this rates Mike D at 8th because this article came out October 12th....anyone sees the record now with a new team and new attitude and still playing the same bad defense would not even rank him
ronoraninainainaina
secondly as i've stated before, stat is not a back-to-the-basket player.
he's a face-up PF.
Fair, fair, fair.
I don't disagree that early days are early days, and that cohesion isn't a just add water substance, but as opposed to yourself I've commented ,via observation, on specific plays and/or lack there of.
Care to do the same?
If the offense is proven, enlighten me, via observation, on a specific play or set in either half court or transition that solidifies this offense as one that is proven. I've seen less confusion in sets from our supposedly weaker opponents.
Isn't this an insult to STAT? I can't possibly believe that posting him on the block for a baby hook or fading J in the key is beyond his measure. If anything, that's just small minded rudeness.
Categorising Amar'e as incapable of a back to the basket game is a poor defence in any argument. Dwight Howard has a baby hook and is half as capable as STAT offensively. Say no more.
So that's Amar'e covered.
Not only is that not a realistic option, but if the offense relies so heavily on one component, then it is flawed.
Now, I'm debating whether or not you've watched any games. Or at least whether you've popped out for a stroll in the second half of each game.
If you go back over our posts and compare them, mine was about basketball in the form of set plays and observations regarding the offense. Yours is about defending a coach. You've said nothing with any regard to the basketball you've watched. No comments on designed plays etc. NOTHING.
Answer me this one question when you reply. If you please.
In our wins against Chicago and Washington, what were the keys to victory? If you watched the games, you'll know.
Fair, fair, fair.
I don't disagree that early days are early days, and that cohesion isn't a just add water substance, but as opposed to yourself I've commented ,via observation, on specific plays and/or lack there of.
Care to do the same?
If the offense is proven, enlighten me, via observation, on a specific play or set in either half court or transition that solidifies this offense as one that is proven. I've seen less confusion in sets from our supposedly weaker opponents.
Isn't this an insult to STAT? I can't possibly believe that posting him on the block for a baby hook or fading J in the key is beyond his measure. If anything, that's just small minded rudeness.
Categorising Amar'e as incapable of a back to the basket game is a poor defence in any argument. Dwight Howard has a baby hook and is half as capable as STAT offensively. Say no more.
So that's Amar'e covered.
Not only is that not a realistic option, but if the offense relies so heavily on one component, then it is flawed.
Now, I'm debating whether or not you've watched any games. Or at least whether you've popped out for a stroll in the second half of each game.
If you go back over our posts and compare them, mine was about basketball in the form of set plays and observations regarding the offense. Yours is about defending a coach. You've said nothing with any regard to the basketball you've watched. No comments on designed plays etc. NOTHING.
Answer me this one question when you reply. If you please.
In our wins against Chicago and Washington, what were the keys to victory? If you watched the games, you'll know.
Are we, is MD, setting that limitation? Or is STAT not capable?
I remember I'd watched this video ,at some stage, with a low post instructional by, sadly, Carlos Boozer.
Please, give it a peek and then tell me whether or not STAT's capabilities don't include the fundamentals required to play as a post up scorer.
Pay particular attention to the in game highlights. If it works for Boozer, it works for Amar'e. If it works for Sloane, why doesn't it for D'Antoni?
Good response. I'll add one or two things...
1. IDK if Ronoranina knows this but, some of us have chronically, and meticulously detailed the deficiencies of this system from way back. These observations are nothing new.
2. As I stated in the Verdict is out thread and repeat...
To kill all this debate about Coach, his system, his past, and present, all we have to do is look at the
RESULTS!
If you're happy with them, or think they'll get better then STFU! But please don't try and bash someone for standards and expectations that don't match your own. I mean c'mon... any coach would be considered a failure given these results. And the more you big-up MDA, the more you show patience"...
the more the expectations GO UP. And the more we fail, the worse your opinion looks. Are we watching the same game?
ahhh finally a nice meaty topic to argue. the gloves are off..
listen, when i say the offense is proven what i'm referring to is those years in phoenix when him and nash had it running on all cylinders for 5 or 6 seasons. when he had players that could shoot consistently and a point guard that could pass and run the pick and roll uber effectively.
right now felton can't run the pick and roll right for two possible reasons:
either he just doesn't have the aptitude to make the decisions inherent to solid pick and roll play, ie the ability to read amare's roll off the pick properly.
...or the wing players we have don't allow amare to get open enough for felton to get a good look off the pick cause opposing defenders are helping off of perimeter shooters; see the inconsistency of gallo, inexperience of fields and the utter brick launcher that is chandler from 3 as prove positive for this part of the ineptitude of our staple play.
either way, right now the p & r is useless w felton at the helm. if it's primarily the first reason, then all we have to do is wait for the chemistry to develop between felt and stat. i suspect it's a little of both. if i'm wrong and it's the second, then our perimeter guys need to turn into knock-down shooters w the quickness or the p & r is facked!
on the other areas of suckiness w regards to our O, i just don't think these guys grasp well enough how to run it. i was watching phoenix play the lakers last night after the knick game (yes i watched the whole game, lol), and those players on phoenix run that shat crisp bro. not just nash either. they all know what they're doing in that O. THEY ACTUALLY DO THE SHAT YOU HERE MIKE D PREACHING OVER & OVER IN THE POST-GAME INTERVIEWS. they move the ball. when they have a shot they take it. they don't hesitate!! and they have guys that are knockdown shooters who hit consistently! they actually get the ball up quickly like WE should, granted nash has alot to do w that. but i've seen too many times where we take forever just to get the inbounds pass in to felt. ridiculous. this offense is designed to run a certain way and our team just doesn't do it right yet!!
now is that soley because of our coach? the system?? felton?? our lack of consistently dangerous shooters?? amare?? the newness of the team? who the fack knows.. none of us really knows, however i suspect it's not just anyone thing.
based on mike D's history i'm hesitant to point the finger at him soley and say "that's it! that's the problem".. it's just not that simple. developing a good team is like baking a cake. if some, or even one of the ingredients is missing you get a nasty ass-tasting cake. right now our team is :barf: type nasty and it's because of alot of things.. to point at our coach and say he is the one reason that the team is sinking based on his history is shortsighted imo.
what i do know is that coach basicly brought this O and nash into prominence.. has he lost it suddenly?? is it the system?? it was all nash right? the answers are complicated and elusive to pinpoint. i'm not gonna claim i have them.
the fundamental thing i want to get across here is my philosophy on the impact having good players has. right now we have stat and a bunch of role-players that have no battle-tested chemistry together to speak of. this is not enough obviously to even overcome really bad teams right now. time is the answer. as much as you and so many others here don't want to hear it, it's about getting time on the court together. it's also about guys like chandler and gallo getting better as players and more and more competent players in this system. the better and more effective our players get within the ssol the better we will be w time.
ofcourse, having more really, really good players obviously would take the edge off of the transition, as we're seeing w Miami, but all we have is stat right now. actually, miami makes all sorts of mistakes and is having it's own share of problems, but it's not "bad news bears" over there by any stretch because they have three extremely dynamic players that eliminate alot of mistakes even tho the team as a collective isn't completely familiar w spoltra's (or riley's depending how you look at it) system and lacks chemistry. it's about players ~~ always was always will be. i spanked red in this debate a couple of weeks back. why do you think donnie's trying to get steve nash over here.
one last thing, good coaching is not about what you do when your under-gunned, which we still are at this point. that's a common misconception around these boards. good coaching shows and is about having what you need to win and then making the moves necessary in training camp, walk-throughs, film sessions, and during in-game management to get your team to the best possible result. any coach who wins in the nba has had the players to do so. you can't have a good coach and no or not enough good players. when mike d has had the talent he's shown he can win consistently, just liek any other coach. and just like any other coach who's good and hasn't the players he's shown he can lose consistently. this ain't rocket science guys. players ==== wins, not coaches. pls get off mike d..
we suck primarily because we don't have the cohesion yet to overcome our lack of talent.
coolclyde D'Antoni's reputation took a bit of a hit with the success of Alvin Gentry in Phoenix this year
I'll have to get back in detail later. Now it's time to get me some MONEY!! Contracts, contracts!
But in the meantime, what about my question? The system isn't solely P&R. That's an easy way to blame Felton instead of Mike or anyone.
This thread is about the lack of success in set plays/the under utilisation and misguidance of Amar'e.
You can lead a horse to water etc etc etc.
if you read my post you wouldn't say all I touched on was the p & r w felton and amare.
ronoranina;142066listen, when i say the offense is proven what i'm referring to is those years in phoenix when him and nash had it running on all cylinders for 5 or 6 seasons. when he had players that could shoot consistently and a point guard that could pass and run the pick and roll uber effectively.
on the other areas of suckiness w regards to our O, i just don't think these guys grasp well enough how to run it. i was watching phoenix play the lakers last night after the knick game (yes i watched the whole game, lol), and those players on phoenix run that shat crisp bro. not just nash either. they all know what they're doing in that O. THEY ACTUALLY DO THE SHAT YOU HERE MIKE D PREACHING OVER & OVER IN THE POST-GAME INTERVIEWS. they move the ball. when they have a shot they take it. they don't hesitate!! and they have guys that are knockdown shooters who hit consistently! they actually get the ball up quickly like WE should, granted nash has alot to do w that. but i've seen too many times where we take forever just to get the inbounds pass in to felt. ridiculous. this offense is designed to run a certain way and our team just doesn't do it right yet!!
what i do know is that coach basicly brought this O and nash into prominence.. has he lost it suddenly??
the fundamental thing i want to get across here is my philosophy on the impact having good players has. right now we have stat and a bunch of role-players that have no battle-tested chemistry together to speak of. this is not enough obviously to even overcome really bad teams right now. time is the answer. as much as you and so many others here don't want to hear it, it's about getting time on the court together. it's also about guys like chandler and gallo getting better as players and more and more competent players in this system. the better and more effective our players get within the ssol the better we will be w time.
one last thing, good coaching is not about what you do when your under-gunned, which we still are at this point. that's a common misconception around these boards. good coaching shows and is about having what you need to win and then making the moves necessary in training camp, walk-throughs, film sessions, and during in-game management to get your team to the best possible result.
crazy 8s >>> rono pusiaf
:agreed: :gony: :boohoo:
You know, I bet you've never even played basketball. Have you? You're too small and too arrogant to be shown up. No doubt you lack the coordination to play a little man's role, so you played baseball or something the likes of that.You have zero experience coaching basketball, so I'll take D'Antoni's moves over your non credible ass. Even if it fails, you're not qualified to speak on basketball decisions. So stop pretending like you are. Fool.