nixluva wrote:

Olbrannon wrote:Waffling on this still. oohah and nixluva make interesting cases as the staunchest on each side of the pole.
He does come up with some good plays out of time outs ...sometimes. Sometimes I'm like wtf was that!??!
And it's just flat arse difficult for me to get this whole no foul crap he espouses. Sometimes ya gotta.
Especially end game

On the other hand..the teams he had in Phoenix were not expected to do as well as they did.

82 games a lot can happen and does.

His approach of not fouling is more a middle of the game thing. It just doesn't make sense to put teams on the FT line when that is the highest % offense you can give a team. FT's are shot at about 76% across the league. In addition he wants the pace to be fast and FT's slow the game down and don't allow you to run and catch teams before they get their defense set. Tactically it makes perfect sense if you intend to win more with offense than defense.

Sure it's great to win with hard defense, but not if you're team isn't blessed with a lot of shutdown defenders. We've still got some guys that aren't that great defensively and that thrive on offense. Tho i'm happy with the defensive effort so far this preseason. IMO it's better to learn how to defend without giving the foul than to rely on fouls too much.

The above is just common sense for any team Looks to me like DW and d'A have put a good mix of both skills on the squad. Now if they all learn from each other and get a flow....

At the same time this is New York and the Knicks we are talking about. Not like there won't be some drama and soap opera's conjured and such. Nothing quite like it they say Melo, Buike, "Trade affects Gallo?" "youth inconsistent" " win before Stat crumbles!" Sheesh it never ends.

loweyecue wrote:

sidsanders wrote:

Nalod wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:After 2 years I think that he should be monitored 20 games @ a time. I want to see progress-- we should not be worse than last year with a superstar player and enough complimentary pieces

I agree. Of course we can't keep firing these guys either.

I do like he is giving rookies a shot. Moz has earned everything and is getting an opportunity. Fields could well be in his rotation. Preseason has shown that Rautins does have a skill set although I doubt he cracks it this year.

Progress in terms of roster is evident. How it comes together and of course that MDA never loses the team this year is paramount.

We may be .500 by years end but its going to be rough start. 7-13 record in first 20 games and then better than .500 after to make up ground is not going to be easy to digest.

Melo looms over until traded to Nets or he holds out for Knicks.

if they are not getting the job done why not? if the hire/fire thing keeps up, then perhaps they are not firing at a high enough level since fired coaches cost time/$$$.

Because if you keep this madness up, no one will want to coach here except scrubs who can't get a job anywhere else.

$$$ will drag folks in the door. i see no reason to keep clowns like thomas around to fail and make things worse over being afraid some future hire might not want the job. mike took the $$$ despite how this team was, the media scrutiny, the love/hate of the fans, and several coaches hired/fired in succession.

BRIGGS wrote:Mason cant hit a jumpshot and fields is playing great--yet he will play Mason over fields. we are getting killed KILLED KILLED on the boards and he wont switch up to zone for to compensate for some of our physical short comings TOO MANY F 3 BALLS STILL SHOWERING IN

tell me why he shouldnt be under serious scrutiny---right now hes just taking the money.

Zone doesn't help a team to rebound, in fact it makes it harder in many ways. For one thing zone tends to force longer jump shots and when they miss they miss long and you can't really block out as effectively out on the perimeter.

Guys are shooting 3's cuz they can't get inside. We didn't have an inside out game, due to not having a real post threat, so the Sixers pack the paint and dare us to shoot, which we did, but missed. We don't have a lot of great breakdown players that can get to the rim easily. Our PG's aren't great drive n kick players either, so that's another facet of the game we couldn't use without a post presence in there.

fishmike wrote:EVERY coach needs that to be successful! DUH!

Who is this coach you guys are dreaming of? I cant WAIT to see how terrible the Nets are this year with Avery "defense comes first" Johnson.

Knick defense has been very good so far. Its the rebounding thats poor. Funny thing.. we dont have good rebounders. Weird how that happens! Its an area of concern pretty much everyone saw. Last game was better. We saw guys who dont usually put more effort on the glass. Its going to be a season long endeavor

Dripping sarcasm and pointing out the obvious followed by cliches are not very constructive content Fishmike...please do your best to be more constructive with the content you post.

oohah

martin wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:He is already proving again to be a horse's @ss in my book with his treatment of Randolph. He appears to make no effort with talented guys that might need to be built up, coached, taught, or are immature in their game. Apparently talent isn't worth his time if he has to work as a coach to get it out of the player. I keep hoping this guy will change, and not be predictable in his treatment of players. He continues to be very predictable. The writing was on the wall for this move after the first preseason game. Can't wait till he is gone.

you must be catching all of the practices. What are you seeing that makes you write such things?

I swear, Crushalot is Mark Berman. This is the same guy who continues to talk about Tony Douglas' playing time coinciding with some meeting between Walsh and MDA that he witnessed on the plane to SanAn.

It seems to me that Crush is fan of certain players (Jordan Hill, Anthony Randolph) and when they dont pan out right away or are not as good as he wants them to be, he blames the coach. Why is it that MDA gets credit for not coaching Randolph up, but he gets no credit for Fields development who just so happens to be a rookie that MDA despises?

CrushAlot wrote:

Uptown wrote:

martin wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:He is already proving again to be a horse's @ss in my book with his treatment of Randolph. He appears to make no effort with talented guys that might need to be built up, coached, taught, or are immature in their game. Apparently talent isn't worth his time if he has to work as a coach to get it out of the player. I keep hoping this guy will change, and not be predictable in his treatment of players. He continues to be very predictable. The writing was on the wall for this move after the first preseason game. Can't wait till he is gone.

you must be catching all of the practices. What are you seeing that makes you write such things?

I swear, Crushalot is Mark Berman. This is the same guy who continues to talk about Tony Douglas' playing time coinciding with some meeting between Walsh and MDA that he witnessed on the plane to SanAn.

It seems to me that Crush is fan of certain players (Jordan Hill, Anthony Randolph) and when they dont pan out right away or are not as good as he wants them to be, he blames the coach. Why is it that MDA gets credit for not coaching Randolph up, but he gets no credit for Fields development who just so happens to be a rookie that MDA despises?

First of all the only assumption I would make about you is that we are both fans of the same team. The reason I bring up Douglas is because he fits the pattern of how D'Antoni handles young players. During the first 59 games of the season last year Douglas had 26 dnps. His minutes and playing time changed dramatically when Walsh traveled with the team on the Texas road trip to evaluate the players and coaching staff. Those are facts.

My issue with Jordan Hill was that there was no logical reason for him not to be getting minutes on a 29 win team with marginal vets playing ahead of him. I was excited about his potential and that D'Antoni compared him to Amare. Now I just wish that Hill had been given minutes so that the Knicks wouldn't have had to give up two picks in the McGrady trade.

Regarding Randolph, he has tremendous talent and is incredibly young. He needs coaching, mentoring and maturity. D'Antoni has a pattern with guys that need this from him. He benches them and doesn't deal with them. It is a pattern and I was afraid that it would happen with Randolph.

I think when you look back at the Knick teams of the 90's that won there were some guys that might be considered knuckleheads, immature or character issues but they were a big part of that success. Can you imagine if Charles Smith was played and Mase was banished to the bench, or Starks was banished and just Wilkins played, or Spree or Camby? Coaches need to manage personalities and egos. You can't ignore talent because it needs to be molded and mentored. Up to this point matuturity, profesionalism, and a lack of a need for a coach to act as mentor/teacher/ authority figure has been more important than talent, potential, building for the future, and even winning. I keep waiting for D'Antoni to not be predictable in his faults but I haven't seen it yet.

First, do you care to address the fact that MDA gets credit for not coaching Randolph up, but he gets no credit for Fields development who just so happens to be a rookie that you claim MDA has no patience for?

Hard to compare Starks, Mase, Spree and Camby who all played on winning teams to incosistant rooks (Jordan Hill, Dougls) and outcasts (Hughes).

Uptown wrote:

First, do you care to address the fact that MDA gets credit for not coaching Randolph up, but he gets no credit for Fields development.

Why does D'Antoni get credit for Fields' development? Has Fields been developed? Maybe he is a just a good 4 year college player with a mature game, I think that is closer to the mark. D'Antoni has worked with Fields for what, 3-4 weeks?

oohah

oohah wrote:

fishmike wrote:EVERY coach needs that to be successful! DUH!

Who is this coach you guys are dreaming of? I cant WAIT to see how terrible the Nets are this year with Avery "defense comes first" Johnson.

Knick defense has been very good so far. Its the rebounding thats poor. Funny thing.. we dont have good rebounders. Weird how that happens! Its an area of concern pretty much everyone saw. Last game was better. We saw guys who dont usually put more effort on the glass. Its going to be a season long endeavor

Dripping sarcasm and pointing out the obvious followed by cliches are not very constructive content Fishmike...please do your best to be more constructive with the content you post.

oohah

All coaches need talent to be successful.

Previous Knick coaches failed and were fired first and foremost because the talent on this roster was subpar.

The weakness of this team (rebounding) is a product of the player's shortcomings and not the system. To further clarify: The Knicks are a poor rebounding team because they lack good rebounders.

The Knicks as a team are clearly working harder to rebound. I'm suggesting thats because the coach has suggested if this doesnt get fixed they wont be winning any games.

If I'm stating the obvious its because you fail to see it.

Your welcome.