MDA does it again...

nyk_nyk

All Star
You're spot on. This game was WON. First off we should have pressured the ball on the way up court. Second, you have to have Jared Jeffries in the game. Whe I saw these two things not happening I knew he wasnt going to do the smart thing.This coach is clueless...

Two things I was livid about when it happened. You don't let them bring the ball up and do what they want to do. Secondly, I would have had Jeffries in the game to guard Pierce. I know Shump is a good on ball defender but when guarding against a 3 I'd prefer some length. If you asked MOA who his best defenders are I'm sure he'd mention Jeffries, so his benching in that situation was weird. Also, Davis was doing a great job of hounding his man up court on nearly every play, so not sure why that wasn't taken into consideration in terms of disrupting the backcourt.
 
We have a great mix of talent that isn't being used to their potenial, instead they are being used to run a system. I'm almost positive that any other NBA coach will get better results from this group of ballers. The only good thing I see in us loosing these games is that the loses increases the chances of this being D'Ant's last year.
 

wynton

Rookie
Two things I was livid about when it happened. You don't let them bring the ball up and do what they want to do.

This made me irate too. I understand not pressing Rondo aggressively in the backcourt with Lin, if you're worried that he'll blow past him right away. But if Lin - or whoever - just got within 10 feet of Rondo in the backcourt, then he would have had to pick the ball up and start the clock. May not have seen like a big deal then, but these kinds of mistakes are completely unnecessary.

And I can't let end this post without asking again: has anyone EVER come up with an explanation why they purposely switch constantly? At this point, I'd just like to hear the rationale.
 

skisloper

Starter
Lin & Shump bust there chops to get that 3 point lead with 18 seconds left in the game....
with Boston having no timeouts to take the ball out at halfcourt....
Knicks WIN with Rondo & Lin taking foul shots.
:thumbsup:
Headcoaches Jax, Sloan, Pop, Doc, Thibs being up by 3 points with 18 seconds
left in the game, plus their oponent have no timeouts wouldve foul their oponents
on every possession 10 times out of 10.

Doc Rivers told Dantonio not to foul so u are wrong.
 
90% of the coaches in the league win this game. There are a couple more idiots that might not have. If the situation was reversed you think Doc lets Novak or Melo get off a 3 point shot? No way in hell...
 

Kiyaman

Legend
We have a great mix of talent that isn't being used to their potenial, instead they are being used to run a system. I'm almost positive that any other NBA coach will get better results from this group of ballers. The only good thing I see in us loosing these games is that the loses increases the chances of this being D'Ant's last year.


Our Knicks players talent level should stay above .520
Tyson Chandler & Lin-Sanity prove that in 5 games in 7 days without any Knicks practice....
using talent & instint to win 7 consecutive games.

Dantoni's cluelessness and personal-DNP....it has become hard for a team of players to
get on the same-page with Dantoni.
What Dantoni had in Phoenix with the players are the oposite in New York.
 

Knicks#7

Rookie
D'Antoni is a joke of a coach, and as long as he is here, this team is nothing more than a joke. I really want to stop watching this mess with this guy running the show, but I have been a fan for along time and hopefully this is almost the end of D'Antoni
 

KingofNy

Starter
It has nothing to do with faith. A smart coach would foul Pierce in that situation and never allow the other team to have any chance of winning.

I can't see how some people here don't realize this? Blows my mind. I guess there has to be some morons in the world so the rest of us can be smart.

MDA has lost many more games for this team than he's ever won and yesterday's loss should've been an easy win. I haven't seen us lose a game we had in the bag since Reggie Miller killed us 12 or so years ago. Fire this coach and just promote Woodson already... PLEASE!!! I can't take this dumbass coach anymore.
 

Weissenberg

Grid or Riot
D'Antoni has faith in his defense...lets not be dramatic, Pierce made a lucky shot.
Celtics made those lucky shots in 7 over last 11 games we played them... 3 times they outscored us and 1 time we won (probably because Pierce was injured). Lucky bastards! :teeth:
 

mafra

Legend
The entire play just shows how D'antoni has zero plan when it comes to strategizing on defense, to get a stop when the team needs one late in the game. Doc Rivers has run circles around him for years. Folks, under D'antoni we've never won a game in BOS.

First of all, regardless of your philosophy to foul in that situation (or at what point under 18 seconds), the play started off on the wrong foot.

1) You do not allow Rondo to roll ball up court, leaving him open until he crosses half court, allowing BOS to start their offense WHERE THEY WANTED TO.

2) You have to waste your foul. You had one to burn. You fake pressure, force Rondo to pick up the ball, make them start the offense under duress, and then foul as soon as they start doing something. Clock is probably at about 11-14 seconds. Their ball coming out on the side.

3) If you're just gonna play defense, not foul, then YOU MUST TAKE AWAY THE 3-point shot. All 5 guys should be playing around the line, and preventing PP & RA from getting into good position.

Personally, I would have pulled Shumpert aside. Told him to play defense straight up, but if given the chance... When clock gets under 8-10... If PP dribbles or tries to movewith the ball, instead of chasing and rushing to get into position, just reach in and go for the ball. FOUL HIM.

What's the point having Shump shadow him and then stay planted on the floor and watch a man w/ rings take a clean shot w/out hands in his face?

PP was a few feet behind the arc. He was moving into position to shoot the 3. If Shump was told to do so, he fouls PP as he is dribbling there. 6 seconds. He's shooting 2 shots. NY wins.
 

fender0577

Rotation player
The entire play just shows how D'antoni has zero plan when it comes to strategizing on defense, to get a stop when the team needs one late in the game. Doc Rivers has run circles around him for years. Folks, under D'antoni we've never won a game in BOS.

First of all, regardless of your philosophy to foul in that situation (or at what point under 18 seconds), the play started off on the wrong foot.

1) You do not allow Rondo to roll ball up court, leaving him open until he crosses half court, allowing BOS to start their offense WHERE THEY WANTED TO.

2) You have to waste your foul. You had one to burn. You fake pressure, force Rondo to pick up the ball, make them start the offense under duress, and then foul as soon as they start doing something. Clock is probably at about 11-14 seconds. Their ball coming out on the side.

3) If you're just gonna play defense, not foul, then YOU MUST TAKE AWAY THE 3-point shot. All 5 guys should be playing around the line, and preventing PP & RA from getting into good position.

Personally, I would have pulled Shumpert aside. Told him to play defense straight up, but if given the chance... When clock gets under 8-10... If PP dribbles or tries to movewith the ball, instead of chasing and rushing to get into position, just reach in and go for the ball. FOUL HIM.

What's the point having Shump shadow him and then stay planted on the floor and watch a man w/ rings take a clean shot w/out hands in his face?

PP was a few feet behind the arc. He was moving into position to shoot the 3. If Shump was told to do so, he fouls PP as he is dribbling there. 6 seconds. He's shooting 2 shots. NY wins.
:agreed::agreed::agreed:
 

nyk_nyk

All Star
Knicks' D'Antoni defends decision not to foul Celtics

By MARC BERMAN

Last Updated: 5:43 PM, March 5, 2012
DALLAS - Knicks coach Mike D'Antoni went on a long rant about his least-favorite subject - his refusal to intentioanlly foul when his team is up three points in the final 10 seconds.
D'Antoni's philosophy has been unbending since taking over the Knicks and has met a lot of bad endings. Paul Pierce hit the 3-point dagger over Iman Shumpert with 4.9 seconds left to send Sunday's game to overtime and the Celtics carried home the victory. It was a very tough shot, off-balance, but D'Antoni still heard the critics back home.

According to D'Antoni, he said the stat service the Knicks use confirms his belief and he said most coaches agree with him. D'Antoni said the service has tracked games since 1995 and teams who don't foul with 10 seconds left or less and up three, win roughly 93 percent of the games.
Teams who do foul in the same circumstance win 90 percent of the games. D'Antoni said players also prefer to play straight-up defense and not worry about fouling intentionally to extend the game.
?It's a three percentage points difference,?? D'Antoni said after Monday's practice at AmericanAirlines Center. "With 10 seconds to go you have a helluva chance to win. You ask most players, they don?t want to foul. Because you don?t want to be that guy to have to go down (the other end) and make those two foul shots.''
D'Antoni feels players like Pierce are too smart to not turn the intentional foul into a shooting foul.

"The philosophy is not to foul but you say that with an asterisk,'' D'Antoni said. "Down below 5 seconds and they?re in the 2-point (range) and you can get a good shot at somebody, you do it. But Paul Pierce has the ball and he?s like this (in shooting motion). You can?t foul him. Because he?ll go up. He?s smart enough.

"Now do you foul him with 10 seconds and you just do everything we just did. If you get it down to eight seconds, maybe. They make theirs (free throws). They foul you immediately. Seven seconds left. You miss one foul shot. They?re coming at you and you?re defending the two.'
"You put the onus on the referee to make a call that's dubious,'' D'Antoni added. "If you pick the ball up, it?s a shooting foul. That?s why most coaches won?t do it. It?s hard.''

D'Antoni gave a curious answer when asked if defensive assistant Mike Woodson has same approach.
"I don?t think that really matters, to be honest with you,'' D'Antoni said. "Because guess who gets fired? But he is in agreement. I don?t know because I don?t think I?ve asked him.
 

metrocard

Legend
You guys really overrate this whole D'Antoni obsession. Worst coach ever is Isiah and D'Antoni is a huge upgrade over him.
 

metrocard

Legend
What qualifies anyone here as a scout for a good coach? You know-it-alls really have it all figured out.

Its easy to blame the coach, but to say D'Antoni lost the game is truely psycho.

If you watched the game, the refs beat the Knicks, not the Celtics.

For example; this was a technical




This game was rigged, no matter who the coach is, Knicks were going to lose.

So please... stop crying and being so dramatic over D'Antoni; D'Antoni gave you Lin and Steve Novak two guys who would started a career in Europe because nobody in the NBA wanted to give them a chance.
 
Last edited:

fender0577

Rotation player
What qualifies anyone here as a scout for a good coach? You know-it-alls really have it all figured out.

Its easy to blame the coach, but to say D'Antoni lost the game is truely psycho.

If you watched the game, the refs beat the Knicks, not the Celtics.

For example; this was a technical




This game was rigged, no matter who the coach is, Knicks were going to lose.

So please... stop crying and being so dramatic over D'Antoni; D'Antoni gave you Lin and Steve Novak two guys who would started a career in Europe because nobody in the NBA wanted to give them a chance.
Dude, lin was sent to the d-league twice, and only played because TD, was playing the worst bball in the NBA, and Novack only played because, JORTS got hurt.Remember, C'ANToni was on his way out, so to say he gave us, those to is reaching, abit.I wouldn't say he's a huge upgrade, over anyone, stop it.
 

fender0577

Rotation player
Knicks' D'Antoni defends decision not to foul Celtics

By MARC BERMAN

Last Updated: 5:43 PM, March 5, 2012
DALLAS - Knicks coach Mike D'Antoni went on a long rant about his least-favorite subject - his refusal to intentioanlly foul when his team is up three points in the final 10 seconds.
D'Antoni's philosophy has been unbending since taking over the Knicks and has met a lot of bad endings. Paul Pierce hit the 3-point dagger over Iman Shumpert with 4.9 seconds left to send Sunday's game to overtime and the Celtics carried home the victory. It was a very tough shot, off-balance, but D'Antoni still heard the critics back home.

According to D'Antoni, he said the stat service the Knicks use confirms his belief and he said most coaches agree with him. D'Antoni said the service has tracked games since 1995 and teams who don't foul with 10 seconds left or less and up three, win roughly 93 percent of the games.
Teams who do foul in the same circumstance win 90 percent of the games. D'Antoni said players also prefer to play straight-up defense and not worry about fouling intentionally to extend the game.
?It's a three percentage points difference,?? D'Antoni said after Monday's practice at AmericanAirlines Center. "With 10 seconds to go you have a helluva chance to win. You ask most players, they don?t want to foul. Because you don?t want to be that guy to have to go down (the other end) and make those two foul shots.''
D'Antoni feels players like Pierce are too smart to not turn the intentional foul into a shooting foul.

"The philosophy is not to foul but you say that with an asterisk,'' D'Antoni said. "Down below 5 seconds and they?re in the 2-point (range) and you can get a good shot at somebody, you do it. But Paul Pierce has the ball and he?s like this (in shooting motion). You can?t foul him. Because he?ll go up. He?s smart enough.

"Now do you foul him with 10 seconds and you just do everything we just did. If you get it down to eight seconds, maybe. They make theirs (free throws). They foul you immediately. Seven seconds left. You miss one foul shot. They?re coming at you and you?re defending the two.'
"You put the onus on the referee to make a call that's dubious,'' D'Antoni added. "If you pick the ball up, it?s a shooting foul. That?s why most coaches won?t do it. It?s hard.''

D'Antoni gave a curious answer when asked if defensive assistant Mike Woodson has same approach.
"I don?t think that really matters, to be honest with you,'' D'Antoni said. "Because guess who gets fired? But he is in agreement. I don?t know because I don?t think I?ve asked him.
Good find, but it's kinda sad that, C'ANToni is in that 7% who lose,LOL.:boohoo:
 
What qualifies anyone here as a scout for a good coach? You know-it-alls really have it all figured out.

Its easy to blame the coach, but to say D'Antoni lost the game is truely psycho.

If you watched the game, the refs beat the Knicks, not the Celtics.

For example; this was a technical




This game was rigged, no matter who the coach is, Knicks were going to lose.

So please... stop crying and being so dramatic over D'Antoni; D'Antoni gave you Lin and Steve Novak two guys who would started a career in Europe because nobody in the NBA wanted to give them a chance.

Although I might agree that the game was rigged, we still should have won. No matter what happened before the 18.9 secs fiasco for all intents and purposes MDA didnt play this game correctly. There were several mistakes.
 
Top