Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 30

Thread: Be Specific, Gentlemen. Analysing D'Antoni's Offence

  1. #1
    Evacuee Crazy⑧s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    日本
    Posts
    6,487
    Rep Power
    27

    Default Be Specific, Gentlemen. Analysing D'Antoni's Offence

    There are those of us who want him gone.

    There are those that don't.

    In this thread, I would like to ask, without an inkling of provocation, what it is that MD's supporters think about our offence? Not a drip about defence, solely offence, and what your analysis is.

    It's not about chemistry.

    It's not about post trade circumstance.

    It's not about the equations that the offence is based upon.

    It's solely about how we play on the offensive end.

    The plays we make/do not make, and have made.

    About the symbiosis of our stars.

    Throughout all the exaggerated self righteous posts and elaborate use of wording, I'm yet to hear, or simply have not read, the opinions of MD's supporters on the matter directly.
    Last edited by Crazy⑧s; Apr 29, 2011 at 04:17. Reason: Spelled D'Antoni as F'antoni

  2. #2
    Super Moderator RunningJumper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    4,005
    Rep Power
    16

    Default

    Would like to hear this too. Despite our defense, Mike didn't bring much on offense either.

    If we had a coach who was good on offense, people wouldn't want a THIRD max contract. If you have two max players who's offense brought them to the dance, and people are still thinking they need a max PG to run the show, something is definitely wrong there.

  3. #3
    Member ducktales17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    280
    Rep Power
    4

    Default

    offense*

    damnit ****ing hell **** **** ****ing **** did no one here actually go to high school?

  4. #4
    Super Moderator RunningJumper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    4,005
    Rep Power
    16

    Default

    Originally Posted by ducktales17
    offense*

    damnit ****ing hell **** **** ****ing **** did no one here actually go to high school?
    You seem to be angry a lot.

  5. #5
    Member ducktales17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    280
    Rep Power
    4

    Default

    Originally Posted by RunningJumper
    You seem to be angry a lot.
    no argument there

  6. #6
    TYPE-A Red's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    2,308
    Rep Power
    15

    Default

    Offense=

    Over-rated
    Limited
    Predictable
    Flawed
    Neglectful
    Is responsible for LOSING games as much as the _______.

    About as good as a one trick pony can get.

    *oops... I'm not a supporter, I wasn't supposed to post.

  7. #7
    Hannibal Lecter TR1LL10N's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Dark side of the Moon
    Posts
    2,743
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    Well I am on record stating that I think MDA should be replaced now that we acquired Melo and Billups, two players that are best suited for a half court offense. I do think STAT is best suited for a high tempo offense but I digress.

    That said, the main tenet of MDA's offense is the ability to push the pace therefore controlling it in the hopes of setting up an open shot before the defense can setup. This is very effective IF you have a PG that can race up the floor and put pressure on the backpedaling defense near the paint in the hopes you can exploit them with a quick pass to an open shooter. (not necessarily a 3) When done effectively this puts tremendous pressure on the opposition who is not accustomed to this type of frenetic pace. Further while 3 point shots are a lower percentage shot than a two pointer they count as 1.5 two pointers when made therefore over the course of a game if enough drop the percentage becomes less important. (not unimportant but less) The 3-point shot also has the added benefit of spreading the floor which in theory should give Amare or Melo room to maneuver.

    If the fastbreak is stopped with good transition defense then historically the PnR is used to create a similar effect. This is done by keeping the defense off balance forcing them to make switches and go under/over picks which potentially leave wide open shooters. Again, the whole point of SSOL and MDA's overall philosophy is to get open shots. Open shots are high percentage shots and when the offense is running smoothly(see Phoenix and some stretches this year with Felton) it is almost impossible to guard.

    The problem with the Knicks since MDA took over is that we have not had a capable PG except Felton to run SSOL. (of course rebuilding the first 2 years was an issue too) Felton had the Knicks playing really well once he got accustomed to the system and prior to his ankle injury. He was starting to get healthy again right before being traded and we started to look dangerous once again as a result. One can track our win/loss this year prior to the trade to Feltons production almost without fail. SSOL requires a PG that can make smart decisions, shoot and pass. It limits the burden on the rest of the team from having to create or make decisions provided you have a capable PG. The ideal scenrio is to have knock down spot up shooters surrounding Amare and the "right" PG. These players do not need to create shots or make decisions they simply need to hit the open shot created by the system.

    SSOL does not benefit from volume scorers like Melo and actually is hurt by them. Again, SSOL is about taking quick uncontested shots and players like Melo while capable of knocking down jumpers are best suited in ISO's creating their own shot. That is the antithesis of SSOL and the major reason why I have concluded another coach should be brought in. That said Melo has the potential to thrive in any system and if we brought back a PG of at least Feltons ability let a lone a CP3 we would be unstoppable in MDA's offense.

    P.S. The only reason we seem predictable is because we arent actually running SSOL because we lacked the right PG after the trade. Prior to the trade we were anything but predictable. (when we were hot) So yea, MDA's system does require specific players to be effective and looks awful when we don't have them. Since we do not have them we should focus on getting another coach or acquiring the right pieces to make it work.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin, NYC orig
    Posts
    84
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Originally Posted by ducktales17
    offense*

    damnit ****ing hell **** **** ****ing **** did no one here actually go to high school?
    LOL really? his spelling's fine, I'm p sure it's offence in euro and looks like he's from japan.

  9. #9
    TYPE-A Red's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    2,308
    Rep Power
    15

    Default

    Originally Posted by TR1LL10N
    Well I am on record stating that I think MDA should be replaced now that we acquired Melo and Billups, two players that are best suited for a half court offense. I do think STAT is best suited for a high tempo offense but I digress.

    That said, the main tenet of MDA's offense is the ability to push the pace therefore controlling it in the hopes of setting up an open shot before the defense can setup. This is very effective IF you have a PG that can race up the floor and put pressure on the backpedaling defense near the paint in the hopes you can exploit them with a quick pass to an open shooter. (not necessarily a 3) When done effectively this puts tremendous pressure on the opposition who is not accustomed to this type of frenetic pace. Further while 3 point shots are a lower percentage shot than a two pointer they count as 1.5 two pointers when made therefore over the course of a game if enough drop the percentage becomes less important. (not unimportant but less) The 3-point shot also has the added benefit of spreading the floor which in theory should give Amare or Melo room to maneuver.

    If the fastbreak is stopped with good transition defense then historically the PnR is used to create a similar effect. This is done by keeping the defense off balance forcing them to make switches and go under/over picks which potentially leave wide open shooters. Again, the whole point of SSOL and MDA's overall philosophy is to get open shots. Open shots are high percentage shots and when the offense is running smoothly(see Phoenix and some stretches this year with Felton) it is almost impossible to guard.

    The problem with the Knicks since MDA took over is that we have not had a capable PG except Felton to run SSOL. (of course rebuilding the first 2 years was an issue too) Felton had the Knicks playing really well once he got accustomed to the system and prior to his ankle injury. He was starting to get healthy again right before being traded and we started to look dangerous once again as a result. One can track our win/loss this year prior to the trade to Feltons production almost without fail. SSOL requires a PG that can make smart decisions, shoot and pass. It limits the burden on the rest of the team from having to create or make decisions provided you have a capable PG. The ideal scenrio is to have knock down spot up shooters surrounding Amare and the "right" PG. These players do not need to create shots or make decisions they simply need to hit the open shot created by the system.

    SSOL does not benefit from volume scorers like Melo and actually is hurt by them. Again, SSOL is about taking quick uncontested shots and players like Melo while capable of knocking down jumpers are best suited in ISO's creating their own shot. That is the antithesis of SSOL and the major reason why I have concluded another coach should be brought in. That said Melo has the potential to thrive in any system and if we brought back a PG of at least Feltons ability let a lone a CP3 we would be unstoppable in MDA's offense.

    P.S. The only reason we seem predictable is because we arent actually running SSOL because we lacked the right PG after the trade. Prior to the trade we were anything but predictable. (when we were hot) So yea, MDA's system does require specific players to be effective and looks awful when we don't have them. Since we do not have them we should focus on getting another coach or acquiring the right pieces to make it work.
    Sorry Crazy8's but to be fair we must realize the O & D aren't mutually exclusive in ball like it is say in football (where a whole different unit is used).

    Trill to be fair we have to mention the not so obvious effects of running such a style which you neglected.

    First we can agree that getting "open or "quality" shots is the goal of any offense that's nothing new. By hurying the pace to set up and take advantage of a lack of transition or set D here in lies multiple concerns:

    1. To be a transition or fast-break team, specific players need to be acquired. As you mentioned a quicker PG. But it's really determined by the wings- they too must be able to score in the open court off the break. That in of itself a) reduces the players available (by type) & b) reduces the margin for error (not many can come in and replace)

    2. Pace = injury over time

    3. Jump "knock down" shooters further reduces the talent pool available. It's a bit much to ask for knock down shooters WITH the speed and driving capabilites to score on the break. When you start seeing things from an availability, realistic stand point- we soon realize a hand full of such players available. This is illustrated in the myriad of different players used and not used to find the right fit. They are of the LeBron James (jumper not so much so) Wade ilk. And even they aren't necessarily knock down shooters.

    4. There is a reason why most coaches would say "if we are in transition offensively, and we don't have #'s or position- pull the ball out and set up".

    Thats because the odds say a set up play designed for an individual(s) realistically can be relied upon more than scoring off the break. The opportunity is there more (or less depending), and the reputation of "slowing the ball down" during the playoffs or "it's more of a half-court game" rings true, mostly due to the quality shot aspect.

    This offense in concept makes sense, but its not practical for many reasons down the stretch. Quality shots = those shots that are taken by design for specific players achieving specific goals (inside, at a high % spot of their liking). In this offense it's an adlibbed approach taking what the defense gives by the "open knock down shooter", multiple being on the floor.

    But here's the real down-fall not mentioned. Combine the unavailable players with:

    The effect on defense. Remember this isn't football. You play BOTH sides of the ball. So not only is the personnel light when it comes to offensive abilities (driver, knock down shooter)- it further dwindles when adding defensive capabilities.

    This is the achilles heal. When you are hell bent on acquiring these players, you neglect defensive types. This is few and far when it comes to this type of player. Its like trying to field 5 Kobe Bryants- immpossible.

    Examples of this also would be like:
    Putting Michael or Ben Johnson in pads and playing running back. They were the fastest men in the world, but in reality they can never be better than say Emmit Smith who is much slower.

    Or, if the Yankees signed Arnold Swarchenegger. In theory he should be killing the ball, but those other ancillary skills won't allow that in reality.

    All in all balance is what Mike has to learn. His leasons are obvious. By that I mean if we take this system and add a Shaq in his prime. No coach would deny he can help. But in this system, he would be marginalized. This is what Mike sees with Jeffries. One defensive addition throws it off. Shaq like JJ would be relegated to setting screens at the top of the key and encouraged to shoot if the rock goes his way and he's open. It takes not his actual best used abilities into account, and forces him to conform, limiting him. Chalk that up to another limitation.

    If Mike really analyzes how his system is incorporated given the actual talent in the NBA- he would notice there are more "specialists" than adaptable blank slates that he ultimately has to work with.

    Now contrast that unorthodox style with conventional. First a coach with a star or any player accentuates their natural abilities. But they create balance by not having so many players with the same styles and abilities. Even with a Shaq, the Lakers didn't go to him every play. But when they did, those plays were designed and called with his specific talents in mind and analysis of where his high % shots are. The same would go for Kobe or anyone for that matter.

    This system neglects that specialized aspect. And it neglects to understand why multiple attacks lead to the "confusion" attempted to be created in its design. Good conventional coaches have plays designed for in and out of the paint and call the game accordingly. If someone is in foul trouble, they go at him, deliberately, not incorporate plays where anyone can shoot.

    If there's an obvious mis-match that is exposed strategically. Not in this system.


    But back to Trill and your Felton example. Yeah when he was healthy, we were clicking.

    BUT, a) that was against low level teams, b) he did get injured as did almost every other guard we had, and c) MOST IMPORTANTLY WE WERE STILL NEAR LAST IN DEFENSE d) we took a chance as that approach had us down double digits almost every time, effectively shooting ourselves out of games e) it actually makes it harder to hold the lead

    That's why many say it's a false sense of security. A false positve. It's a one game maybe aboration that produces diminishing returns over the course of time- further exposed in the playoffs where the top teams who play defense, clamp down, and slow you down. Without a solid all around approach, illustrated by the all around personnel on the floor, it can only win when too many factors become true.

    That and the availability of players is why I say it's too risky.
    Neglecting to "showcase" a player's specific talents is why I say it's limited. These issues have many trickle down effects and reduce the likelyhood of winning a chip using this approach.
    Last edited by Red; Apr 29, 2011 at 18:07.

  10. #10
    Evacuee Crazy⑧s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    日本
    Posts
    6,487
    Rep Power
    27

    Default

    Originally Posted by ducktales17
    offense*

    damnit ****ing hell **** **** ****ing **** did no one here actually go to high school?
    Did you?

    Have a think about it, moron.

  11. #11
    Veteran jpz17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,782
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    You cannot use the Knicks offense from the playoffs as an example, and if you are analyzing his offense, you must compare all of his seasons. With Phoenix he had possibly the greatest offensive team in NBA regular season history, and with the Knicks we were top 5 in a category we've had no business in for 15 years.

    This Knicks team is NOT D'Antoni's dream team. His best teams are built around a solid point guard, and we don't have that with an unhealthy Billups. (Sure when Billups is healthy he does a great job, but he is getting old and unhealthy). Our biggest addition from now on ought to be a star point guard, but not one who is always scoring (and not a Chris Duhon 6apg 3ppg type guy either)

    We basically need the next Steve Nash for the offense to fit. Think about it, we have Amare, Melo is our Shawn Marion, and a point guard would be our Nash. That right there was the PHX offense. With Fields getting rebounds and playing good D he does all he is asked. Then we need a good defending good rebounding tall center and he doesn't have to score on offense.

  12. #12
    SWAGABURY KingStarbury3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Chinabury
    Posts
    3,313
    Rep Power
    21

    Default

    ^^ Tall center who doesnt have to score?


    How about......






































  13. #13
    Evacuee Crazy⑧s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    日本
    Posts
    6,487
    Rep Power
    27

    Default

    Originally Posted by TR1LL10N
    Well I am on record stating that I think MDA should be replaced now that we acquired Melo and Billups, two players that are best suited for a half court offense. I do think STAT is best suited for a high tempo offense but I digress.

    That said, the main tenet of MDA's offense is the ability to push the pace therefore controlling it in the hopes of setting up an open shot before the defense can setup. This is very effective IF you have a PG that can race up the floor and put pressure on the backpedaling defense near the paint in the hopes you can exploit them with a quick pass to an open shooter. (not necessarily a 3) When done effectively this puts tremendous pressure on the opposition who is not accustomed to this type of frenetic pace. Further while 3 point shots are a lower percentage shot than a two pointer they count as 1.5 two pointers when made therefore over the course of a game if enough drop the percentage becomes less important. (not unimportant but less) The 3-point shot also has the added benefit of spreading the floor which in theory should give Amare or Melo room to maneuver.

    If the fastbreak is stopped with good transition defense then historically the PnR is used to create a similar effect. This is done by keeping the defense off balance forcing them to make switches and go under/over picks which potentially leave wide open shooters. Again, the whole point of SSOL and MDA's overall philosophy is to get open shots. Open shots are high percentage shots and when the offense is running smoothly(see Phoenix and some stretches this year with Felton) it is almost impossible to guard.

    The problem with the Knicks since MDA took over is that we have not had a capable PG except Felton to run SSOL. (of course rebuilding the first 2 years was an issue too) Felton had the Knicks playing really well once he got accustomed to the system and prior to his ankle injury. He was starting to get healthy again right before being traded and we started to look dangerous once again as a result. One can track our win/loss this year prior to the trade to Feltons production almost without fail. SSOL requires a PG that can make smart decisions, shoot and pass. It limits the burden on the rest of the team from having to create or make decisions provided you have a capable PG. The ideal scenrio is to have knock down spot up shooters surrounding Amare and the "right" PG. These players do not need to create shots or make decisions they simply need to hit the open shot created by the system.

    SSOL does not benefit from volume scorers like Melo and actually is hurt by them. Again, SSOL is about taking quick uncontested shots and players like Melo while capable of knocking down jumpers are best suited in ISO's creating their own shot. That is the antithesis of SSOL and the major reason why I have concluded another coach should be brought in. That said Melo has the potential to thrive in any system and if we brought back a PG of at least Feltons ability let a lone a CP3 we would be unstoppable in MDA's offense.

    P.S. The only reason we seem predictable is because we arent actually running SSOL because we lacked the right PG after the trade. Prior to the trade we were anything but predictable. (when we were hot) So yea, MDA's system does require specific players to be effective and looks awful when we don't have them. Since we do not have them we should focus on getting another coach or acquiring the right pieces to make it work.

    The entirety of MD's team's success is specific to an individual? I think that's true to a degree, but considering our roster, it shouldn't even be necessary. And if that's the case, and it's the absence of a good player at a specific spot that made our offence so pathetic and predictable against Boston, then why can't the individual blame, be it some or all, be pointed toward the fact that MD, its orchestrator, is so reliant on a particular thing to be successful? And without that crucial component, he is, in both meanings of the term, defenceless. That's a blaring weakness.

    With 2 of the most gifted athletes and scorers in the league on the one team playing as individuals offensively, I don't really believe that our being devoid of the right point guard is the issue.

    So yea, MDA's system does require specific players to be effective and looks awful when we don't have them. Since we do not have them we should focus on getting another coach or acquiring the right pieces to make it work.


    That's very fair. What amazes me in regard to that point, is his lack of ingenuity with STAT, Melo and Billups on his team. It's incredible. Am I the only person who thinks so? I'm dumbfounded just thinking about it. It seems that he literally doesn't know what to do with them.

    If MD can't be successful without the very precise ingredients he needs, regardless of who's on his team, then, IMO, that lack of protean capability is his ultimate weakness, and it was evidenced in our 2 abismal home games against Boston. The entire roster was made to look foolish as our predictable and uncreative offence was offered as fodder to the Celtics.

    Well I am on record stating that I think MDA should be replaced now that we acquired Melo and Billups, two players that are best suited for a half court offense. I do think STAT is best suited for a high tempo offense but I digress.
    Yes, I did read that.

    Thanks for your post, TR1LL1ON.

  14. #14
    Evacuee Crazy⑧s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    日本
    Posts
    6,487
    Rep Power
    27

    Question Mark

    Originally Posted by Red
    Sorry Crazy8's but to be fair we must realize the O & D aren't mutually exclusive in ball like it is say in football (where a whole different unit is used).
    EH? We must realise that? I don't agree at all. Especially not at the professional level.

  15. #15
    Veteran jpz17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,782
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    Originally Posted by KingStarbury3
    ^^ Tall center who doesnt have to score?


    How about......





































    I said someone good on defense and can rebound and plays hard. Not Bumfries..

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •