nykshaknbake wrote:What do you mean? Those six seasons included a strike shortened season. It's really like preseason game 5 only. You can't judge him based on that.

CrushAlot wrote:

nixluva wrote:

mrKnickShot wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:Paul isn't an idiot; he knows MDA's track record in Phoenix. That should matter far more than what a less accomplished NBA player thinks.

He is the perfect coach if Paul wants to win the MVP and underachieve as a team in the playoffs.

Great point Crush.

The only difference is that Paul would not stand for the bullsh1t that MDA gets all the credit for making Paul a great player as he did with Nash.

Nash made MDA look alot smarter than he was. Would have love to have seen Nash win a ring but the coach did not care enough about defense for them to ever win a ring.

Find me a team that won a ring that was that bad every year defensively.

Name me the great defensive centers MDA had? It's hard to get as far as he did with Nash and Stat up the middle of your D with no Center. Please stop reading and regurgitating this untrue crap. You need some defensive talent to excel on D.

He was 6 games under .500 with the second best defensive center in the league. Also at some point he was quoted in phoenix as saying big men slow down the offense. What untrue crap are you talking about? Do you want me to post his record for his 6 seasons without Nash versus his time with Nash. 6 seasons is a significant tenure in the NBA.

nykshaknbake wrote:What do you mean? Those six seasons included a strike shortened season. It's really like preseason game 5 only. You can't judge him based on that.

CrushAlot wrote:

nixluva wrote:

mrKnickShot wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:Paul isn't an idiot; he knows MDA's track record in Phoenix. That should matter far more than what a less accomplished NBA player thinks.

He is the perfect coach if Paul wants to win the MVP and underachieve as a team in the playoffs.

Great point Crush.

The only difference is that Paul would not stand for the bullsh1t that MDA gets all the credit for making Paul a great player as he did with Nash.

Nash made MDA look alot smarter than he was. Would have love to have seen Nash win a ring but the coach did not care enough about defense for them to ever win a ring.

Find me a team that won a ring that was that bad every year defensively.

Name me the great defensive centers MDA had? It's hard to get as far as he did with Nash and Stat up the middle of your D with no Center. Please stop reading and regurgitating this untrue crap. You need some defensive talent to excel on D.

He was 6 games under .500 with the second best defensive center in the league. Also at some point he was quoted in phoenix as saying big men slow down the offense. What untrue crap are you talking about? Do you want me to post his record for his 6 seasons without Nash versus his time with Nash. 6 seasons is a significant tenure in the NBA.

TheloniusMonk wrote:

nixluva wrote:So Nash, Felton, Lin all have positive things to say about MDA As a coach. Just cuz guys love to hate on him doesn't mean he's not a good coach with something to offer a team. I'm sure the Clips would sign up for a couple of WCF's at the least right now.

Not to mention the rings they won with Mike.

So now the only valid reason for hiring a coach is if he has a ring? This is such garbage. All 30 teams can't possibly have coaches that have won a ring. You have to use reason, cuz LB was a great coach even before he won his title. This is what makes it impossible to have real conversations with people around here. Rick Carlisle finally won a title but he was always a good coach. Rick Adelman got to the finals back in 90 and 92 and has many years of good results, but no ring, is he not a good NBA coach worthy of being chosen to run a team?

TheloniusMonk wrote:Problem is, no one is calling Mike D a good coach. Sure, he's a player's coach. Playing under him, if u like to run, you'll have fun. But it is a novelty style. Not a good plan. To simply "outscore the other team" and not put as much focus on STOPS is not good coaching. The coaches you mentioned coach two sides of the floor. So sure, those guys were either on their way to a ring or one or two players away as we speak. Mike D will never win. He coaches one side of the floor......period. Not good coaching whatsoever. He has never coached on team that could get a stop in the playoffs. Not one. Once the scoring ran out, his novelty scheme falls flat. He was never going to win with Phoenix, was never going to win with NY (no matter what the roster) and he won't win in the future. Steve Nash made his career. Period.

You do realize that he didn't have a championship level roster in PHX. You can't win a title if your Center is STAT or worse Diaw!!! They tried to add Shaq, but by that time he was no longer a serious defensive center and they just ran PnR on him and Nash, neither of whom could defend it. It's more than just having a coach that "stresses defense". You have to have defensive TALENT too. It's hard to have a great defensive team without a great defensive big. You're always vulnerable around the basket. It's amazing that his teams weren't bottom of the league when you factor in the heavy minutes Nash and STAT played. Let's not forget that they went up against and beat most of the best talent in the league with no real Center. How do the Knicks look defensively without Tyson and Jared or Shump??? How would the Pistons have looked without Rasheed and Ben???

As for saying that Nash made MDA's career, then you can say the same thing for any coach with good players. Nash and MDA both helped each other!!! That's how it works. Just like Magic helped Riley and vice versa! Jordan helped PJax and vice versa!!!

As for not winning in NY, that really is hard to say given what went down. No need to rehash everything we've argued here about that situation, but you need players to stand up and do their job too. Let's not forget that MDA used to take flack for having Jared in the mix, but now everyone sees why he had him playing. If he didn't care about D why would he play Jared so much? Furthermore this team did defend for him during Linsanity. That was the biggest part of that success.

ChuckBuck wrote:LA Clippers.

Has his Nash(CP3), young Amare(Blake Griffin), young swingman Nick Young(Barbosa/JRich/Iso Joe), and athletic Big Center DeAndre Jordan(Not really MDA's cup of tea). All they're missing is a stretch 4. Maybe if they fire Del Negro, hire D'Antoni, he tries to lure Steve Novak next season. All these pieces would be a match made in 7SSOL heaven.

We could trade Lin for Paul and everyone is happy. They can get fields as well and we could start shumpert at the 2.

Jokes...

nixluva wrote:

TheloniusMonk wrote:Problem is, no one is calling Mike D a good coach. Sure, he's a player's coach. Playing under him, if u like to run, you'll have fun. But it is a novelty style. Not a good plan. To simply "outscore the other team" and not put as much focus on STOPS is not good coaching. The coaches you mentioned coach two sides of the floor. So sure, those guys were either on their way to a ring or one or two players away as we speak. Mike D will never win. He coaches one side of the floor......period. Not good coaching whatsoever. He has never coached on team that could get a stop in the playoffs. Not one. Once the scoring ran out, his novelty scheme falls flat. He was never going to win with Phoenix, was never going to win with NY (no matter what the roster) and he won't win in the future. Steve Nash made his career. Period.

You do realize that he didn't have a championship level roster in PHX. You can't win a title if your Center is STAT or worse Diaw!!! They tried to add Shaq, but by that time he was no longer a serious defensive center and they just ran PnR on him and Nash, neither of whom could defend it. It's more than just having a coach that "stresses defense". You have to have defensive TALENT too. It's hard to have a great defensive team without a great defensive big. You're always vulnerable around the basket. It's amazing that his teams weren't bottom of the league when you factor in the heavy minutes Nash and STAT played. Let's not forget that they went up against and beat most of the best talent in the league with no real Center. How do the Knicks look defensively without Tyson and Jared or Shump??? How would the Pistons have looked without Rasheed and Ben???

As for saying that Nash made MDA's career, then you can say the same thing for any coach with good players. Nash and MDA both helped each other!!! That's how it works. Just like Magic helped Riley and vice versa! Jordan helped PJax and vice versa!!!

As for not winning in NY, that really is hard to say given what went down. No need to rehash everything we've argued here about that situation, but you need players to stand up and do their job too. Let's not forget that MDA used to take flack for having Jared in the mix, but now everyone sees why he had him playing. If he didn't care about D why would he play Jared so much? Furthermore this team did defend for him during Linsanity. That was the biggest part of that success.

All great coaches never had every single piece, but yet they made it work because they instilled confidence, a consistent work ethic, and a demand of focus on BOTH ends of the floor.

Mike Dantoni was given a lot of the things here in New York that he didn't have when he first joined, and he still failed to make it work. He bad scorers, shooters, defensive players, depth, and an owner willing to spend.

Phil Jackson won over 10 rigs without an all star caliber PG. Larry Brown won in Detroit without having a mega star.

The list goes on and on, just like your tiresome Dantoni excuses.

The man was given a chance and he failed. No one here is saying he didn't try, or he didn't care. He did. But he failed, and he showed that his Phoenix success was a fluke.