. Big deal. They shouldn't hire or not hire someone based on what might or might not happen when they might or might not fire him.

Thats stupid shortsighted paranoid thinking. They should hire TP IF they feel he is the best candidate. If they decide to not hire TP, it should not be based on how the brainless tools at the Oregonian react if he's ever fired.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

i would like TP, Iavorni and DR G that would be a good mix


----------



## DrewFix (Feb 9, 2004)

Utherhimo said:


> i would like TP, Iavorni and DR G that would be a good mix


Perfect on all fronts. Fan base, X's & O's, Front and back court skool'n...


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

One positive about Terry, if we hired him before the draft (probably not likely) is that he's seen first hand most of the players that we are looking at drafting due to the fact that Milwaukie had a top pick also. So Terry could share his thoughts with Nash/Patterson based on Milwaukie's workouts etc.


----------



## kaydow (Apr 6, 2004)

AJ Prus said:


> LOL...good point...but watching multiple last second sideline plays, where the game is on the line, and the ball ends up getting thrown out of bounds, I have to question what the play was designed to do......


How many times have we seen that happen? Blazers down by 1-3 pts, out of a time-out, with the ball, and what happens next? They don't even get a shot off. I'm not so sure this was all coaching. Who knows, there might have been a decent play drawn up, but if a screen isn't set or a player telegraphs the pass (etc.) the play breaks down. The Blazers just haven't had a guy in a long time who could get his own shot, especially late in games. This poor execution were talking about shouldn't just reflect on the coach, but also the intelligence (or lack there of) and athletic ability of the players. No doubt, Cheeks contributed--what the heck was he thinking having seldom used/reserve (at the time) Frahm throw the ball in on the last possesion last year against the Wizzards? However, IMO, Larry Brown couldn't have coached this team into executing late in games.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=bucksporter&prov=st&type=lgns




> "Obviously, I am disappointed by the decision," said Porter, who had one year left on his contract. "However, I am grateful to (team owner) Senator Kohl and Larry Harris for the opportunity they gave me."


----------



## DrewFix (Feb 9, 2004)

> "Obviously, I am disappointed by the decision," said Porter, who had one year left on his contract. "However, I am grateful to (team owner) Senator Kohl and Larry Harris for the opportunity they gave me."


...to work for the organization that I have dreamed of coaching for, The Portland Trail Blazers."


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> Not gonna happen, but I can dream:
> 
> Head coach: Terry Porter
> Asst. coach: PJ Carlisimo, Pippen, Iavaroni, Grgs.
> ...



and probably a very good one too... good minds at work by committee :drool:


and Schilly.. your right on...


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> One positive about Terry, if we hired him before the draft (probably not likely) is that he's seen first hand most of the players that we are looking at drafting due to the fact that Milwaukie had a top pick also. So Terry could share his thoughts with Nash/Patterson based on Milwaukie's workouts etc.


And knows their draft strategy, kind of a conflict of interest isn't it? I wonder if he is under any kind of confidentiality provision regarding Buck's plans? It would be more interesting if he know Atlanta's plans.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

the Cheeks/Porter comparison is obvious, but in one huge way not fair. Cheeks has never coached a team that rose above expectations. Porter undeniably has a year ago, and maybe even this year. 

one Bucks fan here seems to think Porter's team underperformed this year, and he certainly knows more about his team than I do. but look at that roster: 
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/teams/stats?team=mil
Redd -- admittedly a bona fide shooter. but who really wants a one-dimensional player to be the best player on your team? 
Mason -- a pretty darned good role player. 

aside from those two, who on that roster would you trade Telfair for? Patterson? Przybilla? Randolph? Outlaw? Miles? Rahim? I wouldn't trade any of them. hell, Damon Stoudamire might be better than the rest of those guys, and I hate the Mouse. 

yet Milwaukie won 3 more games than we did. 

so when people compare Cheeks to Porter, just remember what the two guys have actually done with the talent they've been given. it becomes pretty obvious to me that there is no comparison.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

theWanker said:


> the Cheeks/Porter comparison is obvious, but in one huge way not fair. Cheeks has never coached a team that rose above expectations. Porter undeniably has.
> 
> one Bucks fan here seems to think he failed to think Porter's team underperformed this year, and he certainly knows more about his team than I do. but look at that roster:
> http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/teams/stats?team=mil
> ...


:clap:


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

How many head coaching candidates have been discussed here?

In no particular order:
Jackson
Saunders
Adelman
Porter
McMillan
Skiles
O'Brien
Iavaroni
Casey
Silas
PJ
Roland Todd :eek8: 

I'm sure I left several out. My point here is that NOT ONE of these candidates has failed to provoke a negative response from a substantial number of people. No matter who the Blazers hire at this point, the fans have been programed to be upset about it.

No matter who is hired, I propose a moratorium on kvetching about it until the all-star break. Seriously!


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

Oldmangrouch said:


> How many head coaching candidates have been discussed here?
> 
> In no particular order:
> Jackson
> ...


EXACTLY! You left out everyone's favorite canidate (according to the Oregonian of course), J.Lucas.


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

Oldmangrouch said:


> No matter who is hired, I propose a moratorium on kvetching about it until the all-star break. Seriously!


Sounds like a reasonable proposal to me. Who's going to enforce it though? 

Seriously though, I have no problem if the Blazers do decide to hire TP. It's just that it would hurt worse to have him fail than to have Iavaroni fail. I could rag on Iavaroni a month into the season without it hurting my conscience. :biggrin:


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

*Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*

Ric Bucher just said on sportscenter 

Portland told him are 2 far down the road with the other canidates


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

Trader Bob said:


> This would instantly sell more tickets....
> 
> just to see TP introduced as head coach on opening night... would almost be priceless


There is no doubt that the home opener at the Rose Garden would be sold out, mainly because fans would want to come see Terry be introduced. I know I wouldnt miss it! I made it a point to get tix for the game when the Bucks came to the Rose Garden after Terry got the job there, and the ovation he got was incredible.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*

Considering you can nto talk to McMillan at all since he is under contract...

I doubt that is the case...

TP would be starting the process in the same spot


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*



cimalee said:


> Ric Bucher just said on sportscenter
> 
> Portland told him are 2 far down the road with the other canidates


I wonder if Porter would consider moving back to assistant under, let's say, McMillen?

If Portland really said that, then they are probably trying to let him down gently. If true, then you also have to give them credit for not making the easy and cheap PR move.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*



Trader Bob said:


> Considering you can nto talk to McMillan at all since he is under contract...
> 
> I doubt that is the case...
> 
> TP would be starting the process in the same spot


My thoughts exactly. And considering the news of Porter being fired came just a few minutes before the Green workout, I doubt Bucher even talked to Nash or Patterson, I'd think watching Green and talking to the local media after the workout is more importand than taking a call from Bucher.


Couldn't this info/thread gone into the existing thread about Porter?


----------



## talman (Dec 31, 2002)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*

Gotta call BS as well. Unless contracts are being finalized then it's never too late. If the organization strongly feels that Porter is their man then they will make it happen.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*

Bucher also said The bucks have come to terms with Flip Saunders


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*



cimalee said:


> Bucher also said The bucks have come to terms with Flip Saunders


WHAT!?!? I'm waiting for him to also report that the Trail Blazers are going to be adding the color green to their uniforms this season, and they are going to have a indian chief on the front.


----------



## talman (Dec 31, 2002)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*

BTW, cimalee I'm not talking about you or your post--I realize you are passing the info along. I'm talking about the "inside info". Just wanted to make that clear.


----------



## DrewFix (Feb 9, 2004)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*

Nash told Jason what's his name from 1080 that Porter might not have any interest in the position.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*

Nash just said via Jason Petterson of 1080 the fan... 

he has not had time to address it (Porter being fired and possible candidate for the Blazers), but does not know if Porter is even interested in our job.


----------



## DrewFix (Feb 9, 2004)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*



Trader Bob said:


> Nash just said via Jason Petterson of 1080 the fan...
> 
> he has not had time to address it (Porter being fired and possible candidate for the Blazers), but does not know if Porter is even interested in our job.


dude i totally scooped you!


----------



## jwhoops11 (Nov 26, 2003)

e_blazer1 said:


> I'm with Sodapopinski on this one. I think Terry's a great guy and was a terrific PG, but I'm not sure that he brings anything more to the table than Mo did. I do think that Nash & Co. may be regretting not having hired Iavaroni last week. Now they'll have to deal with these TP expectations. Talk about a no-win situation. Tell the fan base that their beloved TP isn't up to the head coach task and feed the media scorn, or cave in and take a guy who you may have to turn around and fire in a couple of years.


I'll agree with you eb but I have to ask, would he bring more to the table then Marc Iavaroni or Nate McMillian? 

From a PR standpoint, and a mentoring our young PG standpoint, I think he would.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*

Hmmm wait a minute so Reports from Portland are Nash doesn't know Porters interest level since he just became available, and Reports from Bucher say the Blazers don't have time to pursue Porter.....

Ok talk about conflicting reports....Porter Head coach by Friday IMO.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*



DrewFix said:


> dude i totally scooped you!


LOL you got me by 2 mintues Drew... :woot:


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*



Schilly said:


> Hmmm wait a minute so Reports from Portland are Nash doesn't know Porters interest level since he just became available, and Reports from Bucher say the Blazers don't have time to pursue Porter.....
> 
> Ok talk about conflicting reports....Porter Head coach by Friday IMO.


Maybe Bucher called and was told the Blazers don't have time to talk about it (they were kind of busy working out our future shooting guard at the time).


----------



## DrewFix (Feb 9, 2004)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*



Trader Bob said:


> LOL you got me by 2 mintues Drew... :woot:


shows how slowly i type. (3 letters back space 2 letters back space etc.)


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

You forgot Musselman and John Lucas in your list, dude.

Also, is it just me, or is the Blazers short list slowly growing larger? We know McMillan and Iavaroni are on it, but can we rule out Hollins, Carlissimo, or Musselman at this point? And now it seems Porter is also going to throw his name into the hat, and likely would be a top contender for the job.

LORD I hope they find their guy soon!

PBF


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*



Blazer Bert said:


> Maybe Bucher called and was told the Blazers don't have time to talk about it (they were kind of busy working out our future shooting guard at the time).


Nice avatar! I almost went with that one.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*

Maybe Bucher's sourse is an 80 year old employee of the Blazers???

And if the Blazers really said that I will write the most glowing letter about Quick and Canzano I can possibly stomach.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

I've stated this already, but if PatterNash aren't on the phone with Porter or his agent right now there is a real problem at 1 center court. Porter would not only sell tickets, but I think he is at least as good a coach as Nate McMillan. 

There is almost nothing the organization could do to increase the popularity of the Blazers than hiring Porter. 

And turning that around, there is almost nothing they could do that would destroy their popularity more than not interviewing him. 

Is Porter the best "coaching" candidate????? I don't think so. Is he the smartest candidate???? Absolutely.

If nothing else it would be good karma. 

Send your emails now!! Bombard PatterNash with stories of yore!! Express your love for the Blazers of yesteryear people!!!! We have to speak now or forever hold our pieces....er peace!! Tell management we're tired as hell and we're not going to take it anymore!! No more Philly pipeline, no more Nate McMillan pipe dreams!! We want Mr. Blazer in all his glory!! 


GIVE ME PORTER, OR GIVE ME DEATH!!!! :soapbox:


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Porter is a name I know we kicked around before the end of the year, but it looked like the Bucks were going to hang onto him.

Is Porter the perfect coach? No.

Is he an option I would be excited about, and could fully support? Absolutely.

The Bucks teams he has been in charge of have been remarkably mediocre considering how bad their talent base is. I could dig up the posts I made a few months ago, but you only need to look at what they've brought in via the draft the past several years to understand how dry their well is:

2004: None
2003: TJ Ford
2002: Marcus Haislip
2001: None
2000: Joel Przybilla
1999: None
1998: Traded Dirk Nowitzki and Pat Garrity for Robert Traylor
1997: Traded Danny Fortson for Ervin Johnson

Even knowing that the team added Michael Redd and Dan Gadzuric in the second round... how is a team supposed to bounce back from that sort of drafting?

Porter did a pretty good job with a series of pretty bad teams. I think that his history as a Blazer and his history as a head coach add up to a good fit for the Blazers.

Ed O.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

I wouldn't call it a Nate McMillian pipe dream..I'd call it a "what the hell are you smoking by thinking Nate McMillian is worth hiring".


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Interesting read about Porters firing

http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?t=176497&page=1


----------



## BlazerFanFoLife (Jul 17, 2003)

NAte does suck, the second i heard Porter was out i knew that Saunders is going to Mil. I predict it now. Saunders goes to Mil, Terry Porter comes here and Mauslemen or PJ go to Minny.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

BlazerFanFoLife said:


> NAte does suck, the second i heard Porter was out i knew that Saunders is going to Mil. I predict it now. Saunders goes to Mil, Terry Porter comes here and Mauslemen or PJ go to Minny.


Minny already hired D.Casey.


----------



## Peaceman (Jan 15, 2003)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*



Blazer Bert said:


> Maybe Bucher called and was told the Blazers don't have time to talk about it (they were kind of busy working out our future shooting guard at the time).


I think they already worked out their future Shooting guard and it's Webster. Nash should have said I'm too busy to talk to Terry, because I'm trying to get the best deal I can in trading down.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Schilly said:


> Another thought that comes to mind...I can't imagine that Milwaukee would fire their head coach just 6 days before the draft, unless they had a very very legitimate lead.
> 
> Also Portlands perspective on being so Hush hush is probably because they were not allowed to disclose andy negotiations with an coach curretnly under contract.


he hey!! Imagine that, I must have been thinking about right, too bad Id idn't mention Flip but he is the guy I had in mind.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*



Peaceman said:


> I think they already worked out their future Shooting guard and it's Webster. Nash should have said I'm too busy to talk to Terry, because I'm trying to get the best deal I can in trading down.


I can live with that. Webster and Bynum, oh my!


----------



## TP3 (Jan 26, 2003)

Would you guys stop pretending you know Porter as a coach? You don't. How do you know he's not the "perfect coach" for PDX? You don't. It's all speculation. Stop pretending really know what you're talking about with all the absolutes.

I speculate he'd do a heck of a job. I speculate that he would hire a great post coach.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

TP3 said:


> Would you guys stop pretending you know Porter as a coach? You don't. How do you know he's not the "perfect coach" for PDX? You don't. It's all speculation. Stop pretending really know what you're talking about with all the absolutes.
> 
> I speculate he'd do a heck of a job. I speculate that he would hire a great post coach.


I speculate that you do a lot of speculation.......As Albert Einstein once said...if we knew the truth it woudn't be called research...


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Schilly said:


> Interesting read about Porters firing
> 
> http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?t=176497&page=1


Wow, the guys on that thread think Porter is a good coach and has done a great job. Interesting to see all those perspectives.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

TP3 said:


> Would you guys stop pretending you know Porter as a coach? You don't. How do you know he's not the "perfect coach" for PDX? You don't. It's all speculation. Stop pretending really know what you're talking about with all the absolutes.
> 
> I speculate he'd do a heck of a job. I speculate that he would hire a great post coach.


Well dang I specualate that from here on out that specualtion should as I speculate be the best policy, this is only speculation of course.

I would speculate too, that people are simply in fact speculating about their ideas and their speculations should by no menas be speculated as truths.


----------



## TP3 (Jan 26, 2003)

I'm with you, Hasoos...we should stop pretending we know everything. Exactly.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Is it just me or do people that sit on a mountain top a proclaim that "people don't know everthing" come off as the most pompous know-it-alls of them all.

I could be wrong, I mean I don't know everything.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

mediocre man said:


> Is it just me or do people that sit on a mountain top a proclaim that "people don't know everthing" come off as the most pompous know-it-alls of them all.
> 
> I could be wrong, I mean I don't know everything.


Your're just specualting right?


----------



## TP3 (Jan 26, 2003)

OK...my bad. Not trying to offend and certainly not trying to somehow come off as a know it all. That's the opposite of my intent. All I'm wondering is...how does anyone know that Porter wouldn't be the PERFECT guy for us?


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

TP3 said:


> OK...my bad. Not trying to offend and certainly not trying to somehow come off as a know it all. That's the opposite of my intent. All I'm wondering is...how does anyone know that Porter wouldn't be the PERFECT guy for us?


No one does for sure, but the key is when a person says

"Porter would be perfect here" 

They aren't trying to state fact, but are simply stating the opinion that to them "Porter would be perfect here"


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Schilly said:


> No one does for sure, but the key is when a person says
> 
> "Porter would be perfect here"
> 
> They aren't trying to state fact, but are simply stating the opinion that to them "Porter would be perfect here"


He really would be perfect though. The one thing Porter has over every other single coach is that the Blazers could lose every game net year and he probably wouldn't be blamed for a single one of them.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

I think it is fairly safe to say though that some of the local distributirs of pulpous matter would spin it in a negative light somehow.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

> one Bucks fan here seems to think Porter's team underperformed this year, and he certainly knows more about his team than I do. but look at that roster:
> http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/teams/stats?team=mil
> Redd -- admittedly a bona fide shooter. but who really wants a one-dimensional player to be the best player on your team?
> Mason -- a pretty darned good role player.


The roster now looks pretty bad....but at the start of this season, we had a much better lineup, and we started off 6-16...

PG: Mike James/Mo Williams
SG: Michael Redd
SF: Keith Van Horn/ Desmond Mason
PF: Joe Smith/ Zaza
C: Dan Gadzuric/ Zaza

Injuries were a problem, but that isn't much worse of a team that went to the playoffs the year before.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

I don't consider Porter a perfect fit because he hasn't demonstrated the ability to lead a team out of the lottery and to a championship.

What coach fits that description? Maybe none. Maybe there ARE no perfect fits to me.

It doesn't mean that Porter's a perfect fit just because he might be the best available fit. And him not being the perfect fit doesn't mean he's necessarily a bad fit.

Ed O.


----------



## NBAGOD (Aug 26, 2004)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*



> have to give them credit for not making the easy and cheap PR move.


Actually cheap PR moves is all this current regime has shown any competence at.

IMO, they'd be crazy not to hire Porter. Let me get this straight, you're not going to hire a competent coach who happens to be one of the most beloved players in team history because you're too far into the process with Marc Iviaroni?


----------



## rose city fan (Jun 22, 2005)

I think i remember hearing that Kersey was already let go before the Terry Porter dismissal.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

Ed O said:


> I don't consider Porter a perfect fit because he hasn't demonstrated the ability to lead a team out of the lottery and to a championship.
> 
> What coach fits that description? Maybe none. Maybe there ARE no perfect fits to me.
> 
> ...


Um.....what he said...I think. :wink:


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

AJ Prus said:


> The roster now looks pretty bad....but at the start of this season, we had a much better lineup, and we started off 6-16...
> 
> PG: Mike James/Mo Williams
> SG: Michael Redd
> ...



no offense, but none of the guys you list there beside Redd exactly make my mouth water. two of your three best players (Mason/KVH) man the same position, and the other doesn't really do much but shoot

so it seems to me you aren't thrilled with him because Porter got his team to massively overachieve the year before but only got his team to really overachieve this year. 

even with your "better lineup", Mo Cheeks gets maybe 20 wins with that squad. if Porter can add 10 more wins to our squad, you won't find many of us complaining. some, but not many.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*



NBAGOD said:


> Actually cheap PR moves is all this current regime has shown any competence at.
> 
> IMO, they'd be crazy not to hire Porter. Let me get this straight, you're not going to hire a competent coach who happens to be one of the most beloved players in team history because you're too far into the process with Marc Iviaroni?


Agreed. I don't have a real high opinion of Nash, but he can't be THAT dense! Can he?


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

theWanker said:


> no offense, but none of the guys you list there beside Redd exactly make my mouth water. two of your three best players (Mason/KVH) man the same position, and the other doesn't really do much but shoot
> 
> so it seems to me you aren't thrilled with him because Porter got his team to massively overachieve the year before but only got his team to really overachieve this year.


30-52 is not overacheiving. That team is better than 30 wins.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

AJ Prus said:


> 30-52 is not overacheiving. That team is better than 30 wins.


That team sucks dong.

I don't know if "dong" gets censored out, and if not mods can feel free to censor it, but I find it hard to believe that anybody could expect that team to win anything more than 30 games even if everyone's healthy.

Mike James? Keith Van Horn? Joe Smith? Soft, no defense bench players.

I'm not putting down the Bucks because I think the Blazers were better, but the talent on that Bucks team was (and is) terrible and Porter did a good job getting as much out of them as he did.

Ed O.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

> That team sucks dong.







Elequant as always Ed. More over correct as always....er usual anyways.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Ed O said:


> That team sucks dong.
> 
> I don't know if "dong" gets censored out, and if not mods can feel free to censor it, but I find it hard to believe that anybody could expect that team to win anything more than 30 games even if everyone's healthy.
> 
> ...



I dont know if it deserves to be censored out, but I know it deserves to be noted that Ed O said the word "dong" and "sucks" in the same breath.


----------



## The Professional Fan (Nov 5, 2003)

> That team sucks dong


For some reason, that quote struck me as incredibly funny. 

FWIW, after reading through this entire thread, I've been convinced that Porter could be a good fit as Portland's next coach. Obviously it would be a PR win. But is TP a good Coach? I think so. I forgot about the job he did with that Bucks sqaud 2 seasons ago.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Ed O said:


> That team sucks dong.
> 
> Ed O.


brutal. honest, but brutal. 











time for another life lesson courtesy of Cinderella: 

Don't know what you got til it's gone
Don't know what it is I did so wrong
Now I know what I got
It's just this song
And it ain't easy to get back takes so long
Do you wanna see me beggin' baby
Can't you give me just one more day
Can't you see my heart's been draggin' lately
I've been looking for the words to say
Ooooh
Don't know what you got til it's gone
Don't know what it is I did so wrong, wrong, wrong
Now I know what I got
It's just this song
And it ain't easy to get back takes so long
Don't know what you got til it's gone
Don't know what it is I did so wrong, wrong, wrong
Now I know what I got
It's just this song


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Hap said:


> I dont know if it deserves to be censored out, but I know it deserves to be noted that Ed O said the word "dong" and "sucks" in the same breath.



AND took a breath according to you. 

OK better zip this thread up. Things can only GO DOWN from here.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*

I liked Terry Porter in his Trail Blazer days as much as anyone, but I'm not convinced he is our best choice as a head coach. Seems to me there's a lot of sentimental hopes being expressed here. Is Terry really that good of a coach for us to be salivating over him? Maybe I'm just not seeing what the rest of your are seeing, but his Bucks team only performed at about a .500 level in his first season, correct?


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

I've been pretty busy at work, and haven't had time to post here until now, but I believe this thread has built up faster than any I have ever seen. 

You guys probably set some kind of record today!

What the heck is going on? Can somebody summarize this thread so I don't have to go back and read all 8 pages of it?


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*



Talkhard said:


> I liked Terry Porter in his Trail Blazer days as much as anyone, but I'm not convinced he is our best choice as a head coach. Seems to me there's a lot of sentimental hopes being expressed here. Is Terry really that good of a coach for us to be salivating over him? Maybe I'm just not seeing what the rest of your are seeing, but his Bucks team only performed at about a .500 level in his first season, correct?


I'll play point to your counterpoint. 

Talkhard you ignorant slut! If you look at Terry Porter's teams in Milwaukee they over achieved. It also needs to be remembered that our other likely choices are Nate McMillan and Marc Iavaroni, not Phil Jackson and Larry Brown. Between Porter, McMIllan and Iavaroni I would say Porter stacks up at least as good as they do. Also as I said in another post, the guy could screw up and still get a free pass for at least a year. 

Bottom line is Porter will sell tickets and make the franchise look like hero's, as where McMIllan and Iavaroni make them look like settlers...Not Trailblazers.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Talkhard said:


> I've been pretty busy at work, and haven't had time to post here until now, but I believe this thread has built up faster than any I have ever seen.
> 
> You guys probably set some kind of record today!
> 
> What the heck is going on? Can somebody summarize this thread so I don't have to go back and read all 8 pages of it?



We all want Porter, and according to Hap Ed O said the words dong and suck while breathing or something like that. Oh then the Wanker broke out with some 80's Butt rock. 

All in all it's a homophobe's nightmare thread.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

Thanks, MM. I guess I haven't missed much.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*

A thousand pardons, MM. 

Okay, I'm convinced. Bring on Terry!!


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*

I think we should "TP" the Rose Garden until they listen to us. Maybe that'll send the message.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*



NBAGOD said:


> Actually cheap PR moves is all this current regime has shown any competence at.
> 
> IMO, they'd be crazy not to hire Porter. Let me get this straight, you're not going to hire a competent coach who happens to be one of the most beloved players in team history because you're too far into the process with Marc Iviaroni?


Dont let your hatred towards the franchise sway common logic. Nash didnt say they were "too far into the process", a REPORTER did.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*



mediocre man said:


> I think we should "TP" the Rose Garden until they listen to us. Maybe that'll send the message.


HA HA!! GREAT IDEA!! I havent "TP'd" a house since 1991.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*



mediocre man said:


> Talkhard you ignorant slut!


:laugh:


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*



BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> WHAT!?!? I'm waiting for him to also report that the Trail Blazers are going to be adding the color green to their uniforms this season, and they are going to have a indian chief on the front.


They are adding Green to the Blazers Uniform this year


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*



Schilly said:


> They are adding Green to the Blazers Uniform this year


Next year the team will be Green Hot and Rolling®!


®Hap and Schilly productions


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Ed O said:


> I don't consider Porter a perfect fit because he hasn't demonstrated the ability to lead a team out of the lottery and to a championship.
> 
> What coach fits that description? Maybe none. Maybe there ARE no perfect fits to me.
> 
> ...


OK Ed... you wait for the perfect fit to come along and we watch the games with whom ever we can fill the bill with. :rofl:

I am not so sure we can even define what a perfect fit will be at this point in time. This team is young and athletic, but not balanced personel wise. Roles not defined yet. A few pieces here and there to the puzzle, then maybe the descrption for a perfect fit coach will happen. Trouble is it still may take another year to do that. But in the mean time, maybe with a lot of luck a coach or a experienced coah or someone in between will fill the void and take us a long ways toward that goal.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

*Re: Porter unlikey to become blazers coach*



Hap said:


> Next year the team will be Green Hot and Rolling®!
> 
> 
> ®Hap and Schilly production


and trimmed in Bynum beige


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

rose city fan said:


> I think i remember hearing that Kersey was already let go before the Terry Porter dismissal.


Speculation has it that Milwaukee was trying to get Porter to quit so they fired Kersey and Mike Schuler two of Porter's hand picked coaches in a attempt to get the loyal Porter to walk away, but he didn't and he was let go today. I got this tibbet from the Fan when they were talking to a Milwaukee radio host this afternoon.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

HOWIE said:


> Speculation has it that Milwaukee was trying to get Porter to quit so they fired Kersey and Mike Schuler two of Porter's hand picked coaches in a attempt to get the loyal Porter to walk away, but he didn't and he was let go today. I got this *tibbet* from the Fan when they were talking to a Milwaukee radio host this afternoon.


is that related to a tribble?


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

Hap said:


> is that related to a tribble?



Ah yes, the trouble with tibbets. Nash can go on and on about that.... :biggrin:


----------

