martin wrote:Here's my last thoughts on the 3 point shooting and what I have been taking into consideration when I think about the Knicks and how much they shoot.

Up until this year, Douglas and Gallo shoot nearly 40% from 3 point land. As a coach, do you tell your guys to shoot, not shoot, or take what's given to you? Probably some place in between, and yet there will be nights when both threw up donuts. Chandler is a bad 3point shooter and a bad decision maker (my opinion is that there is a 99% chance he will be gone by next season). As a coach, how much leeway to you give each of them? Also consider how much experience each has and where they are in their collective careers.

And the bad shooting is compounded with losses: After Chi and Wash games, general feeling was that this team was a world beater or at least better than perhaps a final record of .500; now, after a few loses, not so much and blame is tossed around.

It's the same with Wade and LeBron, 2 of the premiere players in the league, and I didn't have to dig very far to come up with an example. Both are incredibly bad 3point shooter and yet last night they both put up 5 EACH from downtown and hit ZERO and lost. Each of them must have had bad coaches who never told them to NOT shoot outside shots, especially when they are not falling, and both of those guys have incredible skill at going strong to the rim so there is really no excuse, and yet it happens.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=301111014

There is a give and take and ebb and flow to a season. 8 games in? Not sure I want to draw conclusions. After 20 I start to see what's going on and certainly by 40 we can start to draw conclusions.

If you want to pull in the last 2 years to make an argument, why not also include in the last 4 with PHO to see how MDA coached, wouldn't that give us a clearer picture?

CrushAlot wrote:

martin wrote:Here's my last thoughts on the 3 point shooting and what I have been taking into consideration when I think about the Knicks and how much they shoot.

Up until this year, Douglas and Gallo shoot nearly 40% from 3 point land. As a coach, do you tell your guys to shoot, not shoot, or take what's given to you? Probably some place in between, and yet there will be nights when both threw up donuts. Chandler is a bad 3point shooter and a bad decision maker (my opinion is that there is a 99% chance he will be gone by next season). As a coach, how much leeway to you give each of them? Also consider how much experience each has and where they are in their collective careers.

And the bad shooting is compounded with losses: After Chi and Wash games, general feeling was that this team was a world beater or at least better than perhaps a final record of .500; now, after a few loses, not so much and blame is tossed around.

It's the same with Wade and LeBron, 2 of the premiere players in the league, and I didn't have to dig very far to come up with an example. Both are incredibly bad 3point shooter and yet last night they both put up 5 EACH from downtown and hit ZERO and lost. Each of them must have had bad coaches who never told them to NOT shoot outside shots, especially when they are not falling, and both of those guys have incredible skill at going strong to the rim so there is really no excuse, and yet it happens.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=301111014

There is a give and take and ebb and flow to a season. 8 games in? Not sure I want to draw conclusions. After 20 I start to see what's going on and certainly by 40 we can start to draw conclusions.

If you want to pull in the last 2 years to make an argument, why not also include in the last 4 with PHO to see how MDA coached, wouldn't that give us a clearer picture?

If you count D'Antoni's first year in Phoenix ( he was there for 5 years) and his year in Denver he has had 4 very bad years and 4 very good years as an NBA coach. What variables were in place for his four consecutive very good years? To me the one that jumps out is Nash. The franchise was relatively stable and loaded with talent. Marion, Johnson for part of the time, and Amare helped make up an extremely talented roster. However, I now think Nash truly deserved his two mvps during that time period. I think his ability to see the floor and react to the defense might be the best ever. Nash is an mvp and hall of famer.

i guess the context of the discussion - for me anyhow - was when and how to judge coaching and systems. For me the first 2 years in NY are a throw away for MDA, not much good data to grab on to, too much turnover and roster change of caca players to really be able to judge a coach (and I am going to have patience of 20-40 games to integrate 10 new players and lots of young guys this year). Same with that Denver gig of which that was a take over job of a crap team 30 games or so into the season, and if memory serves correct, that first year in PHO when MDA took over 20 games in for an ousted Frank Johnson and was coach at a time that centered around dropping Marbury and Penny on NY, no? In exchange for high talent of Eisley and whatever?

Perspective, gotta have it.

ramtour420 wrote:i like MDA, but the one thing that really bothers me is that he doesn't call timeouts when we need to break up the other team's momentum. You know, we are up by 20+, they cut it to 16- no timeout. They cut the lead to less than 10- no timeout. when they tie or about to tite- then he calls timeout . . . i don't get it

martin wrote:

AnubisADL wrote:

martin wrote:

eViL wrote:

nixluva wrote:You guys really think you know better than Mike how his offensive set is supposed to run? It doesn't matter if Fields was successful a few times on his cuts, it's the timing of his other forays to the basket that is in question. All Mike is saying is that the timing isn't right. If he's moving too soon, then really only Mike would know from watching film. None of you guys knows what the hell you're talking about from the perspective of the coach. This guy is the one teaching these guys to run the plays and he's pretty sure how they're supposed to work. I'm constantly amazed that so many think that this guy is lost when OTHER Coaches actually use the plays and things he's designed offensively.

All the Olympic players remarked at how great he was at coming up with plays. Just cuz we haven't seen it with these players doesn't mean that he's wrong. Perhaps the players aren't executing the plays properly. I know i've seen his offense run very well before. I think we need to give him time to get it worked out and if he fails then you can look to fire him, but after 8 games it seems too premature to be going in on him.

all i know is that i've been generally supportive of the guy but it's becoming painfully obvious that this team 1) lacks intensity, 2) is sloppy in its execution (especially in the 4th), 3) has terribly undisciplined shot selection. all 3 of those things fall on coach for me at this point. not saying he should get fired. just saying i'm losing patience.

after 7 games?

it's why it's so hard to rebuild in NY.

I dont consider signing Amare to a 100 million dollar deal rebuilding.

Can we say Miami is rebuilding? Would you say Chicago is rebuilding?

Knicks are trying to win now. You cant put the team in limbo for 2 years than try to rebuild by signed a guy to a max deal.

when you add 10 new guys to the roster, what do you call that?

Revamping

New players playing the same dysfunctional system that was expected to make us winners this season. While young, the trio of Gallo, Will and Randolph are not rooks anymore. Amar'e, Felton and Turiaf are young veterans. Fields and Mozgov have been part of the starting lineup but not mainly because they are part of the future, but because the first one plays like a veteran and the second is the only true C on the team. This isn't rebuilding while with patience we hope the players develop and at some point in the next seasons they win. This was a team expected to win at least enough to battle for a last playoff spot.

“We weren’t attacking the rim,” Knicks Coach Mike D’Antoni said. “We were settling too quick. No excuse, we shouldn’t have done that.”

"...the Knicks, who seemed to be doing whatever they wanted offensively against the league’s second-worst defensive team, began misfiring 3-pointer after 3-pointer without running much time off the shot clock. And when the Timberwolves scored eight straight points, the listless crowd at the Target Center began to stir."

"In a span of 11 minutes 41 seconds from early in the third quarter to early in the fourth, the Knicks made only three baskets in a 33-9 run by the Wolves, who moved from 21 points down to 3 points ahead, 90-87."

“I thought we might have been a little tight, as a matter of fact,” D’Antoni said. “We got up and started missing shots. And then we couldn’t make dunks and different things happened. Weird stuff happened.

Weird stuff?

"The Knicks led, 67-53, when Stoudemire committed his fourth foul only 53 seconds into the third quarter, and pushed the margin to 78-57 over the next two minutes while Stoudemire sat."

When D'Antoni brought back Stoudemire, Gallo and Felton, it began to fall apart as Knicks players fell into the predictable trap of jacking up three's.

In retrospect, Mozgov was rebounding well against the large Minnesota front line and instead of going with the flow, he sat with only one foul after 11 minutes. This was a game to match size with size, not go small. Without Turiaf or Mozgov, there was no interior defense, or apparent offense. Shooting 38 per cent from the field will not get it.

Scoreboard

"in-game adjustments" - 1 D'Antoni - 0