Spin fail. No I wouldn't have you believe anything, nor did I include any #'s that conclude he is bottom 5. That was your spin. He's been middle of the road at best, and ultimately not good enough. Consider his TOP offensive ratings couplede with his mediocre D and we can conclude where his weak points are.
Again, who are you arguing against? Yourself? Nobody is saying MDA is strong defensively, that he is some defensive guru and draws up sweet ass defensive plays on every play. And when I say "you" I don't necessarily mean "you" particularly, I mean you and the people that argue similar points to you. And I never said you explicitly said that you said he was bottom 5, that's your spin (see what I did there?)...I said you make it sound like he is bottom 5, and someone who didn't know better, listening to you, might believe that.
Red said:
But you don't know/understand his system. How do you know it was the players? In fact an argument can be made that the ability of these players is not only there, but really has no bearing on the scheme as its implemented.
This shows me you don't understand the role of the coach or what his ratings are based on. The stats themselves reflect the coaches ability to adapt withe roster he has. Before some were arguing that he could've won if it not been for bad luck in PHX. So he had the pieces
& what happened? He lost. But it wasn't due to lack of defense right? Well they were near the top in offense so where were they weak? O yeah in luck...smh
I don't think anyone was arguing that "bad luck"...again, Red's spin-session at work
. What has been argued is that D'Antoni would have stood a better chance if Amare didn't leave the bench during a fight, leading to an automatic suspension? Are you suggesting that Amare being on the floor in the Western Conference Finals WOULDN'T have helped the Suns win it all? I don't think you are, but nobody is arguing luck. I think it makes sense to think that MAYBE the Suns stood a better chance of winning that series with Amare than without him. Of course, luck is a factor (the ball bounces one way instead of another, the ref sees one foul call and not another, etc.) that is completely random and likely evens out in the end. But no team in the playoffs wins every game without somewhere down the road encountering a little bit of good luck. But that's life.
Red said:
No, I was saying MDA's stats don't show an improvement. And we lead the league no only in blocks because we have a swiss cheese lay-up line, but we also lead in points scored against in the paint. Only someone who understands defensive concept will know why this is.
Because our centers this season were, let's count them off: an undersized Ronnie Turiaf, an out of position Amare Stoudemire, a European Undrafted Rookie Project Timofey Mozgov, and the rotting corpse of Eddy Curry. Literally. That's it.
Are you REALLY suggesting that points in the paint allowed has NOTHING to do with the fact that this might be overall the smallest team in the league? REALLY?! REALLY?!?!?! Obviously the lack of SIZE the team has has a lot to do with whether or not opponents can score in the paint. Or I guess you want MDA to parade out there and stand in the middle? Because it's all the coaches' fault.
Red said:
PLEASE stop it. This whole thing is based on an improved defense INEPENDENT of coach D'Antoni. And trust he will never get credit when 2 maxs decide to run the defense. His credit would of been due when the time to make players better defensively was apprent. He failed. Because he's mediocre and middle of the road. Just logic. Not rocket science.
So you are arguing a logical farcical tautology. Exactly what I said: the team doesn't run defense, and MDA is to blame. The team DOES run defense, MDA gets no credit and it's on the players. Good argument...you know, if you like farcical results where one result is apparently an impossiblity with no grounding in reality.
Red said:
Wow, ialready formed my opinion. Hubie echoed those sentiments. Don't hate.
LMFAO! So you are admitting you are taking Hubie's point to heart, but you don't want to listen to/give heed to Chauncey's statement? Or JJ's statement?
Red said:
REPEAT AFTER ME...
REGARDLESS OF PLAYERS A-Z Skill level, independent of circumstance, a coach can be evaluated on many things, especially with a large body of work.
Ugh...do I really have to be the teacher on elementary statistics?
Whenever you look at statistics, there are several variables to factor in. Variables are elements that might affect a statistical output. For instance, when you are boiling water, normally it boils at 100 degrees celsius, but when you change altitudes that boiling point differs. Altitude is what we consider a variable.
So, when considering points per game, a variable that controls a lot of the output is number of possessions. An increase in the number of possessions, independent of anything else, will lead to skewed output in points per game.
Players, and their respective talent levels in all facets of the game, are also what we call "variables". A team of Ben Wallace, Dennis Rodman, Bruce Bowen, James Jones and Rafer Alston will not score a lot of points (of course relative to the number of possessions), regardless of whether Mike D'Antoni, Isiah Thomas, or James Dolan is the head coach. "Players" are variables, and their respective talent levels NECESSARILY impact the final statistical output at the end.
So no, statistically speaking, you cannot evaluate a coach independent of his players. You might be able to establish weak or mild correlations, but you cannot prove causation because there are too many variables to factor in.
Red said:
Why not just hire anyone, sh*t why not just go with no coach, its the players? The truth is the teams perfomance is a reflection of the coach. His strategy, approach, handling of personalites, priorities etc... are you aware of how to evaluate? Not if you like him. Evaluate his coaching? Can you do this regardless of the roster? Don't think so.
No, you can't evaluate a coach regardless of the roster for the reasons I outlined above. Do you think that parades out a small lineup versus a big lineup is going to outrebound the other team? Are they going to be able to stop the other team in the paint? Again, if you go out there with Turiaf-Stoudemire trying to guard guys like D12, or even to a lesser extent, to guard guys like Big Baby or any other teams with size in the league (and compared to us, everyone has size), you are going to give up points in the paint.
You obviously did not read my post, or just read what you wanted...to borrow your own line "Comprehension is key"
Practice what you preach. I clearly state that there are good coaches and bad coaches, but I believe, and will always believe, that coaches are more the same than they are similar. They cannot, and will not ever, sway the game more than the players actually on the floor.
Red said:
There is no contridiction. Billups knows more defense than an overpaid coach. And these players can perform and overcme the limitations of this coach. I'm cool with that, but the ability and strategy are what they are.
When have you heard of mda being a good defensive coach? When have you heard of mda making players bettr defensively? Never. But we hear he's not that good at defense all the time. You don't think hundreds of people are on to something?
Did you even read my post? I clear and explicitly stated that D'Antoni is not a good defensive coach, I know that, I understand that. But he also didn't have good defensive players, nor a roster that would ever be adept at clogging the middle. Cite Tom Thibodeau all you want, but he has Joakim Noah and Carlos Boozer clogging the middle, Noah was a stellar defender BEFORE Tom got there, and Boozer at least tries on defense (unlike STAT, who even under Gentry didn't try). We do not have the size or the ability, until we got guys like Billups, Carter and Balkman here to play better defense at least on the exterior. We are still going to suffer in the paint, notice last night our great defense was against the interior of Joel Anthony and the Jump Shooting Chris Bosh.
Red said:
NO it boils down to when we look at the stats and compare him and his players to others accros the league and throughout history a conclusion of mda not being a good defensive coach is reached. You just can't accept that.
Are you comparing this team to other rosters across the league? How many teams in the league are less able to bang in the paint than we are? 2? 3?
YOU want to blame the coach. I want to blame the roster. That's fine. That's your opinion. But that's what it is.
You clearly contradicted yourself:
You said MDA could not adapt.
Now you say he is adapting.
So: answer, which is it?
You said that the COACH dictates the defense.
Now, when good defense is played, it's the players (which I AGREE with).
So: answer, which is it.