The Official Mike D'Antoni Sucks Thread

[TR1LL10N]

I don't assume there is a system devoid of limitations. What I do notice is how the limits of this system cause ancillary effects throughout the team, fatigue and injury being an example.

Phil can't be considered over-rated because he has performed the best. Over rating assumes a player or coach isn't as good as thought of.

Scoring in the paint resulting from the P&R isn't the same as using bigs effectively on the block. So yes Amare who draws fouls may score in the paint- the limitation is illustrated in the offensive fouls he gets by having to be mobile and drive, and increases the likelyhood of injury.

On Kobe or MJ, there are ways to decipher a coaches accumen regardless of his personnel. This includes knowing how to save time outs and using them proprly or deciding to foul. These decisions have nothing to do with talent, and that's the issue, the decisions.

Now when you look at it, Mike's decisions are based on his approach and philosophy primarily, not his players. His approach and philosophy lead to many not so obvious decisions but when things go south, no one wants to attribute that to his approach.

This is illustrated in things like, drafting Gallo, or DNP'ing Randolph etc...
These were coaching decisions as was not fouling with one to give. Analyze this and it comes back to his approach.



I'M NOT SURE I DID THAT. You mention the ned for a floor general, but when it was pointed out that that is exactly what Billups is, you had other plans.




That's just it. On one hand you say with who we have we can defend just fine, but before you were saying we need more. Don't get me wrong, first I agree we need a true center, and really I'm not blaming coach for anything even though I feel he was outcoached, but middle of the road isn't a mislable.





Here's the best way I can put it.... first Mike isan't a bad coach, he doesn't suck, and really even if we get eliminated, I saw enough fight and potential to be satisfied, but...

There are a million ways to skin a cat, right? So here's an analogy:

If I said choose your best way to drive down a mountain, and there were bike paths, roads, and many obsticals to navigate; many different choices may be used. Many factors would be considered. Is this a race or time limit, is your vehicle equipped for off-road etc... (stay with me)

Then I said your fastest way to get down the mountain. Some might calculate driving time, biking time, can they climb etc...

Then I gave you historic stats saying MOST choose to drive even though its longer, but safer. Some have tried hiking but they took days, and no one has biked down without failure although its not impossible.

Well Mike is the one who chooses to bike it. Sure he may make it. But by the time he does, he and his bike are mangled to sh*t!

Mike doing things unconventionally can probably get there, but everyone who has done it didn't do it that way. A mistake here and there and it adds up.

For us I see squandered drafting opportunities, overuse injures, poor financial managment in terms of assets, lost winnable opportunities, reduction of player moral, etc...

All this plus more, all because he decided to bike down that mountain.

Now, some things actually worked out in our favor, thank goodness, can't complain. But what I can say is ok you chose the difficult route, and came out bruised and battered, but got somewhere.

As a decision maker (if I were), I would have the ultimate goal in mind. And I would know (like you) we ain't there yet, there's still work to be done, still more mountains to navigate. Knowing Mike is prevy to the difficult unconventional route, knowing there is little to no margin for error, why would I continue to emplore such techniques?

In business, you maximize your assets and returns. You do everything possible to reduce risk to promote maximum efficiency. This approach has too many risks involved, too many ancillary obstacles created and is not as proven as other methods. When we were desperate, we took desperate measures.

Currently we are in the black, and from a business standpoint that would dictate taking a less riskier approach. That's what I feel we need. Sure we get down the mountain with Mike, but bruised and battared and weak. When we have a chance to invest in a more efficient, responsible, reduced risk opportunity, that is what would be best.

No offense to Mike.

Those are all fair points.

Just an FYI, when a business is in the black that is a good thing. Being in the red is bad. (no pun intended ) Further, focusing on limiting risk is just one school of thought and has less potential for both failure and success.There is a place for aggressiveness in both basketball and business as well as originality. I honestly think MDA's system is more traditional then is touted...PnR, spreading the floor and pushing the tempo are hardly unorthodox.

 

[nyk_nyk]

http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/knicks/post/_/id/4670/dantoni-we-have-to-up-the-pace

More Dantoni tomfoolery. Not saying this is the reason we lost game 2, but his focus is so warped at times. He talked about why the 1st game was in the 80's and referenced BOS taking nearly the whole shot clock to shoot (no sh!t).

IMO trying to speed up the tempo against BOS for 48 minutes is bad because they are a good defensive TEAM and unless you plan on SSOL yielding a 50+ fg% (not likely), it will only hurt you.

 

[TR1LL10N]

The whole point of SSOL is to keep the defense from setting up. The fact that Boston is a great defensive team who likes to slow the game down is the very reason why pushing the tempo works to our advantage. Sheesh...

 

[nyk_nyk]

The whole point of SSOL is to keep the defense from setting up. The fact that Boston is a great defensive team who likes to slow the game down is the very reason why pushing the tempo works to our advantage. Sheesh...

Damn your really don't know anything do you? Did I not say that unless the SSOL method will yield a 50+ fg% it will hurt you??? How does that work to our advantage unless you know for sure that those quick 3s and other rushed jumpers are going to fall at a high %??? This is the playoffs where every possession is vital. Just ask Doc.

 

[nyk_nyk]

Pushing the tempo against BOS is not needed. We already know that they can't guard Amare of Melo so putting them in ISO positions where they can dominate or make the easy pass is key. TD, Williams, and Walker are all inconsistent so i'd prefer more ball movement that leads to open looks over rushed shots any day.

You see it as preventing BOS from setting up their defense while I look at it as playing right into their hands. Newsflash: by the 4th qtr everyone is tired from running and when it is most important to clamp down on defense players will be weak.

Sorry, but I employ a more old school (traditional) type of approach that has proven to work over and over.

 

[TR1LL10N]

Damn your really don't know anything do you? Did I not say that unless the SSOL method will yield a 50+ fg% it will hurt you??? How does that work to our advantage unless you know for sure that those quick 3s and other rushed jumpers are going to fall at a high %??? This is the playoffs where every possession is vital. Just ask Doc.

I don't know what I am talking about!? Ha! You just stated that running SSOL is a bad idea because Boston is good at defense. NEWSFLASH!!!That's precisely why its a SMART idea!

1. That 50%+ stat is a completely made up figure and not based in reality. We have won plenty of games running SSOL and shooting less than 50%.

2. It goes to our advantage because Boston is an old, slow half court team that prefers to grind it out. If we can run on them, they will not be able to keep up and will be forced inton our comfort zone and away from theirs.

P.S. Not only does SSOL keep the defense off balance and allow us to dictate the tempo but it spreads the floor taking away Boston's defensive size advantage.

 

[nyk_nyk]

I don't know what I am talking about!? Ha! You just stated that running SSOL is a bad idea because Boston is good at defense. NEWSFLASH!!!That's precisely why its a SMART idea!

1. That 50%+ stat is a completely made up figure and not based in reality. We have won plenty of games running SSOL and shooting less than 50%.

2. It goes to our advantage because Boston is an old, slow half court team that prefers to grind it out. If we can run on them, they will not be able to keep up and will be forced inton our comfort zone and away from theirs.

P.S. Not only does SSOL keep the defense off balance and allow us to dictate the tempo but it spreads the floor taking away Boston's defensive size advantage.

I don't know how long you've watched basketball, but it can't be that long because the way you try to make sense of certaing things is just crazy.

Rushing shots against a good defensive team is not smart. If you think its that easy and its just run the ball down and make a shot then your not bright. Possessions are what's important and should be played based on circumstance. If a fast break is warranted then you do it. If not, then its just a quick shot wasted possession with BOS regaining possession so they can set up their higher pecertage shots.

You and MDA think pushing the tempo is the answer. I think getting Melo and Amare more touches in a half court set is better and allow them to create. The 3s will always be there, no need to rush it. The key is getting BOS in foul trouble and continuing to improve our defense. Rushing shots doesn't lead to many FTs and it causes rapid fatigue.

 

[nuckles2k2]

I also wouldn't advise "pushing the tempo" against a team that's dead last in offensive rebounds only because they barely send anyone to the offensive boards and instead they get back on D to negate the opposing team's transition game. Trying to run on them is playing right into their gameplan...why would it be smart to do that?

Boston is not a good defensive team only because of their half court game, they're not that bad in transition. If I have to choose between the methodology that produces quick shots and extra possessions against a team that can crash the defensive boards, and for a team that's allergic to rebounding for 48 mins...or the method that creates more methodical, easier shots, shots in the paint, and that produces more free throw opportunities....give me the latter each and every time.

 

[Red]

excuse the long post

Those are all fair points.

Just an FYI, when a business is in the black that is a good thing. Being in the red is bad. (no pun intended ) Further, focusing on limiting risk is just one school of thought and has less potential for both failure and success.There is a place for aggressiveness in both basketball and business as well as originality. I honestly think MDA's system is more traditional then is touted...PnR, spreading the floor and pushing the tempo are hardly unorthodox.

Yeah "in the black" meaning we are ahead, good, whatever. We can consider this season a success. The P&R is traditional, its how its employed that differs.

You say SSOL is based on pushing the tempo to make it hard for defenders to defend. But its more than that. Take player positioning for example.

Wait before that take the philosophy into account to make sense of this.
Usually a coach would say high% shots are those closest to the hoop (blah blah) I.e. dunks and lay-ups right? And a coach would say the more we get those high% shots the better. Combined with stops or stout defense, a coach would feel they get and make higher% shots than their oponent, thus should lead to a win.

Why not take dunks and lay-ups all day? Because for one, the opposition will collapse on you, two players should have enough skills at this level to score from different spots on the floor. And to not be predictable.

Now with Mike (a former pg). His philosophy says "an uncontested jumper has as much chance (%) as a contested lay-up or dunk". Add the 3pt shot, and the extra point should off-set the misses (if there are some), basically (like Melo) shooting in volume. This leads to "speeding up the tempo" + a byproduct is fatiguing the opponent AND inevitably forcing them to match you by getting away from their game plan and taking more threes themselves.

Mike feels that if his team is prepared to engage in this type of gameand he has knock down shooters, his team should win.

Now with the PG, since "ball movement" is paramount in this system as is quick decision making, that fuels the system. Although normally a pg goes with conventional wisdom, get guys involved, drive if open, etc... a Mike D point guard has to learn to go against that. In this system its about quickness and options, almost like a QB. Read the defense know your reads and options and react, everytime down the floor.

Now, taking this approach into account...
We look at spacing and positioning at the start of the play. What you'll notice 9 out 10x's is Turiaf/JJ setting the high screen at the top of the key, while simultaneously a shooter curls, and another camped out at the baseline 3.

These present the options (and must be read quickly and decisively by the pg)

Option 1- if no one guards the basket, drive in before the help comes (a Nash favorite). The center is pulled out, the 3 is worried about the wing, and the pf & sg are running screen and shoot

2- hit the forward camped out on the wing IF you notice his man off him, cheating middle

3- hit the guard coming off the screen if his man gets caught

4- run the give and go (allowing another opportunity) because the center runs a pick

5- reset and begin the P&R

All in seconds, always moving the rock.

I say one dimentional because that option 2 (sf Gallo/Williams) Mike wants primarily a knock down shooter. With this the d stretches making everyones life easier. Gallo driving was a bonus.

The same can be said for the SG. Primarily if he's a knockdown shooter the d should stretch, both allow easier opportunity to dish low for a lay-up to the cutter or big.

With the PF, if he can hit the 18fter, again the d stretches.

The most dynamic position he needs is the PG, we agree.

But now look at what has happened, and I think its a blessing in disguise. Mike wound up with a Melo. A guy who
holds the ball, scores off the Iso, and has a reputation.

Because one limitation is the ability to do this constantly, and he didn't have this type of player, he now incorporates more iso's and player specific screens and curls. This is good because its another option, and better down the stretch.

All in all, this system is more complicated than given credit. Players have to move in unison, be ready, and it takes time to implement as you said- just look at Felton.

The limitatons are these:
*when a team doesn't play conventional d, and decides to trap or double. This throws things off and quicker decisions need to be made.

*when a shot goes up especially a three players aren't in optimal rebounding position

*every player must know their role or it gets messed up- hence the use of limited rotations or non-use of certain players who "don't get it ala Randolph

*with Mike there seems no contengency. Say if a player is off or hurt. Melo adds this contengency. Also if a play breaks down. This is where that savvy PG is most needed, maybe a CP3

The worst thing to me is since it takes so much time and effort to get everyone clicking on the same page, it leaves little opportunity to incorporate a defensive strategy especially if its complicated- which to me is why his defensive #'s weren't great, and that system is more simple.

So when I say he doesn't work on d, I do understand that its partly a result of having to get guys to buy in and run the offense as designed.

And of course, he has to show more better late game situational decisions. When to foul, trap, call a t.o., and subs. These are needs of improvement.

 

[JeffVanGundyPLEASE!]

I don't know how long you've watched basketball, but it can't be that long because the way you try to make sense of certaing things is just crazy.

Rushing shots against a good defensive team is not smart. If you think its that easy and its just run the ball down and make a shot then your not bright. Possessions are what's important and should be played based on circumstance. If a fast break is warranted then you do it. If not, then its just a quick shot wasted possession with BOS regaining possession so they can set up their higher pecertage shots.

You and MDA think pushing the tempo is the answer. I think getting Melo and Amare more touches in a half court set is better and allow them to create. The 3s will always be there, no need to rush it. The key is getting BOS in foul trouble and continuing to improve our defense. Rushing shots doesn't lead to many FTs and it causes rapid fatigue.

I feel your playing into BOS hands by slowing down the pace that's why you increase the tempo to keep their defense unbalanced, or keep the ball in perceptual motion to counter their motion defense while looking for the higher percentage shot

you forget that we are not as deep or big a team as BOS is

 

[OGKnickfan]

I'd rather have a couch than this "coach" on my team. At least the players would feel comfortable with the couch.

 

[jpz17]

I think his playoff coaching has just reiterated my previous claims that he should be praised by Knicks fans.

 

[TR1LL10N]

I don't know how long you've watched basketball, but it can't be that long because the way you try to make sense of certaing things is just crazy.

Since 1989. Now you know.

Rushing shots against a good defensive team is not smart. If you think its that easy and its just run the ball down and make a shot then your not bright. Possessions are what's important and should be played based on circumstance. If a fast break is warranted then you do it. If not, then its just a quick shot wasted possession with BOS regaining possession so they can set up their higher pecertage shots.

It's ironic that you question the length of time I have been watching basketball inferring I don't know what I am talking about yet you take such a fundamentally incorrect stance. It's not about simply "rushing" shots. It's about pushing the tempo which keeps the defense from setting up leading to UNCONTESTED shots. That is precisely the best course of action against a bigger, slower team known for their half court defense!

You and MDA think pushing the tempo is the answer. I think getting Melo and Amare more touches in a half court set is better and allow them to create. The 3s will always be there, no need to rush it. The key is getting BOS in foul trouble and continuing to improve our defense. Rushing shots doesn't lead to many FTs and it causes rapid fatigue

Amare is not a half court player and Melo can score any number of ways. Further you speak of fatigue when we have a team used to pushing the tempo therefore in better shape playing against an older team that LIKES TO SLOW IT DOWN. Why do you want to play to their strengths? Hows does that make sense? It would be like advocating slugging it out with Mike Tyson rather than out boxing him from the outside with your jab. How do you not understand this?

The facts remain that Boston is slower, older and bigger than us and to advocate playing a slower game the allows their defense to set up and their size to be effective is just the opposite of smart...

 

[TR1LL10N]

I feel your playing into BOS hands by slowing down the pace that's why you increase the tempo to keep their defense unbalanced, or keep the ball in perceptual motion to counter their motion defense while looking for the higher percentage shot

you forget that we are not as deep or big a team as BOS is

Bingo! +1rep for you.

 

[smokes]

While I would agree with nyk_nyk that we appear to be playing at least equal to or better than the Celtics right now and playing in a slow tempo should have gotten us 2 wins, there is a problem. We just can't close out games. Yes we have Melo and Amare and that's it. Two players with the confidence to perform in the fourth. Pretty much every player on that team is playoff hardened, thus when a game is close at the end Boston obviously has a distinct advantage (plus some creative refereeing).

 

[jpz17]

I don't know what is to complain about right now? We played two amazing games (basically won both of them) with a very very poor roster. This is not our ideal team guys, and Walsh knows it. We will have several changes, probably a good free agent, and a few draft picks. You can't bash D'Antoni for keeping us in two games we were favored to lose by 40.

 

[JeffVanGundyPLEASE!]

I don't know what is to complain about right now? We played two amazing games (basically won both of them) with a very very poor roster. This is not our ideal team guys, and Walsh knows it. We will have several changes, probably a good free agent, and a few draft picks. You can't bash D'Antoni for keeping us in two games we were favored to lose by 40.

Exactly! I wasnt and am still not a huge MDA fan but i have to give the man credit where it justly due he made things happen when injuries occuried and had players play way above thier ceilings when you expected the opposite...even i will say that MDA has even put this team (with the help of Amar'e game 1 and Carmelo game2) in positions to win the game

what would you rather have.... this team playing like this, all out heart and hustle or before during the regular season lack of defense and quick shots?

I am impressed and surprised with what i have seen so far in the playoffs i didn't know he was capable of teaching any semblance of defense...however i think he is aware he has to work on end of game management

 

[KnicksFan65]

I don't know what is to complain about right now? We played two amazing games (basically won both of them) with a very very poor roster. This is not our ideal team guys, and Walsh knows it. We will have several changes, probably a good free agent, and a few draft picks. You can't bash D'Antoni for keeping us in two games we were favored to lose by 40.

I can't be anything but proud of this team, after being gutted with the Melo trade. With no bench, no bigs and no Stat and Billups who would of thought we could battle like this.

 

[la2ny]

I can't be anything but proud of this team, after being gutted with the Melo trade. With no bench, no bigs and no Stat and Billups who would of thought we could battle like this.

How were we gutted again?

 

[KnicksFan65]

How were we gutted again?

Well we did lose three starters, two prospects, a draft choice and a fat guy named Curry. Of course we got Melo and Billups but we don't have any sort of bench we can rely on, we can't even rely on Billups at this point...