Sabathia signd with the Yankees/Girardi under much more dubious terms, and because of getting as many bones as possible. He quickly grew to love his decision -- and the coach.
Past is the past. Current reality is Amare likes playing for the Knicks under MDA.
Amare says he was never taught D, yet then was taught as a NBA veteran?
Smh. If anyone truly believes that at face value there's a bridge in the back of my apartment I'm looking to sell...
Either way, his defense has been typically poor is year -- aside from a career high type block/steal numbers.
yeah that one... and if you think it was one sided.. ur wrong...why would amare need to sitdown to talk to him about somethin he did wrong....amare took the high road....Oantoni wanted to make sure that amare would buy into this bs of a system.. he just signed 100 mil contract.. you think he gonna say..
"I signed for the money.. but i hate this coaches system"
u guys live in a fantasy world.. and belive eevrythin printed.. word for word...
try analyzing ang reading the fine print...
"Mike was a quiet guy. Sometimes he didn't talk to a certain players. Didn't communicate as well to the players which sometimes can be a little frustrating because you want to build that relationship with your coach. You want to build that friend(ship) so you can sit down with him and talk about personal thoughts and also basketball. You want that friendship with your coach. Mike was a quiet guy.
...Then you bring in Alvin, a guy who is definitely a players coach. A guy you can talk to and say 'hey man you know', 'family situation here', 'or my kids here', 'my kids are doing great in school', 'how are your kids'. That's the type of conversation you want to have with your coach. Alvin's that guy.
You want a coach that you can really hug and hold and high five and really have fun with. That makes it fun play. You can high five and hug your team mates. You don't want to have fear of your coach. You want to be respectable with him but you also want to be a friend with him."
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
i can pull up more.. if you like
Why would Amare sitdown to talk about something he did wrong? I don't know, maybe because he is a mature human being who actually has remorse for his immature actions of the past? Maybe because before committing himself for the next 5 years he thought it wise to clear up any issues he had? If D'Antoni was really a problem for him he would have taken more money to play in PHX...
Musketeer: Not trying to discredit Hubie Brown, but when you read a quote like that you have to think where he came from, why he says the things he says,etc. Also, if you are saying that Amare ONLY signed in NY for the money, that just proves that he didn't almost stay away b/c of D'Antoni because $ was his sole motivator, which proves my point.
You GUARANTEE things in the hypothetical? For a person you do not know beyond interviews and watching him play basketball? Yikes. So tell me, what is it like being Amare's psychologist and personal confidant? How did you garner such incredible inside info?
Seriously moneyg, with insight into how Amare thinks and being a member of his camp, you should be on here posting daily about all the things you see, hear and know about him? What is Amare's workout regimen? Was he happy that The Kings Speech won best picture? What TV shows is he watching now? What is he going to have for dinner? I mean, you can guarantee that Amare doesn't sign here if PHX offers him the same $ and D'Antoni is still in place, despite the fact that he clearly loves NY. What other inside tidbits can you give us?
You do know the max deal in Phoenix would be worth more than the max deal in NY right? Not to mention, that article does NOT say he would have stayed in PHX and NOT come to New York BECAUSE OF Mike D'Antoni, which was your point.
In addition - it does not PROVE that D'ANTONI was the defining factor in his decision to stay in PHX (which was your point). As I stated the PHX deal would have netted him more $, it does not say that D'Antoni made him waiver, and D'Antoni would have been the reason he stayed in PHX...
Where is the "He would have stayed in PHX for more $ than the Knicks offered b/c of D'Antoni" article?
Example of moneyg's "logical argument":
Mike D'Antoni had a sit down with Amare before Amare put ink to paper.
Amare would have signed in PHX if PHX offered him more guaranteed money.
Therefore: Amare would have stayed in PHX if PHX offered him more guaranteed money because of Mike D'Antoni.
It looks to me like he would have stayed in PHX if PHX offered him more $ b/c of the $. Which means D'Antoni's presence was not a factor.
You asserted that he would not have come to NY if PHX offered the guaranteed deal with D'Antoni in place, IMPLYING that with someone else in place he would have hypothetically left $ on the table. Where is your proof?
Last edited by KBlack25; Feb 28, 2011 at 17:07.
"Don't give me this garbage about guys can't play defense. Defense comes down to the accountability of the COACHING STAFF"
and you refer to "the merits and effects of coaching"...smh
This is called spinning. Wake up.
Learn to accept it for what it is. To assume alterior motive is as you say a straw man argument. But let me break this down to show all of us your reluctance.
1st did you hear the interview for yourself? I doubt it.
2nd What agenda would an aged veteran who is a great commentator have besides giving his opinion? Don't answer that, its moot at this point.
But lets take a looksie at your angle...
You seem to
1. Have a reluctance on accepting the truth
2. See posts on KOL as "battles" to be won or loss
Therefor we can conclude by accepting the truth you will see yourself as losing a battle, while no one else except your clown posse of arguers is attempting.
Hubie f*cking Brown says it's about accountability. Meaning (as he said) a coach can tell a player what he expects, but when said player doesn't do what he's instructed, there's no consequence. No benching, no development, nothing. That's what he meant by accountability.
- The Stats say MDA is an avg defensive coach at best
- The media says they all realize MDA isn't a good defensive minded coach
- Coaches say MDA isn't a good defensive minded coach
- Players say MDA isn't a good defensive minded coach
That's what everyone means about being an OFFENSIVE coach. When you hold players accountable or praise them for their OFFENSIVE doings- this will lead to players, coaches, media to conclude you care more about OFFENSE.
When the Stats show you aren't improving, adapting, developing, and your team is looking down right lost and inept on DEFENSE, an opinion of a coach NOT being a gifted defensive mind will arise.
When a poster argues just to argue ala Trillion, you are seen as weak and feminine as those are the traits.
There is nothing to argue or battle to lose. Only your reputation for a reluctance to accept the truth will permeate.
MDA is an offensive coach with obvious limits and flaws. I accept that.
MDA isn't going to take an avg. defensive team and make them better nor any team and make them better defensively. I accept that also. As you say it's the players right? So why are you defending MDA?
Learn to admit that your posts are just arguing fodder at times because you support coach but can't handle the truth. That he's not as good as you pretend he is. I can accept that too.
Regarding those above semi-technical questions i posed...
yes I can easily answer them and break them down because I watch and know what I am watching (and obviously or I wouldn't have asked); it's elementary to me. Do some research on MDA, his systems and philosophies and if you are willing to accept the truth...
then you can extrapolate why exactly the numbers are what they are. No inference or spinning on motive needed. But if you can't accept the truth (not my opinion on if I like MDA or not or whatever) just what the facts say without spinning or over analyzing then maybe, just maybe you will realize how dumb it is to argue what everyone already knows.
...and I can accept that too. good luck.
For Gods sake, talk what you know, and if not just stfu.
The fact that I think it is the PLAYERS is why I am defending Mike D'Antoni, because I think that the players, not the coach, affect the game much more. Are there good and bad coaches? Of course there are. I am not saying D'Antoni is a defensive genius. Nor am I saying he is perfect, I was yelling that in a crucial spot, with STAT and Amare and Billups, an inbounds play was called for BILL WALKER yesterday. But at the end of the day, MDA isn't missing layups. MDA isn't refusing to boxout. MDA doesn't miss free throws. MDA doesn't let his guy blow right by him. MDA doesn't let LeBron get to the rack (only to be saved by Amare collapsing on defense). And I firmly, and will always firmly, believe that coaches are more similar than they are different.
You say the stats show we aren't improving:
We are better this year in defensive rating.
Amare is blocking a ton of shots.
And this whole board today is blowing up about the good defense we played.
You want to sit here and talk about MDA's limits as a coach, bash his limitations, but what about our limitations as a squad? You consistently refuse to ignore those. Fact is, you can't draw blood from a stone. Amare didn't play good defense with Alvin Gentry, he is playing better this season on defense than I have ever seen him. We don't have a true center, at all. To start the year our centers were Mozgov and Turiaf, now they are Turiaf and nobody, basically. Carmelo's most recent coach bashed him for not having effort on defense, he played genuinely poor defense, even when Karl tried to preach it consistently. This tells me it is more the players.
Hubie Brown doesn't have an agenda; but he has a point of view. He is a coach, he came up as a coach, made his $ and his name as a coach. He isn't going to think coaching is as irrelevant as I do, and likely finds it more important than almost anyone on earth. So no, his comments do not surprise me in the least.
You take everything said against MDA seriously, but then you accept that Billups had to spin his comments in a certain way, that JJ said things in a certain way for ulterior motives. It is YOU, Red, consistently spinning and being clearly and obviously biased, taking information that helps your argument at face value, and ignoring or recasting information that goes against it.
You have even contradicted yourself:
You criticized, earlier in the year, MDA for not being able to adapt.
Now you are saying that he can adapt, but he shouldn't get credit b/c that is the player's doing?
You criticized, earlier in the year, MDA for not coaching up defense.
But when we play good defense, it is the players. (My argument that you, by the way SLAMMED, from the beginning.)
In regards to the technical questions, I can give you answers, but ultimately it boils down to: I blame the players for their shortcomings, you blame the coach. Something I have reiterated countless times on this board. It all stems back to the fact that YOU want to blame the coaches, and I want to blame the players, it is a fundamental disagreement in our ideologies that will never be resolved, informing our opinions and the way we watch things.
Last edited by KBlack25; Feb 28, 2011 at 17:29.
He has experience and accomplishments and for those reasons we should give greater weight to his opinion, not less.
I'm gonna go ahead now and take credit for last week proving unequivocally that Coach's past defenses were atleast average, something the purest Mike D haters could not admit before. The d-rating stat is real deal proof peoples ..
You can take Hubie's statements however you want...all I said was to realize he was going to be very pro-coaching, and speak highly of the position and it's affect on the game. Which is why that statement doesn't surprise me. Which is what I said.