LETS END IT NOW: Mike D'antoni Edition

Do you support Mike D'antoni as our coach?


  • Total voters
    30
  • This poll will close: .
I generally support the theory that defense and rebounding win championships, that being said, one would presume I would hate D'antoni. However, in basketball your head coach does not always have to be the one to emphasize defense in order for you to be successful, as has been the case with the Spurs and Popovich's success recently. For example, you could take the coach with the most championships ever, Phil Jackson, who is known as an offensive genius and the father of the triangle offense. The Kobe/MJ comparisons still go on, and rightfully so, just look at the championship, statistics and accolades. What sets these two players apart from their competition, other than their ability to score the ball with ease and in a variety of ways on the offensive end and their unwillingness to accept defeat, is their dedication to greatness on the defensive end on the floor. Both were/have been selected to the all nba defensive first team 9 times while averaging more than 1.5 steals/game and 5 boards/game.

The point is that despite Phil Jackson dedicating himself to offense, his teams were still able to win championships, at times doing so in a dominant fashion, because his star players played on both ends of the floor. Players of that caliber demand more out of their teammates and push them to be better.

In Phoenix Mike D had an MVP point guard, a beast of a pf and an athletic freak in marion, but he was the only one out of the three who could play a lick of defense and was the least talented of the group.

All of that being said, this summer the knicks have the opportunity to start over with a fresh core. If the players they chose to make up that core are committed to playing defense I do not see any reason why the knicks cannot be a championship caliber team by the 2011 season at the latest. There is an opportunity to erase almost everything and start new this summer so until Mike D gets some talent to work with I think we should just give him a pass and wait to see what he does starting next season.
 

KBlack25

Starter
Obviously the hate for Mike D'Antoni is well documented on this site...and Amar'e's statements don't help his cause. But Amar'e is also a moron. So, it's now Mike D'Antoni's fault that almost 2 years after he left Amar'e still just flat out refuses to play defense?

Honestly, look at Amar'e's play...it's not so much that he lacks defensive skill, it almost looks like he doesn't even try. It would be one thing if D'Antoni was still there and he looked lost, but to not even try is inexcusable. Playing defense should be half of this guys job, even if his coach 2 years ago didn't emphasize it, that doesn't mean it isn't something he should have worked on on his own...As BringHoopinHome said, sometimes it looks like those guys on the former Suns couldn't give two shits about defense, especially Amar'e. And with D'Antoni gone, Amar'e has no one to blame for his lack of defensive effort but himself.

And as far as Mike D'Antoni's firing...I understand why all of his detractors want him gone. I have been steadfast in stating that he should have played Douglas and I would have liked to see what we had in Hill, but at the same time I really don't see how anyone would have done all that much better.

The Ewing idea is well documented on this site, no need to rehash it...I simply don't agree that he would have turned this team around, because honestly nobody could have turned this team around. Walsh came in with the mission to get this team under the cap, that's what he did. He HAS to say "We are trying to make the playoffs," you can't go ahead and admit you are all about moving Jared Jeffries by any means necessary. That's bad PR. But be real, we all know

As LJ said, a first year coach coming in here would have been career suicide...look at how ready half of us are to get rid of this guy who HAS had a decent track record in the last 7 years...Can you imagine what would happen if a guy without such a resume came in here? Shit, if we were even half as bad as we are now, all these D'Antoni haters would be on here screaming bloody murder for his head to be chopped off...the only saving grace for D'Antoni HAS been his resume...without that the guy has nothing, and the guys on his band wagon really have nothing. A first year coach would be better off swallowing a bottle of Tylenol than coming in and trying to survive in this situation.

I know someone will come on here and say "If we had another coach we would have gotten [Player X] in the draft and not Gallinari," but there is only weak circumstantial evidence to back up that point, I'm honestly not entirely sold we wouldn't have ****ed up the 6th pick no matter who we had coaching, based on our track record. Shit, I wouldn't be surprised if we would have traded it for Theo Ratliff or something (obviously I am exaggerating). None of us KNOW what would have happened with #6 2 years ago or #8 last year had we had a different coach, we can speculate but the fact is I don't even that we would have drafted Lopez if there were intentions to play Z-Bo/Lee at 4/5 (not totally outlandish in my opinion).

Knicks fans, we can sit here all night and rehash the past...shit you can trace it so far back to the 1996 NBA Draft when we ****ed up two draft picks IN A ROW. You can trace it back to trading Patrick Ewing which began indulgence in fat contracts and fatter players. You can trace it back to trading Nene Hilario and Marcus Camby for Antonio McDyess. You can trace it back to the entire Isiah era.

But rehashing doesn't do any good...the fact is, right now, we have Mike D'Antoni, a coach that a lot of good players around the league seem to like, a coach that has had success in the past (whether or not you think it's tainted, it exists).

We have Donnie Walsh, who despite the skepticism has gotten rid of some impossibly bad contracts (see: James, Jerome) to get us under the cap.

We have cap space for two max guys.

We have the greatest ****ing city in the world.

I just don't see what good can happen in firing Mike D'Antoni, it makes the situation here look less stable (read: less attractive to free agents and any potential coach) and really does nothing for us in the short term. If D'Antoni's wide open offense fails to land us any free agents or it does and it fails to land us wins, then I will be right here saying this guy needs to get fired. But at this point, it'd be spinning our wheels, and might even put us in reverse.

Now, on the other hand, if LeBron says he wants to pick his own coach...
 

SSj4Wingzero

All Star
My question is this:

Does the Suns' current record and amazing performance mean that, maybe, it's not really D'Antoni who deserves the credit of those years?

I mean...is it possible that it's just Steve Nash being the amazing Steve Nash? Just saying.
 

New New York

Quiet Storm
My question is this:

Does the Suns' current record and amazing performance mean that, maybe, it's not really D'Antoni who deserves the credit of those years?

I mean...is it possible that it's just Steve Nash being the amazing Steve Nash? Just saying.


Alvin Gentry on his success this year: "I am running what Mike ran because he made a beliver out of me" "Its a system that really works"

True having the right type of player (ie. Nash) running the system is a major factor, but just having Nash did not help Terry Porter last year!


Winning Cure's all

And to win a coach needs talent, in college good coaching alone will carry a team to an above .500 record and maybe even to The Final Four (see Jim Larranega of GMU), in The NBA you need the players!

Doc Rivers is regardes as one of the best coaches in the league, but the two seaons prior to obtaining the "Big 3" the Doc Rivers coached Celtics were 57 and 117 with a team you could argue that is more talented than our current roster playing in a much weaker Eastern Conference! We are actually are going to finish with a better two season record than them.


Larry Brown his first two seasons as Sixers coach he was a combined 59-73 (second season was the lockout year), once he was done tweaking the roster the next two seasons The Sixers went 105-59 with a trip to The Finals.


Phil Jackson goes 87-77 and people began to question if he could win without two superstars (just like people question if Dantoni can do it without Nash & Co.) The Lakers bring in Gasol and are now poised for their 3rd Finals appearence.


Point being....only time will tell, let Dantoni get talent like these guys were able to get before turning things around and then we will see what he can do.


I know the argument is not about wins and losses, but for sure each of the three mentioned coaches had their approaches questioned before things got better, once they started winning the critics hushed!
 

TR1LL10N

Hannibal Lecter
Alvin Gentry on his success this year: "I am running what Mike ran because he made a beliver out of me" "Its a system that really works"

True having the right type of player (ie. Nash) running the system is a major factor, but just having Nash did not help Terry Porter last year!


Winning Cure's all

And to win a coach needs talent, in college good coaching alone will carry a team to an above .500 record and maybe even to The Final Four (see Jim Larranega of GMU), in The NBA you need the players!

Doc Rivers is regardes as one of the best coaches in the league, but the two seaons prior to obtaining the "Big 3" the Doc Rivers coached Celtics were 57 and 117 with a team you could argue that is more talented than our current roster playing in a much weaker Eastern Conference! We are actually are going to finish with a better two season record than them.


Larry Brown his first two seasons as Sixers coach he was a combined 59-73 (second season was the lockout year), once he was done tweaking the roster the next two seasons The Sixers went 105-59 with a trip to The Finals.


Phil Jackson goes 87-77 and people began to question if he could win without two superstars (just like people question if Dantoni can do it without Nash & Co.) The Lakers bring in Gasol and are now poised for their 3rd Finals appearence.


Point being....only time will tell, let Dantoni get talent like these guys were able to get before turning things around and then we will see what he can do.


I know the argument is not about wins and losses, but for sure each of the three mentioned coaches had their approaches questioned before things got better, once they started winning the critics hushed!


Powerful post ...well done. A rep point for you.
 

Knicker23

Benchwarmer
There are very few coaches that can make a good team out of okay players... the majority of popular winning coaches have skilled players that win games for them.... at the end of the day, drawing up a plan and calling a play can only go so far; it's the players playing not the coaches... take jordan away from Phil Jackson, the bulls wouldn't be what they were.. take kobe from lakers, Phil Jackson's coaching wouldn't make up for a okay set of players...

the obvious example is Mike Brown... you can have someone who knows nothing about basketball coaching that team and theyd have a 55 + win season.... the fact that he got coach of the year last yr is a joke.. take LeBron away, lets see how good he does..

A 'good' coach can 'salvage' or 'get by' with okay talent.. if you have a .500 w % without a big name i'd say your a good coach... if our record was really bad instead of really terrible i'd say Dantoni did an okay job, but, like you can sub anyone in for Mike Brown and have a 55+ team, we could have had anyone in there in place of Dantoni and lost as many games as we did...

All that being said, talent always > coaching... so i suppose it's only fair that we give Dantoni some talent this summer and see how we do next season... as bad as he may look after his time here so far, he's had squat to work with...

funny in general though how coaches like Brown or Doc Rivers win these awards as a result of nothing more than acquiring talent.. you really think the coach had anything to do w the Cavs turning it around or the Celtics going from 0 to hero in one yr... I guess it's a good sign the way the stars seem to be aligning for the Knicks the way they did for the Celtics and the cavs... we've done the hard part of 'being the laughingstock of the league', next step is 'acquire very good talent' followed by 'have an incredible turn-around season' 'Dantoni wins coach of yr' :smokin:
 

New New York

Quiet Storm
There are very few coaches that can make a good team out of okay players... the majority of popular winning coaches have skilled players that win games for them.... at the end of the day, drawing up a plan and calling a play can only go so far; it's the players playing not the coaches... take jordan away from Phil Jackson, the bulls wouldn't be what they were.. take kobe from lakers, Phil Jackson's coaching wouldn't make up for a okay set of players...

the obvious example is Mike Brown... you can have someone who knows nothing about basketball coaching that team and theyd have a 55 + win season.... the fact that he got coach of the year last yr is a joke.. take LeBron away, lets see how good he does..

A 'good' coach can 'salvage' or 'get by' with okay talent.. if you have a .500 w % without a big name i'd say your a good coach... if our record was really bad instead of really terrible i'd say Dantoni did an okay job, but, like you can sub anyone in for Mike Brown and have a 55+ team, we could have had anyone in there in place of Dantoni and lost as many games as we did...

All that being said, talent always > coaching... so i suppose it's only fair that we give Dantoni some talent this summer and see how we do next season... as bad as he may look after his time here so far, he's had squat to work with...

funny in general though how coaches like Brown or Doc Rivers win these awards as a result of nothing more than acquiring talent.. you really think the coach had anything to do w the Cavs turning it around or the Celtics going from 0 to hero in one yr... I guess it's a good sign the way the stars seem to be aligning for the Knicks the way they did for the Celtics and the cavs... we've done the hard part of 'being the laughingstock of the league', next step is 'acquire very good talent' followed by 'have an incredible turn-around season' 'Dantoni wins coach of yr' :smokin:

Very well put!
 

KBlack25

Starter
SLY1984 said:
2 to 1 ratio of d'antoni haters to lovers.. d'antoni FAILED...

Why? Because people on this site don't like him? Not really a fail, I don't think D'Antoni could care less what KO thinks of him, it's ultimately just a fan site.

Also, the sample size is a meager 25, not enough to make a fair assessment.

D'Antoni has it a bit rough, ever since he outcast Stephon Marbury, the guy stood no chance of coming back into many people's good graces on this site...if he won 50 this year, I think we'd see Steph fans saying "Imagine if we had Steph?!?! We would have won 70! Fire D'Antoni!!!!"
 

nyk_nyk

All Star
Why? Because people on this site don't like him? Not really a fail, I don't think D'Antoni could care less what KO thinks of him, it's ultimately just a fan site.

Also, the sample size is a meager 25, not enough to make a fair assessment.

D'Antoni has it a bit rough, ever since he outcast Stephon Marbury, the guy stood no chance of coming back into many people's good graces on this site...if he won 50 this year, I think we'd see Steph fans saying "Imagine if we had Steph?!?! We would have won 70! Fire D'Antoni!!!!"

The sample size is only 25 but I guarantee it's a good representation of how the general public feels. All 25 of us represent various basketball enthusiasts, so i'd say its pretty accurate.

Thread Done.
 

KBlack25

Starter
The sample size is only 25 but I guarantee it's a good representation of how the general public feels. All 25 of us represent various basketball enthusiasts, so i'd say its pretty accurate.

Thread Done.

The sample size is not what any statistical analyst would ever classify as accurate.

1) It's self-selecting. Only people taking the time to sign up, log in to this site, click this thread and participate in the poll are counted.

2) The people most likely to do the above are more hardcore fans, those most likely to be critical of decisions (because they look at things very closely, and in some cases make mountains out of molehills)...there are very few casual fans (see: The General Public) on this board at all.

It's not accurate.

You are wrong.

Thanks for playing.
 

nyk_nyk

All Star
The sample size is not what any statistical analyst would ever classify as accurate.

1) It's self-selecting. Only people taking the time to sign up, log in to this site, click this thread and participate in the poll are counted.

2) The people most likely to do the above are more hardcore fans, those most likely to be critical of decisions (because they look at things very closely, and in some cases make mountains out of molehills)...there are very few casual fans (see: The General Public) on this board at all.

It's not accurate.

You are wrong.

Thanks for playing.

I'm guessing i'ts not accurate because your riding the lower percentile huh? You need more people.

THREAD DONE.
 

KBlack25

Starter
I'm guessing i'ts not accurate because your riding the lower percentile huh? You need more people.

THREAD DONE.

No it's not accurate because of the nature of the small sample size...It's too self-selecting and not widespread enough to be an accurate indication of the general public...It's quite a well-documented phenomena in statistics:

However, many polls are unscientific, such as most online polls you take using a computer, telephone surveys in which you must call a certain number, or mail-in questionaires in magazines or sent to you by charities. Such surveys suffer from the fault that the sample is self-selected, that is, you decide whether you wish to participate. Self-selected samples are not likely to be representative of the population for various reasons:
  • The readers of a particular magazine or the contributors to a specific charity are likely to differ from the rest of the population in other respects.
  • Those who take the time and trouble to volunteer for a poll are more motivated than the average person, and probably care more about the survey subject.
  • Many such polls allow individuals to vote more than once, thus allowing the results to be skewed by people who stuff the ballot box.
For example, some media outlets sponsor scientific polls but, when the results are reported in their online edition, they are sometimes accompanied by an online poll using a self-selected sample and asking some of the same questions. It is instructive to compare the two, as the results are usually very different.
So, self-selected samples are almost inevitably biased and are, at best, a form of entertainment. They cannot be trusted as a source of information about the population as a whole.


http://www.fallacyfiles.org/readpoll.html
 

New New York

Quiet Storm
Why? Because people on this site don't like him? Not really a fail, I don't think D'Antoni could care less what KO thinks of him, it's ultimately just a fan site.

Also, the sample size is a meager 25, not enough to make a fair assessment.

D'Antoni has it a bit rough, ever since he outcast Stephon Marbury, the guy stood no chance of coming back into many people's good graces on this site...if he won 50 this year, I think we'd see Steph fans saying "Imagine if we had Steph?!?! We would have won 70! Fire D'Antoni!!!!"[/quote]


I started to mention something about how the "Fire Dantoni" crowd consist of mostly all Marbury loyalist!

They talk about wins and losses and coaching philosophy as the reason they want him gone, but I bet you that if he played Steph, The Knicks re-signed him this year, it was him (not David Lee) in the All Star game this and we had the same exact record, then this thread would not even be created!


I bet you they would be claiming Dantoni is still a top 5 head coach, and would be willing to admit that our team sucks because of the "2010 Plan"

I have ex-girlfriends who held less grudges than these "Team Starbury" cats!!
 

KING~POETIQ

The One and Only
I started to mention something about how the "Fire Dantoni" crowd consist of mostly all Marbury loyalist!

They talk about wins and losses and coaching philosophy as the reason they want him gone


Seriously??? SMH

Most of the d'antoni haters want him gone because of all the bad coaching strategies and moves he has made, not because of "wins and losses" or "coaching philosophy."

Please don't repeat this in future arguments. Thanks
 

KING~POETIQ

The One and Only
Why? Because people on this site don't like him? Not really a fail, I don't think D'Antoni could care less what KO thinks of him, it's ultimately just a fan site.

Also, the sample size is a meager 25, not enough to make a fair assessment.

D'Antoni has it a bit rough, ever since he outcast Stephon Marbury, the guy stood no chance of coming back into many people's good graces on this site...if he won 50 this year, I think we'd see Steph fans saying "Imagine if we had Steph?!?! We would have won 70! Fire D'Antoni!!!!"

He fails because the majority of real hardcore knick fans have decided that he has failed...plain and simple :lol:
 

KBlack25

Starter
He fails because the majority of real hardcore knick fans have decided that he has failed...plain and simple :lol:

17 is the majority of real hardcore Knick fans? That means there are a total of 33 or less Hardcore Knicks Fans on the planet? Hmm...Can't say I buy that...seems like these 17 "hardcore Knick fans" are the same people that would have China-league player that nobody in the NBA wanted at any price Stephon Marbury running this team? :D

I'm sure D'Antoni, with his millions of dollars, really doesn't care what 25 Knicks fans have to say...
 
Last edited:

Red

TYPE-A
D'Antoni had...

multiple MVP Nash
perrinial allstars Johnson
Amare
quality role players in Bell. Barbosa
had Marbury
and Q Rich (who led the league in 3's)
plus more...

and failed! Didn't even make the finals with those players.

We've got a rookie 6'10 project that has had back issues
Douglas a rookie
Chandler, Curry plus whoever we sign...

after the stubborness we witnessed...

after the poor rotations

lack of use of big men

and (from the horses mouth) Amare a former player telling us D'Ant DOESN'T teach Defense...

but I'm supposed to believe in him. And supporters think we will be serious contenders with him...

how and why?

Has he changed? Has he adapted? Has he evolved?

Besides being a Knick coach what's the optimistic view based on? You see what happened in PHX with INFINITLY BETTER players (so far)

do you realize our roster probably WONT be better than he had with PHX which means there's a very high possibility we won't even be that good.

so I guess we should be happy IF we make the playoffs next year....?
 

KBlack25

Starter
Red...you don't have to believe in him, you are entitled to your opinion.

But just because 17 people say they don't believe in someone doesn't mean that person has failed.
 

Slit

Rookie
And supporters think we will be serious contenders with him...

how and why?
We'll find next Kevin Durant in the D-league. Or better still 5 Durants in different sizes to fill all positions.
Believe!:gony:
 
Top