Dantoni is the reason for Mozgov's Success

[KBlack25]

Its easy. Follow their actions. Not difficult to determine at all.

If a woman tells you she loves you and you get home and Billy Big Dick is sneaking out the window you know she doesnt love you.

When MDA says he has confidence in someone and sits them for two months he doesnt have confidence.

Not hard at all.

Follow the actions my friend follow the actions...

Wow...my 11 year old cousin could draft a more relevant analogy.

Where did you get this scale from?

After the game he had 60% confidence, now he has 80%.

60% of what? 80% of what? How did he go from having 3/5ths of his total "confidence meter" to 4/5ths of his total "confidence meter"? What is the confidence interval in these percentages?

Please, enlighten us on your well-crafted, well-researched confidence meter and scale and give us a measure and formula whereby we can define other people's confidence in those around them merely by external surface-level viewing.

Show us your detailed formulation as to how you arrived at 60%, as opposed to 40%, or 50%, or 59.3%, or 64% or any real number between 1-100. What exactly went into this highly advanced psychological calculation? What formulaic properties did you use to give us such data?

Or maybe you just made up these numbers from the top of your head while positing it as fact and have no research or data to back up your numbers and merely massaged the facts to again make a pointless, incorrect, horribly misconstrued argument positing things that are merely speculative as factual.

I will give you this though, for someone who makes up facts and pulls numbers out of thin air with no sort of research or backing besides surface-level research and no formulation of how you reached 60% or 80% or any sort of ability to make this a good or even passable case study, you sure have conviced yourself that you gave "facts".

 

[werewolf16]

Well it always feels good when your coach allows you do mistakes on the court. I mean when a solid player like Mozgov is given permission by the coach, he could become a good player.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out tonight's Knicks vs Los Angeles Lakers game on this site <--sportiechannel.blogspot.com

 

[Clyde & The Pearl]

Wow...my 11 year old cousin could draft a more relevant analogy.

Where did you get this scale from?

After the game he had 60% confidence, now he has 80%.

60% of what? 80% of what? How did he go from having 3/5ths of his total "confidence meter" to 4/5ths of his total "confidence meter"? What is the confidence interval in these percentages?

Please, enlighten us on your well-crafted, well-researched confidence meter and scale and give us a measure and formula whereby we can define other people's confidence in those around them merely by external surface-level viewing.

Show us your detailed formulation as to how you arrived at 60%, as opposed to 40%, or 50%, or 59.3%, or 64% or any real number between 1-100. What exactly went into this highly advanced psychological calculation? What formulaic properties did you use to give us such data?

Or maybe you just made up these numbers from the top of your head while positing it as fact and have no research or data to back up your numbers and merely massaged the facts to again make a pointless, incorrect, horribly misconstrued argument positing things that are merely speculative as factual.

I will give you this though, for someone who makes up facts and pulls numbers out of thin air with no sort of research or backing besides surface-level research and no formulation of how you reached 60% or 80% or any sort of ability to make this a good or even passable case study, you sure have conviced yourself that you gave "facts".

You're really enamored with that confidence meter. Lets concentrate on a fact that you failed to reply to.

You keep mentioning Moz like the coaching staff had this big revelation and suddenly said Moz is READY. They didnt. They got lucky. This kid would still be benched if we didnt have injuries..

Care to lamely dispute this?

 

[knicksman20]

I haven't read all of the posts in here, but I dunno if you can attribute Moz's success with D'Antoni. Mozgov is now doing what he showed in Europe, and even flashes of it against Team USA in the World Championships...D'Antoni didn't teach him his height, athleticism, and ability to be a presence around the rim...he had that coming into the league. Getting acclimated with the NBA game is where he needed to develop and as soon as D'Antoni saw signs of growing pains, he benched him. Now whether or not Moz keeps it politically correct in front of reporters is a moot point.

Young players need time on the court, in game situations, to develop as well as competent coaching.

It's one thing if Moz is showing added nuances to his game that he didn't have before...but it's another to say that he's successful because the coach game him some playing time (when 2 of our 7, sometimes 8, man rotation was out?) His problem before was catching entry passes (which is still a bit of an issue), silly fouls (still there to an extent, just not as many as quickly), and looking straight lost.

His game against Detroit looked well put together...question is, how do we know he wasn't primed and ready for that game in late December? If you're gonna use the argument that we're not in practice so we we have no proof that MDA wasn't contributing to Mozgov's growth, then I can use the same logic and say that you have no proof that he was. What if Moz was just under a lot of pressure to come out and perform like a seasoned vet. when he was a rookie still acclimating himself to the NBA game? And instead of MDA playing his big...he benches him for a smaller lineup and shorter rotation and proceeds to watch us get murdered on the boards and run out of our own gym on occasion.

I can't give MDA any credit when I'm sitting in the Garden against the Clipps and the dude in front of me turns around and is like "can you explain to me why we're shooting 9% from ****ing 3?" I look up, and it drops down to 8% as we take and miss another 3. The head coach of that NBA team is showing a lack of game planning and common ****ing sense, so I'm gonna bet that chances are he didn't contribute to the success of one of the most athletic big men coming out of Europe, who is now....using his athleticism.

Great post! Feel the same about his progress as well.

 

[KBlack25]

You're really enamored with that confidence meter. Lets concentrate on a fact that you failed to reply to.

You keep mentioning Moz like the coaching staff had this big revelation and suddenly said Moz is READY. They didnt. They got lucky. This kid would still be benched if we didnt have injuries..

Care to lamely dispute this?

First of all, we do not know whether or not Moz would still be on the bench, that is pure speculation on your part. That the kid would still be benched is NOT a fact, things could have changed in the last week. You keep talking like Mozgov is playing like MVP Shaq. He played well against a poor defensive front in Detroit, played well against a poor defensive front in LAC, and bounded at a decent rate in 2 games v. a poor defensive front in Philadelphia. He played poorly in one game v. Dallas.

I don't think the coaching staff got lucky. I think they knew exactly what they were doing, but looked to protect the young center who got thrown to the wolves in early in the season, trying to correct for an earlier mistake. But injuries happen, this team and this coaching staff knew that, because they, you know, watch the NBA, and hoped to get as much time with Mozgov in practice before they were sure and let him out to play in the NBA.

He defensively still isn't all that stellar, and we have lost 3 of 5 since he came back into the lineup. Greg Monroe, in the game where Mozgov played the most, pulled down 17 (!) rebounds. Is it not a plausible explanation that the coaching staff felt that on the rebounding front he STILL wasn't where they wanted him to be? It's just as plausible as the thought that the team was purposely holding him back as we got outrebound at every night even though he was ready. My point is, you are not in the huddle, neither am I. You are not at practice, neither am I. All we can go on is a) speculation and b) what comes out in interviews. Mozgov said D'Antoni believes in him (80% believes in him if you listen to Clyde & The Pearl's well-researched equations and explained via mathematical and statistical algorithms).

All that was said here is that MOZGOV said the coaching staff believed in him, and MDA continues to believe in him. You are the one calling Mozgov a liar, but he is the one with the most first hand information from what we hear. Anything else you present to the contrary is speculative (hence, not fact, as you claim to assert). I am basing my opinion on what MOZGOV THE PLAYER says, not on what Clyde & The Pearl determined is the truth through mere surface-analysis because MOZGOV THE PLAYER is the one closest to the situation.



You are the one who said you only presented facts. Now is your chance to prove me wrong. You are the one who now has to back up your own assertion. Give us the formula by which you arrived at 60% and 80%, give us the statistical, mathematical and psychological basis for these "facts" as you claim they are. Seeing as you didn't earlier, I am up front willing to give you a full apology, if you can present with a 5% confidence interval, stats and mathematical formulas to back up your assertions that you claim are fact that show D'Antoni's confidence in Mozgov down to a percentage. YOU are the one who said you only present facts. It is your shot, right now, to prove it. 50 bucks says you don't.

 

[KBlack25]

I haven't read all of the posts in here, but I dunno if you can attribute Moz's success with D'Antoni. Mozgov is now doing what he showed in Europe, and even flashes of it against Team USA in the World Championships...D'Antoni didn't teach him his height, athleticism, and ability to be a presence around the rim...he had that coming into the league. Getting acclimated with the NBA game is where he needed to develop and as soon as D'Antoni saw signs of growing pains, he benched him. Now whether or not Moz keeps it politically correct in front of reporters is a moot point.

Young players need time on the court, in game situations, to develop as well as competent coaching.

It's one thing if Moz is showing added nuances to his game that he didn't have before...but it's another to say that he's successful because the coach game him some playing time (when 2 of our 7, sometimes 8, man rotation was out?) His problem before was catching entry passes (which is still a bit of an issue), silly fouls (still there to an extent, just not as many as quickly), and looking straight lost.

His game against Detroit looked well put together...question is, how do we know he wasn't primed and ready for that game in late December? If you're gonna use the argument that we're not in practice so we we have no proof that MDA wasn't contributing to Mozgov's growth, then I can use the same logic and say that you have no proof that he was. What if Moz was just under a lot of pressure to come out and perform like a seasoned vet. when he was a rookie still acclimating himself to the NBA game? And instead of MDA playing his big...he benches him for a smaller lineup and shorter rotation and proceeds to watch us get murdered on the boards and run out of our own gym on occasion.

I can't give MDA any credit when I'm sitting in the Garden against the Clipps and the dude in front of me turns around and is like "can you explain to me why we're shooting 9% from ****ing 3?" I look up, and it drops down to 8% as we take and miss another 3. The head coach of that NBA team is showing a lack of game planning and common ****ing sense, so I'm gonna bet that chances are he didn't contribute to the success of one of the most athletic big men coming out of Europe, who is now....using his athleticism.

A good post from someone who's opinion I disagree with.

I feel as though Mozgov's game HAS changed, I see him way more aggressive on the offensive end, and in some games he looks to rebound a little better than he used to, I suppose that is the fundamental difference between the two sides on this issue. But you say his hands are less of an issue and the stupid fouls are less of an issue. Aren't THOSE the very nuances he added to his game that you are searching for?

But you pose the whole argument of "We aren't in practice so we don't know if he was ready." This statement every person except Clyde and Red agrees with in this argument. We DON'T know what goes on in practice...you are right. All I have to go on is what Mozgov says and what Mozgov says is the coaching staff believes in him.

You are right, we don't know what goes on in practice. That's why I take MOZGOV'S word for what goes on in practice and how HE feels about the confidence MDA and the coaching staff have shown in him. He is the only one with a first hand account, and he is the one I am siding with.

 

[Clyde & The Pearl]

First of all, we do not know whether or not Moz would still be on the bench, that is pure speculation on your part. That the kid would still be benched is NOT a fact, things could have changed in the last week.

So we ignore the fact that the coach, the man in charge of playing time said "I will not upset my apple cart, Moz will resume his place on the bench". You also want to ignore MDAs track record his tendencies.


You keep talking like Mozgov is playing like MVP Shaq. He played well against a poor defensive front in Detroit, played well against a poor defensive front in LAC, and bounded at a decent rate in 2 games v. a poor defensive front in Philadelphia. He played poorly in one game v. Dallas.

I don't think the coaching staff got lucky. I think they knew exactly what they were doing,

So again you want to ignore the FACT that MDA said "I will not upset my apple cart, Moz will resume his place on the bench"
but looked to protect the young center who got thrown to the wolves in early in the season, trying to correct for an earlier mistake. But injuries happen, this team and this coaching staff knew that, because they, you know, watch the NBA, and hoped to get as much time with Mozgov in practice before they were sure and let him out to play in the NBA.

You are the one who said you only presented facts. Now is your chance to prove me wrong. You are the one who now has to back up your own assertion. Give us the formula by which you arrived at 60% and 80%, give us the statistical, mathematical and psychological basis for these "facts" as you claim they are. Seeing as you didn't earlier, I am up front willing to give you a full apology, if you can present with a 5% confidence interval, stats and mathematical formulas to back up your assertions that you claim are fact that show D'Antoni's confidence in Mozgov down to a percentage. YOU are the one who said you only present facts. It is your shot, right now, to prove it. 50 bucks says you don't.

The FACTS above are all you need to figure this one out podna. If you still need help seek it from somewhere else....

 

[KBlack25]

The FACTS above are all you need to figure this one out podna. If you still need help seek it from somewhere else....

Okay, so you point to one set of quotes and you ignore the quotes that go in the opposite direction of your argument which was Mozgov saying the coaches believed in him...Just because he would not upset the apple cart does not, in any way, upset my theory that it was possible the coaches were still trying to protect him b/c the rebounding and defense was not where he wanted it to be.

It does not PROVE your theory that they got lucky and that he definitely would have been on the bench still barring injury. All it proves is that before the Pistons game D'Antoni was not considering upsetting the apple cart. As fickle as you claim D'Antoni is isn't it possible he throws Mozgov in at a random point (see: Robinson, Nate)? It is not a FACT that the quote means that in the next FOUR games Moz would have seen 0 minutes.

It IS fact that Mozgov himself said that MDA believes in him. That is the ONLY fact that is relevant to the thread. Is it that hard to get?

And again, you dodge, so here we go again:

You are the one who said you only presented facts. Now is your chance to prove me wrong. You are the one who now has to back up your own assertion. Give us the formula by which you arrived at 60% and 80%, give us the statistical, mathematical and psychological basis for these "facts" as you claim they are. Seeing as you didn't earlier, I am up front willing to give you a full apology, if you can present with a 5% confidence interval, stats and mathematical formulas to back up your assertions that you claim are fact that show D'Antoni's confidence in Mozgov down to a percentage. YOU are the one who said you only present facts. It is your shot, right now, to prove it. 50 bucks says you don't.

There it is. Right there. Prove me wrong. Prove you ONLY asserted facts. I dare you. Give me the formula, lay out your analysis, prove to me why you wrote the numbers you did based on fact and actual statistical and psychological analysis. If you can do that in a way that makes sense I will leave this board but not before issuing an apology. Otherwise, I demand a statement that you have massaged facts.

 

[ronoranina]

Wow...my 11 year old cousin could draft a more relevant analogy.

Where did you get this scale from?

After the game he had 60% confidence, now he has 80%.

60% of what? 80% of what? How did he go from having 3/5ths of his total "confidence meter" to 4/5ths of his total "confidence meter"? What is the confidence interval in these percentages?

Please, enlighten us on your well-crafted, well-researched confidence meter and scale and give us a measure and formula whereby we can define other people's confidence in those around them merely by external surface-level viewing.

Show us your detailed formulation as to how you arrived at 60%, as opposed to 40%, or 50%, or 59.3%, or 64% or any real number between 1-100. What exactly went into this highly advanced psychological calculation? What formulaic properties did you use to give us such data?

Or maybe you just made up these numbers from the top of your head while positing it as fact and have no research or data to back up your numbers and merely massaged the facts to again make a pointless, incorrect, horribly misconstrued argument positing things that are merely speculative as factual.

I will give you this though, for someone who makes up facts and pulls numbers out of thin air with no sort of research or backing besides surface-level research and no formulation of how you reached 60% or 80% or any sort of ability to make this a good or even passable case study, you sure have conviced yourself that you gave "facts".

All of this gave me a good lol.

 

[Clyde & The Pearl]

Okay, so you point to one set of quotes and you ignore the quotes that go in the opposite direction of your argument which was Mozgov saying the coaches believed in him...Just because he would not upset the apple cart does not, in any way, upset my theory that it was possible the coaches were still trying to protect him b/c the rebounding and defense was not where he wanted it to be.

It does not PROVE your theory that they got lucky and that he definitely would have been on the bench still barring injury. All it proves is that before the Pistons game D'Antoni was not considering upsetting the apple cart. As fickle as you claim D'Antoni is isn't it possible he throws Mozgov in at a random point (see: Robinson, Nate)? It is not a FACT that the quote means that in the next FOUR games Moz would have seen 0 minutes.

It IS fact that Mozgov himself said that MDA believes in him. That is the ONLY fact that is relevant to the thread. Is it that hard to get?

And again, you dodge, so here we go again:



There it is. Right there. Prove me wrong. Prove you ONLY asserted facts. I dare you. Give me the formula, lay out your analysis, prove to me why you wrote the numbers you did based on fact and actual statistical and psychological analysis. If you can do that in a way that makes sense I will leave this board but not before issuing an apology. Otherwise, I demand a statement that you have massaged facts.

Proving anything to you is obviously beyond my capabilities. You need someone that speaks baby talk or someone that can speak in a language that only the brain dead can understand.

 

[KBlack25]

Proving anything to you is obviously beyond my capabilities. You need someone that speaks baby talk or someone that can speak in a language that only the brain dead can understand.

Translation:

I can't. I lied when I said I only presented facts. KBlack exposed me for the fraud I am. Another huge loss for me.

I perfectly understood what you were saying. That MDA saying "I won't upset the apple cart" proves he only played him b/c of injury and Moz would still be on the bench sans injury. Correct?

You just don't want to account for Mozgov's quote that MDA has confidence in him...So why the double standard? Why do you hold in high regard MDA's statement, which doesn't disprove my theory, but elect to ignore Mozgov's statement?

So again, I dare you...back up your assertion. Show me, even if I don't understand your supremely confusing statistical algorithim for making surface analysis to give an accurate confidence rating within a decent statistical certainty. I am not asking for a miracle here. Show me how you got there. Show me. I dare you. I bet you $50 and my registration on this board that you can't. If you only assert facts this should be simple for you. Just put it out there.



Here's the deal: If you prove your factual assertions with a statistically sufficient formulation to show confidence of a coach for each one of his players based only on surface analysis, something that is up to the proper standards in academia, I will apologize to you, admit I was wrong and leave this board. If you cannot, you apologize to me and you leave this board. Put your money where your mouth is and simply PROVE your statements of fact, after all you said you are the one who asserts facts and facts only. I am the one taking the risk here, for all I know you could have a brilliant algorithm for analyzing with a high-degree of statistical certainy the level of confidence a coach has in his player based on watching interviews and not attending practice or speaking with any of the parties involved. I am betting you do not. So do it...prove it. Get your apology, I will admit that I was wrong if you can prove it...

 

[Clyde & The Pearl]

Translation:



I perfectly understood what you were saying. That MDA saying "I won't upset the apple cart" proves he only played him b/c of injury and Moz would still be on the bench sans injury. Correct?

You just don't want to account for Mozgov's quote that MDA has confidence in him...So why the double standard? Why do you hold in high regard MDA's statement, which doesn't disprove my theory, but elect to ignore Mozgov's statement?

So again, I dare you...back up your assertion. Show me, even if I don't understand your supremely confusing statistical algorithim for making surface analysis to give an accurate confidence rating within a decent statistical certainty. I am not asking for a miracle here. Show me how you got there. Show me. I dare you. I bet you $50 and my registration on this board that you can't. If you only assert facts this should be simple for you. Just put it out there.



Here's the deal: If you prove your factual assertions with a statistically sufficient formulation to show confidence of a coach for each one of his players based only on surface analysis, something that is up to the proper standards in academia, I will apologize to you, admit I was wrong and leave this board. If you cannot, you apologize to me and you leave this board. Put your money where your mouth is and simply PROVE your statements of fact, after all you said you are the one who asserts facts and facts only. I am the one taking the risk here, for all I know you could have a brilliant algorithm for analyzing with a high-degree of statistical certainy the level of confidence a coach has in his player based on watching interviews and not attending practice or speaking with any of the parties involved. I am betting you do not. So do it...prove it. Get your apology, I will admit that I was wrong if you can prove it...

Find somebody that speaks your language...

 

[KBlack25]

Find somebody that speaks your language...

You are right, I shouldn't waste my time with those without the balls to admit they were wrong/lied/can't back up their own assertions and should start dealing with people of a high level of intelligence, not talking to people with the IQ of a retarded puppy.