Posted by Allanfan20:

Posted by sebstar:

Posted by fishmike:

Posted by sebstar:
Perhaps DAntoni would have a chip and would still be coaching in Phx if he wasnt such a self-obsessed, egomaniacal, loose cannon.

which great coach isnt?
Larry Brown, Phil Jackson, Riley, even our own little JVG. Pop and Sloan are less outspoke but mostly because they get their way. Not really saying its right, just that it is.

Phl Jacks has the luxury of being egomanical when he's always looked across and seen Jordan, Shaq, and Kobe staring back at him.

Brown would be one of the more controversial figures in sports if not for the media protecting him.

Pop and Sloan are largely pretty stable.

Everything is fair and love and war but at the same time there is a difference between being tough and being destructive. This was destructive and it was so stupid and unnecessary. I know most will eat this up because they hate Nate, but he was dead wrong for this.

Some here hate Nate, but as I said, the majority of NY fans love the guy. I just don't see this as being destructive the way you do. If it were a different personality, yes. Like I said though, Nate is a one of a kind character and I don't see how this can be destructive with him.

It's not I think sebstar should concede defeat and let's be on with it.

Posted by orangeblobman:

Posted by Allanfan20:

Posted by sebstar:

Posted by fishmike:

Posted by sebstar:
Perhaps DAntoni would have a chip and would still be coaching in Phx if he wasnt such a self-obsessed, egomaniacal, loose cannon.

which great coach isnt?
Larry Brown, Phil Jackson, Riley, even our own little JVG. Pop and Sloan are less outspoke but mostly because they get their way. Not really saying its right, just that it is.

Phl Jacks has the luxury of being egomanical when he's always looked across and seen Jordan, Shaq, and Kobe staring back at him.

Brown would be one of the more controversial figures in sports if not for the media protecting him.

Pop and Sloan are largely pretty stable.

Everything is fair and love and war but at the same time there is a difference between being tough and being destructive. This was destructive and it was so stupid and unnecessary. I know most will eat this up because they hate Nate, but he was dead wrong for this.

Some here hate Nate, but as I said, the majority of NY fans love the guy. I just don't see this as being destructive the way you do. If it were a different personality, yes. Like I said though, Nate is a one of a kind character and I don't see how this can be destructive with him.

It's not I think sebstar should concede defeat and let's be on with it.

I'm not asking him or myself to conceid defeat. I'm just trying to put my point across. His point is well taken. I just don't agree with him.

Posted by martin:

Isola usually slants an article and the quotes within it to push his own view, but this one frames MDA's "Nate only got 1 year" quote pretty well I think:

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/basketball/knicks/2009/10/08/2009-10-08_knicks_hope_emotional_nate.html

Lots of other words and context. Seems about right to me.

Posted by Allanfan20:

Posted by orangeblobman:

Posted by Allanfan20:

Posted by sebstar:

Posted by fishmike:

Posted by sebstar:
Perhaps DAntoni would have a chip and would still be coaching in Phx if he wasnt such a self-obsessed, egomaniacal, loose cannon.

which great coach isnt?
Larry Brown, Phil Jackson, Riley, even our own little JVG. Pop and Sloan are less outspoke but mostly because they get their way. Not really saying its right, just that it is.

Phl Jacks has the luxury of being egomanical when he's always looked across and seen Jordan, Shaq, and Kobe staring back at him.

Brown would be one of the more controversial figures in sports if not for the media protecting him.

Pop and Sloan are largely pretty stable.

Everything is fair and love and war but at the same time there is a difference between being tough and being destructive. This was destructive and it was so stupid and unnecessary. I know most will eat this up because they hate Nate, but he was dead wrong for this.

Some here hate Nate, but as I said, the majority of NY fans love the guy. I just don't see this as being destructive the way you do. If it were a different personality, yes. Like I said though, Nate is a one of a kind character and I don't see how this can be destructive with him.

It's not I think sebstar should concede defeat and let's be on with it.

I'm not asking him or myself to conceid defeat. I'm just trying to put my point across. His point is well taken. I just don't agree with him.

Mutual.

Posted by Bippity10:

"He's got to channel his energy in a positive way," Mike D'Antoni says. "If he does that, he could be as good as anyone in the league. It's a challenge for him and for us but I thought he made improvements last year."

How is this destructive???? Is it really destructive Sebstar or are you just interpreting it that way? What exactly are you objecting too?

To me it sounds like he's challenging Nate. He's saying Nate can be a star and is good enough to lead this team if he gets his emotions in check. Is this secret knowledge? And he's right about the contracts. Nate and lee both did not get long-term contracts because they did not play for a winning team. Again is this secret knowledge?

Posted by PresIke:

dj, i'll bite...

a good manager/teacher/coach will give both positive support and criticism.

in the broadcast of the first pre-season game breen mentioned how d'antoni said last year during camp that nate should average 2 or 3 steals if he wants, and said that this year he thinks he can lead the league.

don't see too much press about that, unsurprisingly, but you have to gauge whether a player can take criticism or how one responds to it and use it accordingly.

maybe he and the coaching staff have found that nate may step up better to some criticism, but in the end it isn't larry brown-ish.

he didn't call him delusional...

he's holding nate to high expectations and saying this is what we need and what we don't need.

i don't think this is necessarily a big deal as d'antoni humiliating nate, seb, and i am always one to call out coaches, teachers, etc. who use embarrassment as a tool, often innapropriately.

reality is that while most don't like it, some do respond to "tough love." you have to take different approaches to different people. i've worked with some who want me to call them out, and others who it has the opposite effect (makes things worse).

another reality as a manager is that when you spend a lot of time working with someone and they keep repeating the same mistakes we can be vulnerable to slip ups. d'antoni is a fairly candid coach though, but he will say positives, and try to encourage good play/behavior. that's part of why he is rated the most popular coach in the league, no matter how much that may not jibe with some here.

he is holding the team to high expectations, which is a fine line good coaches/teachers/managers have to walk when also facing realities that some may take longer to grow, or perhaps are not a good fit for a particular team. i suspect with nate after last season, mda felt a bit frustrated that he really encouraged nate positively at the start, but nate kept doing some of the same stuff.

Posted by djsunyc:


imho, d'antoni doesn't like nate and didn't want him on the team. now that he's back and probably the same guy as he was last season, he decided to say something about it. that's just my opinion but bringing up nate's contract seems to make it a little more personal.

Posted by Bippity10:

Because that's the part of the conversation you seem to be missing. I don't think this was an attack on Nate at all. It was a challenge, and this cherry picked quote points towards this. He's saying Nate is as good as anyone in the league and can lead this team to more wins(he did not blame him for losses) if he gets the mental side of the game togehter. This is actually the third coach to say this and not at all a shocker.

"As soon as we get it and he gets it, then we'll win, get in the playoffs and guys will find homes."

This was echoed by Al Harrington earlier this summer. Seems like a theme that the leaders of this team feel needs to get across to the players. That you don't get the accolades or the money until you win. Is this not true?

Posted by sebstar:

Posted by Bippity10:

Because that's the part of the conversation you seem to be missing. I don't think this was an attack on Nate at all. It was a challenge, and this cherry picked quote points towards this. He's saying Nate is as good as anyone in the league and can lead this team to more wins(he did not blame him for losses) if he gets the mental side of the game togehter. This is actually the third coach to say this and not at all a shocker.

"As soon as we get it and he gets it, then we'll win, get in the playoffs and guys will find homes."

This was echoed by Al Harrington earlier this summer. Seems like a theme that the leaders of this team feel needs to get across to the players. That you don't get the accolades or the money until you win. Is this not true?

Im not missing anything. Where have I ever suggested that Nate doesnt have some growing to do?

But there is a right way and a wrong way to go about things. Period. What about his Golden boy having a bad back...did that have anything to do with our success last year? There are more areas that demand his concentration level. Paging Jordan Hill.

And he really exposed himself with the contract talk, which borders on a lie. This was an agenda-filled rant rather than a genuine attempt to reach one of his players. Thats my point.

[Edited by - sebstar on 10-08-2009 1:25 PM]