Of course I'm judging him on his stint here, he was here for four years. I've watched too many games where his indecision or bad decisions helped lose the game. One can argue that there is only so much blame that can be put on the coach with this roster and that's true, but I don't hear any blame at all being put on the coach, just the roster.

I gave him a pass for the first two seasons (he deserved it) but that doesn't mean that MDA wasn't responsible in part for their record over those first 2 years. A good coach knows how to motivate his players, and calls them out when they're under performing. He made TD his punching bag but others got a pass. Letting the players feel free to play their game is fine when they're playing it well but when they're not you sit them. That's why Woodson's "you suck, you sit" mantra and holding players accountable got them to 18 wins a lot faster. It wasn't just about Melo because MDA was making the same mistakes before Melo got here. There was some improvement this season in how he reacted to the other team, but not enough.

Waiting until a game is out of reach to call a time out has nothing to do with being a player's coach. He did that too many times to count. If D'Antoni wants to take a team to the finals with his SSOL philosophy he is going to have to do a better job of implementing it.

holfresh wrote:

Solace wrote:

holfresh wrote:How is MDA ball predicated on high percent shots when his teams generally lead the league or close to the top in low percentage shots(3 pointers)???

A three pointer is obviously weighted based on the fact that it is worth three points. A 50% interior shot is equivalent to a 33.3% three point shot when doing such weighting. 2 x .50 = 1. 3 x .333 ~ 1. Most decent three point shooters shoot over 33% from three.

It doesn't always come out as a clean mathematical equation when u have players who get fouled taking a high percentage 2 point shot and who gets to the foul line a lot...Melo posting to me is much preferable than him taking a three point because it affects the game more positively than a straight up three...The opponent gets into foul trouble...He shoots 80% from the line, etc...

I think the stat you are looking for is TS%, which includes some of the above. Also, Offensive efficiency stat probably comes into play. I think nix showed that in his post above.

holfresh wrote:How is MDA ball predicated on high percent shots when his teams generally lead the league or close to the top in low percentage shots(3 pointers)???

Its based on True Shooting Percentage which gives greater weight to 3 pts... shooting 35% from 3 (1.05 avg points per attempt) is better than shooting 50% from 2 (1 avg point per attempt).

GustavBahler wrote:Sorry Nix, my point had nothing to do with the roster and I've heard excuses for the poor decisions he's made during games, too many excuses. Its one thing to be a player's coach but after a point it crosses the line into laissez-faire. I don't believe you can sit back and watch a player do something over and over which is putting your team in a hole and not say something.

Of course I'm judging him on his stint here, he was here for four years. I've watched too many games where his indecision or bad decisions helped lose the game. One can argue that there is only so much blame that can be put on the coach with this roster and that's true, but I don't hear any blame at all being put on the coach, just the roster.

I gave him a pass for the first two seasons (he deserved it) but that doesn't mean that MDA wasn't responsible in part for their record over those first 2 years. A good coach knows how to motivate his players, and calls them out when they're under performing. He made TD his punching bag but others got a pass. Letting the players feel free to play their game is fine when they're playing it well but when they're not you sit them. That's why Woodson's "you suck, you sit" mantra and holding players accountable got them to 18 wins a lot faster. It wasn't just about Melo because MDA was making the same mistakes before Melo got here. There was some improvement this season in how he reacted to the other team, but not enough.

Waiting until a game is out of reach to call a time out has nothing to do with being a player's coach. He did that too many times to count. If D'Antoni wants to take a team to the finals with his SSOL philosophy he is going to have to do a better job of implementing it.

Please show me another coach with a roster that was full of short term contracts. Guys that were playing for their next contract with another team cuz they all knew that this team was clearing space for 2010!!! You really want to make it seem like this was just any old normal situation where a coach inherits a bad team but works hard to make the best of it and the players are also buying in because they feel they've got a shot to stick??? That's is not what we had here in the 1st 2 years and in the 3rd year we had a bunch of young guys who had to read their names in the paper every day for months!!!

Please stop trying to make this seem like it was a normal situation when it was anything but that. I can't think of a team where a coach was hired KNOWING he was gonna lose for 2 years while the team was constantly trimming down and selling off so they could clear cap for a big FA market. No attempt was made to fix real problems cuz they didn't want to make any commitments to players. Tell me how that's a situation primed for a coach to win or easily make coaching decisions, or have his players actually buy into what he's selling?

What we saw was not a coach put in a position to excel but rather to stumble and second guess and scramble to try and make something work. Then his big reward was to get to coach a player that is the antithesis of his style and with a big lame duck sign on his back and an actual NBA Head Coach that is best friends with the GM on his bench. Man you have a strange sense of what makes for a healthy coaching situation if you think any of that wouldn't effect any top coach. Look at how things went for SVG! Turmoil is never good for a coach in a lame duck scenario.

He was stubborn about not adjusting to his players strengths and what their skills were, he always wants to run his PG and players down to their last legs.
While Poppavich finds a way to preserve his aging stars, developed the confidence and skills of his young players.

Jeff McDonald: Former Sun Boris Diaw, on difference between Spurs' offense and Mike D'Antoni's: "Popovich is still not asking guys to take crazy shots." Twitter

nixluva wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Sorry Nix, my point had nothing to do with the roster and I've heard excuses for the poor decisions he's made during games, too many excuses. Its one thing to be a player's coach but after a point it crosses the line into laissez-faire. I don't believe you can sit back and watch a player do something over and over which is putting your team in a hole and not say something.

Of course I'm judging him on his stint here, he was here for four years. I've watched too many games where his indecision or bad decisions helped lose the game. One can argue that there is only so much blame that can be put on the coach with this roster and that's true, but I don't hear any blame at all being put on the coach, just the roster.

I gave him a pass for the first two seasons (he deserved it) but that doesn't mean that MDA wasn't responsible in part for their record over those first 2 years. A good coach knows how to motivate his players, and calls them out when they're under performing. He made TD his punching bag but others got a pass. Letting the players feel free to play their game is fine when they're playing it well but when they're not you sit them. That's why Woodson's "you suck, you sit" mantra and holding players accountable got them to 18 wins a lot faster. It wasn't just about Melo because MDA was making the same mistakes before Melo got here. There was some improvement this season in how he reacted to the other team, but not enough.

Waiting until a game is out of reach to call a time out has nothing to do with being a player's coach. He did that too many times to count. If D'Antoni wants to take a team to the finals with his SSOL philosophy he is going to have to do a better job of implementing it.

Please show me another coach with a roster that was full of short term contracts. Guys that were playing for their next contract with another team cuz they all knew that this team was clearing space for 2010!!! You really want to make it seem like this was just any old normal situation where a coach inherits a bad team but works hard to make the best of it and the players are also buying in because they feel they've got a shot to stick??? That's is not what we had here in the 1st 2 years and in the 3rd year we had a bunch of young guys who had to read their names in the paper every day for months!!!

Please stop trying to make this seem like it was a normal situation when it was anything but that. I can't think of a team where a coach was hired KNOWING he was gonna lose for 2 years while the team was constantly trimming down and selling off so they could clear cap for a big FA market. No attempt was made to fix real problems cuz they didn't want to make any commitments to players. Tell me how that's a situation primed for a coach to win or easily make coaching decisions, or have his players actually buy into what he's selling?

What we saw was not a coach put in a position to excel but rather to stumble and second guess and scramble to try and make something work. Then his big reward was to get to coach a player that is the antithesis of his style and with a big lame duck sign on his back and an actual NBA Head Coach that is best friends with the GM on his bench. Man you have a strange sense of what makes for a healthy coaching situation if you think any of that wouldn't effect any top coach. Look at how things went for SVG! Turmoil is never good for a coach in a lame duck scenario.

I don't know Nix, the reason I avoid these discussions with you about MDA is because you are unable to concede that MDA has made any mistakes in his tenure as coach. Every coach makes tactical errors at times, some more than others.

You're right, when looking at his overall record, the roster shuffling has to be factored in. No argument here. What I'm not buying and I never will is that this gives him a blanket pass for being too often a lousy tactician and motivator. Too many games where the Knicks came out flat, didn't play hard on both ends of the court.

I don't care if the roster turns over every Sunday. You let a lead get too big and lose the game because you didn't call a timeout to stop the bleeding, its on the coach. When a player jacks up one bad shot after another and you don't tell him to try something else (like taking it to the rim), its on the coach. When the other team changes their strategy and you don't respond fast enough, its on the coach. When you won't adapt your strategy to the roster you have, its on the coach.

Sometimes the roster isn't good enough to beat a better team and sometimes a coach makes the wrong decisions and doesn't get the most out of what he has. Both were the case with MDA. You are arguing that it was all on the roster. I'm just not buying that.

There were long enough stretches in any of those season where his ability as a tactician and coach could be evaluated. The roster wasn't turning over so much that it became impossible to tell if he was making the right decisions on the floor. Every answer to why the Knicks played poorly can't be "roster moves". Its a copout Nix.

I was happy that MDA got hired, I really thought we had a shot with the plan they laid out, I wanted him to succeed. But it was hard to miss that he wasn't always the best coach on the floor, too often for my liking he wasn't and that's why I thought it was time for a change. Will Woodson do better? Damned if I know but I think he's off to a good start.

GustavBahler wrote:

nixluva wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Sorry Nix, my point had nothing to do with the roster and I've heard excuses for the poor decisions he's made during games, too many excuses. Its one thing to be a player's coach but after a point it crosses the line into laissez-faire. I don't believe you can sit back and watch a player do something over and over which is putting your team in a hole and not say something.

Of course I'm judging him on his stint here, he was here for four years. I've watched too many games where his indecision or bad decisions helped lose the game. One can argue that there is only so much blame that can be put on the coach with this roster and that's true, but I don't hear any blame at all being put on the coach, just the roster.

I gave him a pass for the first two seasons (he deserved it) but that doesn't mean that MDA wasn't responsible in part for their record over those first 2 years. A good coach knows how to motivate his players, and calls them out when they're under performing. He made TD his punching bag but others got a pass. Letting the players feel free to play their game is fine when they're playing it well but when they're not you sit them. That's why Woodson's "you suck, you sit" mantra and holding players accountable got them to 18 wins a lot faster. It wasn't just about Melo because MDA was making the same mistakes before Melo got here. There was some improvement this season in how he reacted to the other team, but not enough.

Waiting until a game is out of reach to call a time out has nothing to do with being a player's coach. He did that too many times to count. If D'Antoni wants to take a team to the finals with his SSOL philosophy he is going to have to do a better job of implementing it.

Please show me another coach with a roster that was full of short term contracts. Guys that were playing for their next contract with another team cuz they all knew that this team was clearing space for 2010!!! You really want to make it seem like this was just any old normal situation where a coach inherits a bad team but works hard to make the best of it and the players are also buying in because they feel they've got a shot to stick??? That's is not what we had here in the 1st 2 years and in the 3rd year we had a bunch of young guys who had to read their names in the paper every day for months!!!

Please stop trying to make this seem like it was a normal situation when it was anything but that. I can't think of a team where a coach was hired KNOWING he was gonna lose for 2 years while the team was constantly trimming down and selling off so they could clear cap for a big FA market. No attempt was made to fix real problems cuz they didn't want to make any commitments to players. Tell me how that's a situation primed for a coach to win or easily make coaching decisions, or have his players actually buy into what he's selling?

What we saw was not a coach put in a position to excel but rather to stumble and second guess and scramble to try and make something work. Then his big reward was to get to coach a player that is the antithesis of his style and with a big lame duck sign on his back and an actual NBA Head Coach that is best friends with the GM on his bench. Man you have a strange sense of what makes for a healthy coaching situation if you think any of that wouldn't effect any top coach. Look at how things went for SVG! Turmoil is never good for a coach in a lame duck scenario.

I don't know Nix, the reason I avoid these discussions with you about MDA is because you are unable to concede that MDA has made any mistakes in his tenure as coach. Every coach makes tactical errors at times, some more than others.

You're right, when looking at his overall record, the roster shuffling has to be factored in. No argument here. What I'm not buying and I never will is that this gives him a blanket pass for being too often a lousy tactician and motivator. Too many games where the Knicks came out flat, didn't play hard on both ends of the court.

I don't care if the roster turns over every Sunday. You let a lead get too big and lose the game because you didn't call a timeout to stop the bleeding, its on the coach. When a player jacks up one bad shot after another and you don't tell him to try something else (like taking it to the rim), its on the coach. When the other team changes their strategy and you don't respond fast enough, its on the coach. When you won't adapt your strategy to the roster you have, its on the coach.

Sometimes the roster isn't good enough to beat a better team and sometimes a coach makes the wrong decisions and doesn't get the most out of what he has. Both were the case with MDA. You are arguing that it was all on the roster. I'm just not buying that.

There were long enough stretches in any of those season where his ability as a tactician and coach could be evaluated. The roster wasn't turning over so much that it became impossible to tell if he was making the right decisions on the floor. Every answer to why the Knicks played poorly can't be "roster moves". Its a copout Nix.

I was happy that MDA got hired, I really thought we had a shot with the plan they laid out, I wanted him to succeed. But it was hard to miss that he wasn't always the best coach on the floor, too often for my liking he wasn't and that's why I thought it was time for a change. Will Woodson do better? Damned if I know but I think he's off to a good start.

beautifully said, I CONCUR!