Posted by GallOfFame:

Posted by TheGame:

I like the SSOL - LOSS comparsion but I think the Suns problem is they lacked defensive players. Nash cannot play defense. Amare is known as a weak defender. Other than Marion and Bell, who on that Suns team could play defense. We have the same problem now but at least with Duhon, we have a good on the ball defender. I don't think there is any flaw in MDA's system. You just need to get better defensive players who can also run the system. If we upgrade our 2 and 5 positions with solid two-way players, I think the Knicks can be a solid defensive squad.

[Edited by - thegame on 02-01-2009 17:18]

Well one again this isn't the argument either. We keep referring to team results, instead of individual success. Look everyone knows it's a given as fans we're looking for team success DUH! The article was giving him credit for making player better and I clearly disputed it according to most of the players Sports Guy cited. But going with what you stated our coach played suedo GM for a little while in PHX, so if they didn't have enough defensive players besides Bell and Marion how come he didn't use the power and influence he had to acquire more of those type of players with the assets they had? He was there while they were giving away #1 picks left and right. How come he didn't parlay Diaw and Barbosa into something else defensively via trade instead of signing these guys to an extension? Also how many of these type of players does a team need? If you favor his system, isn't his system limited to how many defensive players can be acquired because it requires shooting at a premium? If he took PHX as far as he could how come so many of us are in favor of him reacquiring those same players...

(many are in favor of trading for Diaw and Bell from Charlotte in a trade)
(signing Amare and Joe in 2010 if we can't get Lebron and Bosh)

he had in PHX sans Marion(don't see his name mentioned as much here) 4-5yrs removed from taking them as far as he could?

We've witnessed similar influence here in New York already, with the signing of Roberson and the drafting of Danilo. Are either of these guys defensive players? The cutting of Balkman and Jr. Are any of these guys defensive players? The trading of Zach for Tim Thomas and Cat. Are any of these defensive players? The trading of Jamal for Al Harrington. Is Al a defensive player?


Should we then be more concerned with coach the suedo GM vs coach who doesn't emphasize D?


I'll ask once again does our coach's system clearly make players better?

Posted by djsunyc:

i think if you build a team via defense, you can get away with not having superstars and still win some games. nothing mindblowing but something like the sixers from last year or the bulls from a few years ago. obviously, those type of teams don't win long term but you can win a few games (at .500 or slightly better) for a few seasons.

if you build a team predicated on offensive minded players, then i think the only way to get to .500 or better is to have *big time* offensive talents. not just mediocre talent but star to superstar type talent. otherwise, you're looking at a 30 win team. the warriors had bdiddy + ellis + sjax when they beat the mavs and won 48 games last year. now, without diddy + ellis, they are putting up high lotto win totals.

with that said, after many years of crap at the garden, the quickest way to get the fanbase energized is to put a shiny new product on the court and a high octane offense gets a buzz going. but you can only get away with stuff in ny for so long. 2010 is what it's all about...and i think d'antoni needs big time players to get to the .500 mark (or better).