After watching Heat.... One thing I do like about Dantonii......

AmareForPresident

AmareForPresident

Starter
Red said:
Sounds good...

Except

1. D'antoni has NEVER coached a top 10 defensive team, complete with Assistants/Players or NOT.

Try again, you fail.

2. No one expects us to be a top 10 defensive team because we all know #1 (see above)

Way to spin it.

3. Doc's team didn't have defensive players as you say. Besides Garnot, Rondo was a rookie, Pierce and Alan weren't stalwarts. The coaching and scheme did that.

Stop making excuses that have no basis. Make the distinction between blame and forecasting what's best for the team.

Are you a Knick fan or D'Antoni fan?
Click to expand...
So Tony Allen, James Posey, and Kendrick Perkins are bad defenders right? Paul Pierce and Ray Allen are not bad defenders at all, the Celtics had a 24-58 record the season before Garnett and Allen came and Celtic fans wanted Doc's head off. And Rondo was a good defender since college actually. You say MDA never had a top 10 defensive team but Doc Rivers never had one either before Garnett and Allen came.

Try again, you fail.
 
Red

Red

TYPE-A
AmareForPresident said:
So Tony Allen, James Posey, and Kendrick Perkins are bad defenders right? Paul Pierce and Ray Allen are not bad defenders at all, the Celtics had a 24-58 record the season before Garnett and Allen came and Celtic fans wanted Doc's head off. And Rondo was a good defender since college actually.

Try again, you fail.
Click to expand...

So it was Allan, Posey, and Perkins that made up their great defense?

Ok, using that assertion, we can assume the coach had a say in their acquisition, playing time, and usage, correct? And it was the coach who hires his assistants right? Let's chalk that one up to Doc over D'Antoni- I guess his approach is just better. He seems to know what he's doing. He got these "great" defenders, and won a championship with his "great" assistants implementing both his offensive ideas combined with his assistants input. Wish we could say the same about D'Antoni, but we can't.

Guess we'll come up with illogical reasons why he failed to do the same like forgetting he had just as mush chance and players to do so but didn't.

Regardless of what the Boston Fans wanted, Doc was a former coach of the year who I'd bet not one fan of Boston wants gone. Sh*t, I'd bet every other team DOES want him gone so he could be theirs- ya think they see D'Antoni the same? Don't kid yourself.

In your statement you said

My point is that Scott Brooks, Doc Rivers, etc are offensive coaches just with great defensive players
Click to expand...

and I'm saying no one besides Garnot was "great" until they were influenced by a "great" coach and a proven system. That goes for Pierce, Alan, etc...

it's an exaggeration on your part.

Then this...

They also have had excellent defensive assistant coaches (Tom Thibbs, Ron Adams)
Click to expand...

makes no sense as I'm sure as a D'Antoni supporter you are well aware that he chose his brother as a defensive assistant and denied other more proven coaching help. Which by the way IF he were good at that (defense), it wouldn't have been an issue, now would it?

then...

and people expect us to be a top 10 defensive team with our current roster and Herb Williams as our "Defensive" assistant coach?
Click to expand...

Who? Who said they expect us to be a top 10 defensive team with our current roster?

and who decides to keep Herb Williams as an assistant?

OKC, Dallas, and Boston weren't a great defensive team before Chandler, KG, Tom Thibbs, Ron Adams came.
Click to expand...

There you go exaggerating again with that word "great". But now let's take a look at this assertion... keep in mind I CAN MAKE A DISTINCTION AS TO WHO'S TO BLAME -vs- why its best to move on

As you say "before Chandler, KG, etc..."

Well Chandler and KG are bigs right? And who exactly has been known recently and historically for not playing bigs (DNP's), not valuing bigs (Skipped on them in drafts and refused to sign them above shooters), playing smaller players out of position (Jared Jaffries, STAT, Chandler, on and on...)?

Yep, you get a two for one for this one! Because it's the same guy that rather bounce on his 60 win team instead of acquiescing and bringing in an assistant. The same one who when asked what he felt about adding an assistant said "... of course that implies we don't know what the hell we are doing".

and finally...

Its unfair to judge MDA when we had an incomplete roster and our best defender (Azubuike) didn't recover like he was supposed to.
Click to expand...

If by judge you mean, realize he can't get it done defensively... then when considering he has never been above middle of the pack ANYTIME in his career, and runs a style not conducive to defensive success as we've witnessed

then yeah, what's the issue?

Should we not realize the truth? Or should we realize the truth, but then deceive ourselves by coming up with excuses?

You say MDA never had a top 10 defensive team but Doc Rivers never had one either before Garnett and Allen came.
Click to expand...

Yet coach Rivers has already won a championship and been to two. This after leading the league in winning percentage, and later this year fully exposing D'Antoni and summarily out-coaching him. And to be fair, you MUST also compare D'Antoni's OTHER teams which included Shawn Marion, STAT, Shaq and more- More than capable defenders, and still was presented with an ultimatum.

Again, that assertion about "the fans wanted him gone" too is an exaggeration. It was the media and one person in particular who disagreed with his style.

After spending a year working as a commentator for the NBA on ABC (calling the 2004 Finals with Al Michaels), he took over the Boston Celtics coaching position in 2004. During his first years with the Celtics, he was criticized by many in the media for his coaching style, most vociferously by ESPN's Bill Simmons, who in 2006 publicly called for Rivers to be fired in his columns.
As a result of the Celtics' 109?93 victory over the New York Knicks on January 21, 2008, Rivers, as the coach of the team with the best winning percentage in the Eastern Conference, earned the honor to coach the East for the 2008 NBA All-Star Game in New Orleans.[2] On June 17, 2008, Rivers won his first NBA Championship as a head coach
Click to expand...

So in contrast to D'Antoni, Doc has achieved more and demonstrated the ability to make the proper decisions to benefit the organization. He has missed the playoffs once in ORL before he got fired. Ya think they may regret that?

Rivers began his coaching career with the Orlando Magic in 1999, where he coached for more than four NBA seasons. Rivers won the Coach of the Year award in 2000 after his first year with the Magic. That season, he led the team that was picked to finish last in the league to a near playoff berth. He made the post-season in his next three years as coach, but was fired in 2003 after a disastrous start to the season.
Click to expand...

I don't hear or see you calling Doc a genius. All I see is your poor attempts to vilify D'Antoni with an irrational comparison to someone who proves the opposite point. Doc is better than D'Antoni.

Fail. :whack:
 
K

KBlack25

Starter
Red - just in terms of the article you posted and the statement that fans didn't want Doc gone:

The evidence you gave doesn't show that the fans didn't want him gone...it only serves to show that the media and one member in particular DID. You are arguing a fallacy there and you might want to clear it up, because I guarantee his response will deal with this obvious flaw.

Also...I don't think that Orlando regrets the decision to fire Doc as they made the NBA Finals without him...
 
AmareForPresident

AmareForPresident

Starter
So it was Allan, Posey, and Perkins that made up their great defense?

Ok, using that assertion, we can assume the coach had a say in their acquisition, playing time, and usage, correct?
Click to expand...
Do you really think that if MDA had either one of those players that he wouldn't play them?

And it was the coach who hires his assistants right? Let's chalk that one up to Doc over D'Antoni- I guess his approach is just better. He seems to know what he's doing. He got these "great" defenders, and won a championship with his "great" assistants implementing both his offensive ideas combined with his assistants input. Wish we could say the same about D'Antoni, but we can't.
Click to expand...
You still have failed to realize my point, if Doc Rivers can succeed with a defensive assistant then why can't MDA?

Regardless of what the Boston Fans wanted, Doc was a former coach of the year who I'd bet not one fan of Boston wants gone. Sh*t, I'd bet every other team DOES want him gone so he could be theirs- ya think they see D'Antoni the same? Don't kid yourself.
Click to expand...
MDA is a former coach of the year as well and I remember that Celtic fans wanted Doc Rivers fired just as much as we want MDA fired.

makes no sense as I'm sure as a D'Antoni supporter you are well aware that he chose his brother as a defensive assistant and denied other more proven coaching help.
Click to expand...
How do you know that? Do you work for the Knicks organization? Name a good defensive assistant that was available and don't say Lawrence Frank or Ron Adams because they were already Chicago/Boston bound. I'm waiting....


Who? Who said they expect us to be a top 10 defensive team with our current roster?
Click to expand...
Basically every MDA hater, they all complain about having bad defense when we have no one on this team that is a good defender other than TD or Azubuike (Who was an great defender when he was with GSW but he did not play a single game all season)

As you say "before Chandler, KG, etc..."

Well Chandler and KG are bigs right? And who exactly has been known recently and historically for not playing bigs (DNP's), not valuing bigs (Skipped on them in drafts and refused to sign them above shooters), playing smaller players out of position (Jared Jaffries, STAT, Chandler, on and on...)?
Click to expand...
Out of all of the conspiracies that MDA bashers create this is by far my favorite. :aplause: Your statement is so flawed, what bigs has MDA had that he hasn't played? Mosgov, Anthony Randolph are you ****ing kidding me? :barf:He has played Shaq, Kurt Thomas, Turiaf so how has he been known historically for not playing bigs? Do you really think that if we had Deandre, Tyson, or Dalembert that MDA wouldn't play them? If you really think that then your smoking. :smokin:

Yet coach Rivers has already won a championship and been to two. This after leading the league in winning percentage, and later this year fully exposing D'Antoni and summarily out-coaching him. And to be fair, you MUST also compare D'Antoni's OTHER teams which included Shawn Marion, STAT, Shaq and more- More than capable defenders, and still was presented with an ultimatum.
Click to expand...
Are you really using a washed up Shaq as one of MDA's best defenders? That just proves my point.

MEGAFAIL
shaq.gif

 
Last edited:
STAT1

STAT1

Starter
TR1LL10N said:
Theory? Dude thats like saying what team who can't shoot the ball or rebound ever won? Its an obvious point and no one is claiming that any team would. That includes Dallas who while relies on jump shooting does a lot more including play defense.

What insightful theory will be next? No team can win with just 4 players on the floor? :teeth:
Click to expand...

No need for the backhanded sarcasm, I'm not representing my point as any groundbreaking theory here. Someone called me out for saying I can't think of 1 team that's ever won a title relying on jumpshooting with weak defense. No kidding this is not groundbreaking news, it's exactly my point. How far do you guys think investing our future on a coach who's track record has been coaching teams that rely on high volume of shooting with very little emphasis on playing defense is going to take us? What the hell are we setting our sights on at this point? Making it past the 1st round of the playoffs & giving the fans some "ooh & ah" moments over the course of the season, or striving to actually win an NBA championship? I don't believe following a strategy that nets 1 team in ready recollection an NBA championship in the history of the league is the way to go (if Dallas even wins it this year). Maybe one of you basketball historians can come up with some examples but I can't think of a single one. I think we need a coach who's fundamental strategy is centered on playing defense first & running an offense from the inside-out. That has been a tried & true proven strategy to win championships over the course of the league's history. Pretty much basketball 101.
 
J

jpz17

Starter
abcd said:
Mike Antoni has to go. He is stubborn and unwilling to compromise.

In all his years of coaching, I have never seen him incorporate defense into his philosophy.

Getting a defensive minded assistant is not going to do anything.

Do you think Antoni listens to what Herb Williams, Phil Webber, or Dan Antoni have to say? Nope. And he's been with those guys for three years. So it's even less likely he would listen to an Assistant he's never worked with.
Click to expand...

First of all, everything you said there is complete 100% false, but I have to point out the most idiotic part. Not paying attention to his brother? Come on.
 
ducktales17

ducktales17

Benchwarmer
STAT1 said:
Please put me on ignore if that's the extent of your debating skills, thanks.
Click to expand...

**** "debating skills" lol.

That was me shooting machine guns at your comment. I just ended shit with that move. Game over. There's not even a way you can 1 up me.
 
Red

Red

TYPE-A
AmareForPresident said:
Do you really think that if MDA had either one of those players that he wouldn't play them?

You still have failed to realize my point, if Doc Rivers can succeed with a defensive assistant then why can't MDA?

MDA is a former coach of the year as well and I remember that Celtic fans wanted Doc Rivers fired just as much as we want MDA fired.

How do you know that? Do you work for the Knicks organization? Name a good defensive assistant that was available and don't say Lawrence Frank or Ron Adams because they were already Chicago/Boston bound. I'm waiting....


Basically every MDA hater, they all complain about having bad defense when we have no one on this team that is a good defender other than TD or Azubuike (Who was an great defender when he was with GSW but he did not play a single game all season)

Out of all of the conspiracies that MDA bashers create this is by far my favorite. :aplause: Your statement is so flawed, what bigs has MDA had that he hasn't played? Mosgov, Anthony Randolph are you ****ing kidding me? :barf:He has played Shaq, Kurt Thomas, Turiaf so how has he been known historically for not playing bigs? Do you really think that if we had Deandre, Tyson, or Dalembert that MDA wouldn't play them? If you really think that then your smoking. :smokin:

Are you really using a washed up Shaq as one of MDA's best defenders? That just proves my point.

MEGAFAIL
shaq.gif

Click to expand...

I got your point. Better players = better defense.

To that I pointed to the many players he has had over his career. You did what spin doc's do... you picked 1 out of how many? And tried to excuse that 1 (Shaq) by stating he was "washed up". Don't you see the pattern here. You are clearly biased and subjective.

Every counter point stated, you responded by coming up with excuses, exaggerating, and pulling a straw man argument. The fact remains IF you assert its the players, which by the way you qualify by adding the assistants are just as culpabale, then as an objective person you have to consider he had those types of players and failed to excel. Period. That is not a valid excuse, just a convienent one.

Why wouldn't Mike be better with assistants?

He may or may not be, who knows? The point is he's also had ample opportunity to prove so and HE DECIDED not to. Now if you state other teams and coaches were better by using their assistants, than we can conclude Mike must not be as good, because he delined and went with his personal staff instead.

As far as players are concerned, bigs in particular.

Not only has Mike been unable to use his bigs effectively except for STAT which it can be argued so did Gentry, it is documented that many serviceable bigs don't fit his mold. This trickles down to unwarranted DNP's in spite of what's best for the team (and others besides bigs have experienced this- some defensive oriented players). It leads to passing them over in drafts, trading them, and the miscalculation moves such as playing the players he's had out of position. Do I have to name them?

Bottom line is there is no argument or excuse you can come up with that trumps historical occurrence. All you have is wishful thinking and that's not what's best for this team. Its another unecessary risk to think things will be so different with a tweak here and there. That's because this issue goes too deep to be remedied by a subtle move.

And about conspiring...

Why would a fan conspire to find reasons to remove a coach? Its counterintuitive and illogical.

To be honest with a valid big we may excel, even using Mike's flawed apprach because we do have talent. We could easily be a top four seed next year with our core 3 of CB, Stat, & Melo. But you already have so many bulit in excuses that if we fail next year it can never be attributed to the one most responsible.

It'll be
*we are still incomplete
*Mike is a lame duck and worried
*we need cp3
*its Herb Williams
*who could ask for more than a playoff appearence
*when we get D12 things will be different
*he preaches no one listens
*if we could just run the pick and roll
*Billups is too old
*Landry is still learning
*Douglas is on the final year of his contract


Everything but the coach.
 
Last edited:
Knicks4Life_1985

Knicks4Life_1985

★The Floor General★
So I guess its safe to say the majority of the people here are still talking out they ass. Holla at me when the season starts I cant deal with 5 months of moronic comments.
 
Red

Red

TYPE-A
KBlack25 said:
Red - just in terms of the article you posted and the statement that fans didn't want Doc gone:

The evidence you gave doesn't show that the fans didn't want him gone...it only serves to show that the media and one member in particular DID. You are arguing a fallacy there and you might want to clear it up, because I guarantee his response will deal with this obvious flaw.

Also...I don't think that Orlando regrets the decision to fire Doc as they made the NBA Finals without him...
Click to expand...

I just showed you where the media was mainly responsible for not supporting Doc early and it wasn't enough. Ok whatever, does it really matter what the fans wanted in the past?

Are you somehow intimating that because some NY fans want Mike gone its comparable with Doc? And that because he got a chance Mike should also?

On the surface, yeah many coaches visit the hot-seat now and then. Because some have changed the minds of the fans or media or were thought of differently until they proved themselves, means nothing. No one needed Doc to be successful after being questioned to prove that sometimes fans are fickle and wrong, that's obvious. It has happened many times.

But if thas the best you supporters can come up with then that's sad. You try to compare Doc to Mike and what you come up with is;

Not only is Doc better, achieved higher levels of success, but when it comes to the core issues of contention similar between him and D'Antoni namely: defense, assistants, player acquisition, usage, in game strategy... basically coaching!

What's the conclusion? Doc is better. Comparson fails to show any counter point.

All it does is further provide excuses. Don't have the players yet HE DID. Don't have the assistants yet he shunned them. Didn't have a chance yet has had ample oportunity. Played with defenders yet failed to be a force in the upper echelon.

Until we start arguing menial sh*t. Well the "fans" wanted Doc fired? Shaq was old? Its Herb Williams. Etc... none of this is valid in terms of providing a counter argument to why D'Antoni is limited and mainly responsible for unsuccessful defense.

And if you are not one to make excuses then answer this:

During D'Antoni's PEAK in PHX- When he had HIS BEST LINE-UP

Why were his teams never umongst the leaders in defense? Not why didn't he win. What was the deal with the defense?

Why was bringing in an assistant even an issue?

I eagerly anticipate your objective response.
 
Last edited:
K

KBlack25

Starter
Wow Red...way to turn a comment about the fact that your proof did not support your hypothesis into a full-blown argument.

I didn't say anything, but sometimes you (and others) quote things on this board that do no support your proposition and use it as evidence. You have your opinion, but it was not backed up by the facts you presented in that instance. That's all I said.

You are the one who wants to start an argument.
 
AmareForPresident

AmareForPresident

Starter
Red said:
I got your point. Better players = better defense.

To that I pointed to the many players he has had over his career. You did what spin doc's do... you picked 1 out of how many? And tried to excuse that 1 (Shaq) by stating he was "washed up". Don't you see the pattern here. You are clearly biased and subjective.

Every counter point stated, you responded by coming up with excuses, exaggerating, and pulling a straw man argument. The fact remains IF you assert its the players, which by the way you qualify by adding the assistants are just as culpabale, then as an objective person you have to consider he had those types of players and failed to excel. Period. That is not a valid excuse, just a convienent one.

Why wouldn't Mike be better with assistants?

He may or may not be, who knows? The point is he's also had ample opportunity to prove so and HE DECIDED not to. Now if you state other teams and coaches were better by using their assistants, than we can conclude Mike must not be as good, because he delined and went with his personal staff instead.

As far as players are concerned, bigs in particular.

Not only has Mike been unable to use his bigs effectively except for STAT which it can be argued so did Gentry, it is documented that many serviceable bigs don't fit his mold. This trickles down to unwarranted DNP's in spite of what's best for the team (and others besides bigs have experienced this- some defensive oriented players). It leads to passing them over in drafts, trading them, and the miscalculation moves such as playing the players he's had out of position. Do I have to name them?

Bottom line is there is no argument or excuse you can come up with that trumps historical occurrence. All you have is wishful thinking and that's not what's best for this team. Its another unecessary risk to think things will be so different with a tweak here and there. That's because this issue goes too deep to be remedied by a subtle move.

And about conspiring...

Why would a fan conspire to find reasons to remove a coach? Its counterintuitive and illogical.

To be honest with a valid big we may excel, even using Mike's flawed apprach because we do have talent. We could easily be a top four seed next year with our core 3 of CB, Stat, & Melo. But you already have so many bulit in excuses that if we fail next year it can never be attributed to the one most responsible.

It'll be
*we are still incomplete
*Mike is a lame duck and worried
*we need cp3
*its Herb Williams
*who could ask for more than a playoff appearence
*when we get D12 things will be different
*he preaches no one listens
*if we could just run the pick and roll
*Billups is too old
*Landry is still learning
*Douglas is on the final year of his contract


Everything but the coach.
Click to expand...
This argument will never end.....
smh-1.jpg


Me and Kblack have told you guys time and time again that it would be stupid to fire MDA right now but you I guess you guys just enjoy bashing MDA. Here is my previous post on why we shouldn't fire MDA.

There might not even be a season next year, why pay a new coach when their might not even be a season? MDA is gone after next season if there even is one, and to be honest there isn't even any coaches available that are better than MDA.

Jerry Sloan- too old
JVG- unlikely
Mark Jackson- no coaching experience at all

and I love how some of you guys want Rick Adelman when his defense is just as bad as MDA's.

2012 is when there will be better coaches available.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
welcometonycity

welcometonycity

Rotation player
I gave you 1 star was poppin rookie. You run your mouth too much I'm tired of logging in and seein your vaginal comments. Earn yourself some credibility on this site before you run your mouth youngin. Before you respond know who you Fukkkin wit you bird as5 ni9ga.
 
Red

Red

TYPE-A
Red said:
Sounds good...

Except

1. D'antoni has NEVER coached a top 10 defensive team, complete with Assistants/Players or NOT.

Try again, you fail.

2. No one expects us to be a top 10 defensive team because we all know #1 (see above)

Way to spin it.

3. Doc's team didn't have defensive players as you say. Besides Garnot, Rondo was a rookie, Pierce and Alan weren't stalwarts. The coaching and scheme did that.

Stop making excuses that have no basis. Make the distinction between blame and forecasting what's best for the team.

Are you a Knick fan or D'Antoni fan?
Click to expand...

Above is my original post. For a lolli-pop, please show us where I said to fire D'Antoni.

AmareForPresident said:
This argument will never end.....
smh-1.jpg


Me and Kblack have told you guys time and time again that it would be stupid to fire MDA right now but you I guess you guys just enjoy bashing MDA. Here is my previous post on why we shouldn't fire MDA.
Click to expand...

Again you're desperate. You refuse to acknowledge your inability to accept facts. We all see you trying so hard to exhibit your support for D'Antoni.

Your lame tactics include:

*Exaggeration
*Deflection
*Misinterpretation
*Straw man arguments
*Diversion

Now this is about firing or not D'Antoni? Word?

I thought it was you trying to vilify Mike by parsing Doc's history into an argument, which when looked at objectively was incorrect.

It was full of conjecture and excuse. And for the last time every point you have regurgetated being "its the players" is weak. I and every other non-casual fan on this sight has proven how lame an short-sighted your argument is. Ho biased your assement is. You conveniently leave out historic facts and exaggerate others to fit your stance.

You keep arguing why you think Mike should stay even when not prompted but then try and say it's an argument constantly revisited. That's contradictary.

And as much as you or Black come up with excuses why not to fire Mike, we have rebutted them and gave u reasons why its what's best for the team, you refuse to understand because your love has blinded you.

And instead of parsing Doc in your argument and looking foolish, you should be asking yourself

"If I say Mike should stay because he didn't have a defensive team to do better and it's basically a given that he won't be here"

Then what's the difference in getting rid of him then vs now?

Because Dolan doesn't want to pay extra for success? Really?

So it's better to squeeze another year out of Mike knowing he won't be here to avoid paying him and another even if another is a better fit?

I'm way past firing Mike because if the owner and FO can't see something so obvious then winning must mean more t me than them. Its their team and their choice. I want to win, so to suggest spending more of a billionaires money is nothing to me.

I understand its something to them. I understand they will still be rich and have high paying jobs championship or not, so I don't expect them to care as much. And that's constantly reflected in their choices. Its no surprise to me.

But please don't try and pull the wool over our eyes by downplaying doc's success and comparing his career choices and accumen to D'Antoni as if you can convince us different of what our eyes see.

The only way Mike can be successful is by NOT being Mike.

And in that case I still get what I want.

We have talent and could get and use more. There is still luck. We have already broached the defensive assistant subject with him. We still haven't resigned him and would rather him be a lame duck.

Who knows? A twisted ankle by the opposition, a new assistant to get the D going, a surprise player here and there, and maybe we make a run next year. Its possible. Problem is given the myriad of excuses you and others have provided over the years it just isn't probable with Mike. Not impossible, nor probable.

I guess if we luck out and overcome all the 100's of excuses you and the supporters have provided then we wont have this conversation. Maybe we can actually hit those 30 threes taken per game and a player will trip every now and again ashe prances his way through our undersized ineffective defense in the playoffs and that's how we'l win.

Maybe CP3 and D12 will conspire to take less and play here by the trading deadlin, because everyone will take less to play with them and they know they have to team up with stars.

Maybe Fields won't avg 1.7 points in the playoffs and a Shaq like player will fall to us at 17. Then the real defensive minded D'Antoni will surface and we all are happy.

Maybe Mike will figure out how to save timeouts, foul when he has one left, and use his genius offensive mind to allow Stat to get the rock within seven straight possessions down the stretch.

Maybe Mike will figure out Antony Randolph is better than Jared Jeffries. And having Brook Lopez and Bradon Jennings is better than Danilo Gallinari and Chris Duhon. Maybe he'll realize doing what's best for the team is better than not playing a player for his personal vendettas.

Who knows?
 
ronoranina

ronoranina

Fundamentally Sound
ducktales17 said:
To give Dantoni some credit, he hasn't had close to the defensive players that OKC has. Look at our roster..... It's just an overall shitty defensive roster.

You could argue that Dantoni never had the defensive roster because he doesn't coach it. I'd understand that, but even in Phoenix he didn't have the defensive players OKC has now.
Click to expand...

I agree w the basic premise of this thread. ;-)

Red said:
Above is my original post. For a lolli-pop, please show us where I said to fire D'Antoni.



Again you're desperate. You refuse to acknowledge your inability to accept facts. We all see you trying so hard to exhibit your support for D'Antoni.

Your lame tactics include:

*Exaggeration
*Deflection
*Misinterpretation
*Straw man arguments
*Diversion

Now this is about firing or not D'Antoni? Word?

I thought it was you trying to vilify Mike by parsing Doc's history into an argument, which when looked at objectively was incorrect.

It was full of conjecture and excuse. And for the last time every point you have regurgetated being "its the players" is weak. I and every other non-casual fan on this sight has proven how lame an short-sighted your argument is. Ho biased your assement is. You conveniently leave out historic facts and exaggerate others to fit your stance.

You keep arguing why you think Mike should stay even when not prompted but then try and say it's an argument constantly revisited. That's contradictary.

And as much as you or Black come up with excuses why not to fire Mike, we have rebutted them and gave u reasons why its what's best for the team, you refuse to understand because your love has blinded you.

And instead of parsing Doc in your argument and looking foolish, you should be asking yourself

"If I say Mike should stay because he didn't have a defensive team to do better and it's basically a given that he won't be here"

Then what's the difference in getting rid of him then vs now?

Because Dolan doesn't want to pay extra for success? Really?

So it's better to squeeze another year out of Mike knowing he won't be here to avoid paying him and another even if another is a better fit?

I'm way past firing Mike because if the owner and FO can't see something so obvious then winning must mean more t me than them. Its their team and their choice. I want to win, so to suggest spending more of a billionaires money is nothing to me.

I understand its something to them. I understand they will still be rich and have high paying jobs championship or not, so I don't expect them to care as much. And that's constantly reflected in their choices. Its no surprise to me.

But please don't try and pull the wool over our eyes by downplaying doc's success and comparing his career choices and accumen to D'Antoni as if you can convince us different of what our eyes see.

The only way Mike can be successful is by NOT being Mike.

And in that case I still get what I want.

We have talent and could get and use more. There is still luck. We have already broached the defensive assistant subject with him. We still haven't resigned him and would rather him be a lame duck.

Who knows? A twisted ankle by the opposition, a new assistant to get the D going, a surprise player here and there, and maybe we make a run next year. Its possible. Problem is given the myriad of excuses you and others have provided over the years it just isn't probable with Mike. Not impossible, nor probable.

I guess if we luck out and overcome all the 100's of excuses you and the supporters have provided then we wont have this conversation. Maybe we can actually hit those 30 threes taken per game and a player will trip every now and again ashe prances his way through our undersized ineffective defense in the playoffs and that's how we'l win.

Maybe CP3 and D12 will conspire to take less and play here by the trading deadlin, because everyone will take less to play with them and they know they have to team up with stars.

Maybe Fields won't avg 1.7 points in the playoffs and a Shaq like player will fall to us at 17. Then the real defensive minded D'Antoni will surface and we all are happy.

Maybe Mike will figure out how to save timeouts, foul when he has one left, and use his genius offensive mind to allow Stat to get the rock within seven straight possessions down the stretch.

Maybe Mike will figure out Antony Randolph is better than Jared Jeffries. And having Brook Lopez and Bradon Jennings is better than Danilo Gallinari and Chris Duhon. Maybe he'll realize doing what's best for the team is better than not playing a player for his personal vendettas.

Who knows?
Click to expand...

Do you realize how exhausting you are at this point?

Don't you think having better defenders would help this team and MDA atleast marginally??

Wouldn't not having poor defenders at his most integral positions, ie PG and PF, have helped MDA to climb higher than the top 15 in d efficiency in Phoenix?

Common Red.. You're smart enough to know that if your best players are not two-way players your basically doomed from having a team that is top-ten in defensive efficiency.

And... news flash: not having solid defensive players is not an excuse. It's a real issue that will need to be addressed.

You need to have guys w the willingness and skill to execute. It cannot be done thru scheming and pleading alone sir.., although MDA does his fair share of both, often ineptly re: defense, or atleast that's how it appears on the surface..

If this team had Bosh instead of Amare and Lebron or Pierce instead of Melo, wouldn't we be a more efficient team defensively?? Sadly, history has repeated itself. Our best two players are merely average defensively at the moment. All the more reason why our next big acquisition needs to be solid to great both ways.

We need a defensive assistant. We also need serviceable bigs that fit into this system. We also need a great two-way player like Paul or Howard and to acquire better defensive players via trade, draft or FA.

I think Dalembert would really help us. I think MDA would definitely play him also. No question. That's another thing, can you please stop saying MDA doesnt play bigs. He played his best bigs all season: Turiaf, Jeffries and Amare, Sheldon too. When Mozgov was ready for another look he played him too. Alright, he didn't play Randolph. But he's neither a smart player or a hardworker. He's a Nate Robinson type.., a gimick. A guy that puts up deceiving numbers on bad teams. Would Randolph start on any of the 16 playoff teams from this season? Would he get off the pine for any of them? He's not a disciplined, fundamentally sound player.. Not yet anyway. But you and others seem to know better than MDA. BS.

You continue to overlook, disregard and minimize other pertinent factors that contribute to issues effecting the team. It's never about the players with you. Never. Why is that Red? Can you please atleast just answer this one question?

Wake up!

THE PLAYERS AND HOW THEY'RE ABLE TO EXECUTE ARE ALWAYS MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE COACH. The Lakers dynasty ending can show you that much, if your eyes and mind are open. Case and point: was Phil Jackson out coached? Or were his players outplayed/ executed?

Now apply that same line of thinking to our team and how they performed in these playoffs.

When you have players that are getting outmatched/ classed you might use a timeout when you shouldn't because your PLAYERS are stinking it up. Maybe getting the ball to the guy who hits game winners and can create shots for himself and others is also a good option in the forth. You could also give some credit to the other team and how those players are able to deny Amare the ball. Those Celtics players can defend.. Also Fields playing terribly by not keeping the D honest w knockdown shooting made it easier for the Celts to defend us. You simply can't have a top rotation player like Fields perform the way he did in the Playoffs. It made it way to easy for Boston. Or it could just all be D'antoni's fault..

Also did Spoelstra all of a sudden become a great coach or is he benefiting from greatness. I suppose he's your next target for a Doc Rivers style man-coach crush?

Seriously dude, when are you going to get this basic fact and incorporate it into your prognosis for our Knicks? You will fail at posting until you acknowledge your complete lack of comprehension of this fundamental aspect of the game of basketball.

*Players*

It's about having the best grouping of guys both ways..

MDA is still a good coach. Lets get healthy and get a competitive team together and see how he does next season. I'm not at all sold that it will be his last w the Knicks.
 
Last edited:
STAT1

STAT1

Starter
Red said:
To be honest with a valid big we may excel, even using Mike's flawed apprach because we do have talent. We could easily be a top four seed next year with our core 3 of CB, Stat, & Melo. But you already have so many bulit in excuses that if we fail next year it can never be attributed to the one most responsible.

It'll be
*we are still incomplete
*Mike is a lame duck and worried
*we need cp3
*its Herb Williams
*who could ask for more than a playoff appearence
*when we get D12 things will be different
*he preaches no one listens
*if we could just run the pick and roll
*Billups is too old
*Landry is still learning
*Douglas is on the final year of his contract


Everything but the coach.
Click to expand...

You forgot to include El Nino & Rush Limbaugh on your list.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top