Posted by TrueBlue:

Posted by joec32033:

Posted by TrueBlue:

Posted by joec32033:

Posted by TrueBlue:

Sure let's compare post-season winning percentages when the playoff format for one is one and done, while the other is a best of and teams get to play more games at home. That's smart NOT!

I'm talking about having a team or the pieces to win it all, who perform well during the regular season, and then fold/choke in the post -season.

[Edited by - TrueBlue on 05-14-2008 08:59 AM]

You made the comparison. And an over .500 win % in the playoffs is not exactly bad.

I wasn't make the comparison of winning percentages.

Supposedly Good coach, high expectations, good team, good regular season, failure after failure in the post-season.

You could throw Flip Saunders in here as well.

Failure in the post season. Exactly how are you defining failure? Seems to me D'Antoni performs well in the playoffs. If your definition of failure is not winning a chip, then 15 teams "fail" every year.

My definition is being picked as a favorite to win it all, not just having a chance to win it, having the roster, coach, producing a regular season that supports the favoritism and then failing. The Suns had been the favorite to win it all for the past 3 yrs and then to top it off they lost in the first round this yr and were a Tim Thomas 3pt shot from being bounced in the first round in the past 3yrs.

Are seriously going to sit here and rationalize that if Boston doesn't win the Chip their failure is equally monumental as the Sixers and Hawks not getting a Chip? PUHLEEZE!!!!!

Sounds like I'm having a conversation with Stephon Marbury!!


[Edited by - TrueBlue on 05-14-2008 09:56 AM]

Posted by fishmike:

Posted by joec32033:

Posted by TrueBlue:

Posted by joec32033:

Posted by TrueBlue:

Posted by joec32033:

Posted by TrueBlue:

Sure let's compare post-season winning percentages when the playoff format for one is one and done, while the other is a best of and teams get to play more games at home. That's smart NOT!

I'm talking about having a team or the pieces to win it all, who perform well during the regular season, and then fold/choke in the post -season.

[Edited by - TrueBlue on 05-14-2008 08:59 AM]

You made the comparison. And an over .500 win % in the playoffs is not exactly bad.

I wasn't make the comparison of winning percentages.

Supposedly Good coach, high expectations, good team, good regular season, failure after failure in the post-season.

You could throw Flip Saunders in here as well.

Failure in the post season. Exactly how are you defining failure? Seems to me D'Antoni performs well in the playoffs. If your definition of failure is not winning a chip, then 15 teams "fail" every year.

My definition is being picked as a favorite to win it all, not just having a chance to win it, having the roster, coach, producing a regular season that supports the favoritism and then failing. The Suns had been the favorite to win it all for the past 3 yrs and then to top it off they lost in the first round this yr and were a Tim Thomas 3pt shot from being bounced in the first round in the past 3yrs.

Are seriously going to sit here and rationalize that if Boston doesn't win the Chip their failure is equally monumental as the Sixers and Hawks not getting a Chip? PUHLEEZE!!!!!

Sounds like I'm having a conversation with Stephon Marbury!!


[Edited by - TrueBlue on 05-14-2008 09:56 AM]

Funny, but If I recall every year, the Spurs are usually the favorite to make it to the finals. What you can't seem to separate is PHX couldn't play anything other than the small ball they made famous. I'll be the first to say it is probably not conducive to winning in the playoffs but the tallest guy they had on the court was a 6-10 Amare. Their PF was 6-7.

PHX, if you recall when Steph was there, was a half court team-for the most part-and they sucked. You really got to ask yourself were the players put in place to run the system or was the system put in place because of the players?

Either way, back track or try to talk your way out of the comparison you made. It doesn't matter. If you are going to just resort straight to insults and name calling, I'm done with you.

Joe.. great post, and it illustrates why Mike is a good coach and did a great job coaching that team. He put a system in that was best for the roster. As a result the group as a whole overachieved as individuals and despite the size issue elevated themselves to the status of an elite team (although never favored to win it all).

I would just ask this.. how could you possible coach more wins out of that roster? Isnt that the coach's job? To put his players in a position to win?

and it should be the GM's/owner's job to not short change the roster, and there is no way anyone can argue that the owner gave his team and D'Antoni everything.

Posted by TrueBlue:

Posted by Nalod:

Suns have been one of the few teams I will watch the last few years.

Lots of fun with great ball movement.

Players want to play for him, he wins, and maybe we can give him what he needs to get over the top one day.

I don't think anyone has disputed D'Antoni has some redeeming qualities as a coach but in New York the Mecca of it all our ultimate goal shouldn't be the Next Best Thing. We need championships here, far more than we have. We could have hired Flip Saunders, George Karl, Don Nelson, or Eddie Jordan and our entertainment desire would have been quenched but I can't imagine too many fans would have been happy with such hires, with exception to maybe Jordan. Of course none of these coaches were available but you get the point. You could also give these same coaches the roster D'Antoni had in Phx and they probably equal or surpass his success there. The past 5 yrs we've spent time trying to justify moves made or trying to make wrongs be right, or trying to see a silver lining in eventual negatives. Now D'Antoni deserves a chance and he will get it. Obviously we have to hope for the best but I do not like the hiring whatsoever no matter how many 100pt games I may watch. I want Rings not a Fling...

Anyway I think I showed the comparison being a good one and that was the main point of this thread.

Posted by Vmart:

Its funny but if you guys think about it Tom Coughlin had great records with Jacksonville but never won a championship. With the Giants he couldn't get past the wild card games. Then it all clicked.

Just tought wouldn't it be great if D'Antoni's career mirrors Tom Coughlin's career. I mean people said Coughlin couldn't change his ways and he did. Whats to say that D'Antoni doesn't change his ways and emphaisis defense with a combination of great offense.

i like that analogy V... no one thought Coughlin could lead the G-Men to a title but he went out & did it... no one thought Eli would ever grow into his older brother but last year he showed he's got the stuff to lead men to a championship... that's what's so beautiful about taking a wait & see approach to things, u just never know... everyone that likes to pretend they know don't really know anything at all.

Posted by TrueBlue:

Posted by Vmart:

Posted by TMS:

i guess anything short of winning a championship will be considered an outright failure... i sure wish we woulda hired someone else but Pat Riley & Jeff Van Gundy to coach the teams of the 90s... there were so many other better options out there... don't ask me who but i know i'm right in saying it so that's all that matters.

Excellent. The stat to look at more than any stats is wins and wins are what makes your chances of getting a championship greater. D'Antoni put his Suns team in a position to get far enough to be able to think about championships. Man we haven't had the luxury to even think playoffs much less championship. If D'Antoni gets the Knicks to point where the Suns were I would be happy as a pig in shyt.

Hmmmm Pat Riley are you kidding me,,,uuhhhhhh how many Championships and Finals appearances/games did he win and/or coach in before we hired him?

JVG uhhhhh how many head coaching gigs did he have before we hired him? None like Mark Jackson! Now JVG had tons of experience as an assistant but zero as a Professional Head Coach and JVG managed to coach a team to the Finals.

Give these two coaches D'Antoni's roster the past 4yrs and I'd wager any amount of money one of the two gets them to the Finals at least once. Defense wins championships!

Tom Coughlin uuhhhhh you mean the same Tom Coughlin who coached the Expansion Jacksonville Jaguars team to two AFC Championship games and won 50gms in the franchise's first 5yrs, which is probably harder to do than anything in regards to coaching on any kind of level, little league baseball to professional hockey. But then again if it's about wins Coughling finished 68-60 Regular Season and 4-4 in the Playoffs as head coach for the Jaguars so there was room for doubt and he was a breath away from being fired on several occasions as Giants head coach. But I can entertain this comparison... two sides to everything

We'll see if D'Antoni turns out to be Marty or Tom or Bust!

[Edited by - TrueBlue on 05-14-2008 6:43 PM]

JVG has his own problems he was given stars in Houston in Ming and McGrady his big flaw is he doesn't coach offense. If defense wins championship then JVG is a great argument for Offense because he is probably the most defensive minded stale offensive coach there is out there. As for Riley you can't argue Riley into any equation because he is a top coach. You aren't getting Phil Jackson, or Popovich. The next best thing out there was D'Antoni and he can hold his own with the best of them who haven't won shyt.

Posted by TrueBlue:

Posted by Vmart:

Posted by TrueBlue:

Posted by Vmart:

Posted by TMS:

i guess anything short of winning a championship will be considered an outright failure... i sure wish we woulda hired someone else but Pat Riley & Jeff Van Gundy to coach the teams of the 90s... there were so many other better options out there... don't ask me who but i know i'm right in saying it so that's all that matters.

Excellent. The stat to look at more than any stats is wins and wins are what makes your chances of getting a championship greater. D'Antoni put his Suns team in a position to get far enough to be able to think about championships. Man we haven't had the luxury to even think playoffs much less championship. If D'Antoni gets the Knicks to point where the Suns were I would be happy as a pig in shyt.

Hmmmm Pat Riley are you kidding me,,,uuhhhhhh how many Championships and Finals appearances/games did he win and/or coach in before we hired him?

JVG uhhhhh how many head coaching gigs did he have before we hired him? None like Mark Jackson! Now JVG had tons of experience as an assistant but zero as a Professional Head Coach and JVG managed to coach a team to the Finals.

Give these two coaches D'Antoni's roster the past 4yrs and I'd wager any amount of money one of the two gets them to the Finals at least once. Defense wins championships!

Tom Coughlin uuhhhhh you mean the same Tom Coughlin who coached the Expansion Jacksonville Jaguars team to two AFC Championship games and won 50gms in the franchise's first 5yrs, which is probably harder to do than anything in regards to coaching on any kind of level, little league baseball to professional hockey. But then again if it's about wins Coughling finished 68-60 Regular Season and 4-4 in the Playoffs as head coach for the Jaguars so there was room for doubt and he was a breath away from being fired on several occasions as Giants head coach. But I can entertain this comparison... two sides to everything

We'll see if D'Antoni turns out to be Marty or Tom or Bust!

[Edited by - TrueBlue on 05-14-2008 6:43 PM]

JVG has his own problems he was given stars in Houston in Ming and McGrady his big flaw is he doesn't coach offense. If defense wins championship then JVG is a great argument for Offense because he is probably the most defensive minded stale offensive coach there is out there. As for Riley you can't argue Riley into any equation because he is a top coach. You aren't getting Phil Jackson, or Popovich. The next best thing out there was D'Antoni and he can hold his own with the best of them who haven't won shyt.

JVG has coached in the Finals... but yes he failed in Houston to a degree although to his defense Houston was never a favorite to win it all and very rarely had a team at full strength from start to finish and never was a 1-4 seed like D'Antoni's Suns.

Dantoni was never a fav to win it all and rarely had a team at full strength from start to finish. D'antoni was a 1-4 seed perhaps because he was an overall better coach than JVG?

Give these two coaches D'Antoni's roster the past 4yrs and I'd wager any amount of money one of the two gets them to the Finals at least once. Defense wins championships!

Posted by TMS:

Posted by TrueBlue:

Hmmmm Pat Riley are you kidding me,,,uuhhhhhh how many Championships and Finals appearances/games did he win and/or coach in before we hired him?

JVG uhhhhh how many head coaching gigs did he have before we hired him? None like Mark Jackson! Now JVG had tons of experience as an assistant but zero as a Professional Head Coach and JVG managed to coach a team to the Finals.

Give these two coaches D'Antoni's roster the past 4yrs and I'd wager any amount of money one of the two gets them to the Finals at least once. Defense wins championships!

Tom Coughlin uuhhhhh you mean the same Tom Coughlin who coached the Expansion Jacksonville Jaguars team to two AFC Championship games and won 50gms in the franchise's first 5yrs, which is probably harder to do than anything in regards to coaching on any kind of level, little league baseball to professional hockey. But then again if it's about wins Coughling finished 68-60 Regular Season and 4-4 in the Playoffs as head coach for the Jaguars so there was room for doubt and he was a breath away from being fired on several occasions as Giants head coach. But I can entertain this comparison... two sides to everything

We'll see if D'Antoni turns out to be Marty or Tom or Bust!

[Edited by - TrueBlue on 05-14-2008 6:43 PM]

i guess the point flew over your head as usual... the point i was making is that if championships is the only deciding factor in determining whether or not a hire is a good one or not, then you could technically call the Riley & VG years as a failure as well... the point is that D'Antoni is as well equipped as any coach out there that was attainable for us to lead this team to the Finals... after that it's anyone's guess what happens... none of you can project whether a certain coach is "capable" or not of leading a team to a championship so stop pretending that u do.

is there any evidence you can point to that would make Mark Jackson or Avery Johnson any better a choice at this point? (& let me just qualify that by saying i did favor bringing those guys here over Mike D, but unlike some of you i'm not jumping to any conclusions as to whether or not he's got the ability to lead us to a title)

does Mark Jackson have any kind of coaching track record to point to? he wasn't exactly the greatest defending G during his playing years... Avery Johnson preached defense so much it helped the Mavs, a team w/a roster of players that most experts & analysts in & around the NBA projected to be championship contenders, to disappointing 1st round eliminations the past 2 seasons... yes, he did make a Finals appearance (much in the same way JVG & Riles did) but he never one a title... does that make those guys' tenures a failure for their respective teams in the minds of all you who are killing this hire? it seems to me it could qualify as such considering some of the statements being made during these debates.

meanwhile D'Antoni had the Suns averaging 58 wins every season he coached there (except for the year he took over midseason) & helped bring 1 of the worst franchises in the league to back to back Conference Finals appearances & 2 other playoff appearances... does that also qualify as a failed tenure? what if he replicates the same in NYC? failure or no?

we hired the guy who had his team in the international leagues win multiple titles & making the playoffs every year he coached them, being voted COY twice over there... how is he such a clearcut bad choice to lead the team we currently have when establishing any kind of winning culture here has been seemingly impossible since JVG left? this is what i find so baffling about the logic some of you are using to justify your opposition to this hire.