Solace wrote:

fishmike wrote:1) Knicks are a top 5 defensive team so please spare me the MDA digs on defense
2) So what? Allan Houston's floater and friendly bounce saved Jeff Van Gundy's CAREER. This is how sports works.
3) Not really that impressive an observation. As far as Im concerned Knicks need to win a playoff series before they prove anything which is fine. Since the playoffs arent here yet we judge by what we see.

I agree. The no defense thing is getting old. The only reason the Knicks are not 10 games over .500 is their offense. The defense this year has been enough to be one of the 5-8 teams in the league.

They have been alot better defensively this year. However, they are still at the bottom of the league in defending the 3.

That cannot continue.

mrKnickShot wrote:

Solace wrote:

fishmike wrote:1) Knicks are a top 5 defensive team so please spare me the MDA digs on defense
2) So what? Allan Houston's floater and friendly bounce saved Jeff Van Gundy's CAREER. This is how sports works.
3) Not really that impressive an observation. As far as Im concerned Knicks need to win a playoff series before they prove anything which is fine. Since the playoffs arent here yet we judge by what we see.

I agree. The no defense thing is getting old. The only reason the Knicks are not 10 games over .500 is their offense. The defense this year has been enough to be one of the 5-8 teams in the league.

They have been alot better defensively this year. However, they are still at the bottom of the league in defending the 3.

That cannot continue.

The point is not that the Knicks don't have room for improvement defensively. The point is that MDA gets a bad rap for not coaching defense, yet, last year was an aberration. In most years, his teams are average to above average defensively. Can we stop with the bias or is it just more fun to insult the coach for no reason? MDA's teams play at a higher pace, so they give up more points. More possessions = more points. Most of the people who criticize seem to only take into account points and stop there. If you look at pace, his teams are usually pretty solid on defense. That's all I'm saying. The Knicks are not Miami, but they're solid. MDA deserves some credit for that.

mrKnickShot wrote:

Solace wrote:

mrKnickShot wrote:

Solace wrote:

fishmike wrote:1) Knicks are a top 5 defensive team so please spare me the MDA digs on defense
2) So what? Allan Houston's floater and friendly bounce saved Jeff Van Gundy's CAREER. This is how sports works.
3) Not really that impressive an observation. As far as Im concerned Knicks need to win a playoff series before they prove anything which is fine. Since the playoffs arent here yet we judge by what we see.

I agree. The no defense thing is getting old. The only reason the Knicks are not 10 games over .500 is their offense. The defense this year has been enough to be one of the 5-8 teams in the league.

They have been alot better defensively this year. However, they are still at the bottom of the league in defending the 3.

That cannot continue.

The point is not that the Knicks don't have room for improvement defensively. The point is that MDA gets a bad rap for not coaching defense, yet, last year was an aberration. In most years, his teams are average to above average defensively. Can we stop with the bias or is it just more fun to insult the coach for no reason? MDA's teams play at a higher pace, so they give up more points. More possessions = more points. Most of the people who criticize seem to only take into account points and stop there. If you look at pace, his teams are usually pretty solid on defense. That's all I'm saying. The Knicks are not Miami, but they're solid. MDA deserves some credit for that.

Nobody goes by points - they go by defensive efficiency. MDA gets credit for this year for being better.

17
16
19
20
19

Those are his defensive efficiency rankings in his years in PHX. That is average to below average at best. It is not biased to say that he is an offensive minded coach (not defensive minded). Just like in football, you have offensive minded head coaches and defensive minded head coaches. You just need the right complimentary coordinator - which we now have in Woodson.

24th
27th
21st

is where he ranked in NY. And last year "the aberration" was his best in NY! Not Average to above average at all.

This year, he/they are ranked 7th. They forced a defensive assistant on him (which is okay since he is an offensive minded coach) - I am sure that is not just an aberration either. Chandler helps to - of course.

Look at what Rick Carlisle has done and then you can be impressed. They lost Chandler and are ranked 3rd. That is because he is a defensive minded coach. Funny thing is that with Chandler they were ranked 7th.

This is not hating on MDA. I am just a realist in regards to what he is good at.

I think Woodson has done an underrated good job and alot of that credit goes to Grunwald for bringing him in.

arkrud wrote:

TripleThreat wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:A) D'Antoni doesn't emphasize defense
B) Lin saved D'Antoni's job
C) Knicks can finish as high as 3rd in the east but have no shot against Miami or Chicago

I don't agree with everything Barkley says, but I don't know if he's being totally accurate. To be fair, Chuck works for a network and there are just some things he can't say out loud, but to his credit, IMHO, he comes as close as anyone, besides Phil Jackson, to just saying the league is rigged without using those specific words.

Stern and the NBA simply make more money if Chicago or the Heat win a ring or head to the Finals. Adidas just spent 180-250 million on branding Derrick Rose. Stern just annointed him by having him win MVP last season. The overall NBA brand profits more if Rose is an NBA champion in the next three years. The Heat, at risk of having their Big Three with opt outs, and specifically James, is worth more in terms of profit if James wins a ring. In a lockout shortened season, Stern can use his refs to push James to a win, which detractors can say was a product of the lockout and a superteam, thus Stern can benefit from the profit of James as a champion but still split that team apart, as superteams are the bane and a serious issue to small market owners.

The Jeremy Lin story is partially incredible, IMHO, because it was something even Stern couldn't foresee. There was no chance to prepackage it, hype it, and then have Lin dunk over a car in a Gatorade commercial. The NBA is not really set up for underdogs, they are less predictable for generating ratings and marketing individual stars. They are ok for getting past the first round, a nice sideline story, but they aren't the three or four teams Stern and his refs have already designated as contenders.

In a clean game, with clean officiating, I think the Heat and Bulls take the Knicks in 7 out of 10 series. I think in the current game, with Stern's officials, it's more like 98 out of 100 times, the Heat or Bulls would prevail in a seven game series. One of the most interesting things about Lin is people who don't normally follow basketball or the Knicks are now watching games, including women. These are the demographics that MLB and the NFL get that the NBA has mostly struck out on. When Lin becomes a worldwide brand that could generate the NBA a billion dollars in value in terms of opportunity and international appeal and making the NBA a fully global brand, then I think you'll see the refs treat the Knicks much differently as a whole.

What I think Barkley is saying, just not saying out loud and directly, is Anthony is not taking advantage of his superstar status on defense. Refs aren't going to foul out Anthony in the third quarter of a game. They probably won't even get too close to getting him in foul trouble as long as he's not blatant, esp at home. To me, IMHO, that's the free hits, free elbows, free shoves, free kicks, free kidney punches, free jabs, free swipes that superstars get to do to other players as defenders. I think too often superstars are only noted for the advantages they get offensively, but I think it works both ways. What ref is going to want to risk his ratings, and potential raises, bonuses, promotions and playoff work by doing something crazy like calling a clean game for a road team, or ending a playoff series clean at Game 5 when Stern clearly wants a Game 7 and it's revenue or fouling out a Rose or LeBron James for elbowing some second string forward in the face?

IMHO, the issue is not D'Antoni, the issue is Lin's max profitability for the lifetime of his career. At some point, Lin is either going to be or not going to be worth so much potential money for the NBA, that eventually he will get enough calls to make sure the rest of the players know they can't beat him into the ground ( Fisher and Barnes looked like they wanted to desperately beat Lin as much as they could, but the refs were having none of it) If Stern can't market you or individual players on your team to sell McDonalds, shoes, commercial spots, ad time or fill a highlight reel, then your team isn't going to the Finals.

So to win the title Knicks need to add Indian player to the roster in adition to Lin... then we will have exposure to another 1.5 billions of fans and Knicks can go all the way with full refs amd Stern support!!!!

haha - and an israeli because Stern is jewish.