Jordan Hill Giv me da opportunity and ill make da most out of it...DA GOOD ROOKIE!!! ; )

LMAO! good stuff big fella! good stuff!

Pharzeone wrote:ROFL. That quote has to be one of the most bizarre ones I seen in awhile from a head coach. I can't complain, I like it for my sign.

His stans, other than Nalod have been dead ass quiet. His handling of Hill is indefensible and supports the narrative that those who disapprove of him, and his job performance, have been claiming for quite sometime.

martin wrote:

sebstar wrote:

Pharzeone wrote:ROFL. That quote has to be one of the most bizarre ones I seen in awhile from a head coach. I can't complain, I like it for my sign.

His stans, other than Nalod have been dead ass quiet. His handling of Hill is indefensible and supports the narrative that those who disapprove of him, and his job performance, have been claiming for quite sometime.

not true. The rest of the MDA supports are trolling through the Alba thread, too bored of the tired arguments.

How is this a "tired" argument. He just said this about Hill, what, a day or so ago?

sebstar wrote:

martin wrote:

sebstar wrote:

Pharzeone wrote:ROFL. That quote has to be one of the most bizarre ones I seen in awhile from a head coach. I can't complain, I like it for my sign.

His stans, other than Nalod have been dead ass quiet. His handling of Hill is indefensible and supports the narrative that those who disapprove of him, and his job performance, have been claiming for quite sometime.

not true. The rest of the MDA supports are trolling through the Alba thread, too bored of the tired arguments.

How is this a "tired" argument. He just said this about Hill, what, a day or so ago?

hey, I thought Hill should have played more. Speak to MDA's other comments that came out of the same clips from yesterday: Hill was behind Lee, Harrington, Jefferies, Gallo, etc at the 4/5 position for minutes. He also needed to learn system (others had a head start on this from previous year) and came into training camp out of shape.

Pharzeone wrote:Martin, should we salute him for a job well done. He continues to put his foot in his mouth. He should have just avoided the issue and said all the right things. Instead he found it necessary once again to defend himself and his actions. His insecurities are one of his biggest flaws.

the correct response would have been "yeah, i realize now that Jordan Hill is a lot better than what i ever gave him credit for, but we had to give up assets in order to free up the cap space we were looking to have this summer. i'm happy for Jordan that he's getting an opportunity to play now in Houston, i think he's in a great situation now. i wish him nothing but the best."

that's what u would expect a coach to say while taking accountability for his own mistake rather than dishing out cheap shots at a 22 year old kid who just wanted a shot to play this season... bad form on MDA's part & shows u a lot about what this guy is all about.

martin wrote:

Pharzeone wrote:Martin, should we salute him for a job well done. He continues to put his foot in his mouth. He should have just avoided the issue and said all the right things. Instead he found it necessary once again to defend himself and his actions. His insecurities are one of his biggest flaws.

the whole "Bad rookies" comment is waaayyy out of context IMHO. Perhaps MDA should keep his mouth shut, but this is NY and the media we got. Did he defend his actions or did he just answer questions the best he can?

Everyone has insecurities. Does answering questions mean you are defending them or just answering questions?

That's fair. But I think he is only giving these media guys rope. I thought his remarks about Jeffries were well done. Maybe he should have lumped the two together and just talk about the 2010 plan to get under cap.

Pharzeone wrote:

martin wrote:

Pharzeone wrote:Martin, should we salute him for a job well done. He continues to put his foot in his mouth. He should have just avoided the issue and said all the right things. Instead he found it necessary once again to defend himself and his actions. His insecurities are one of his biggest flaws.

the whole "Bad rookies" comment is waaayyy out of context IMHO. Perhaps MDA should keep his mouth shut, but this is NY and the media we got. Did he defend his actions or did he just answer questions the best he can?

Everyone has insecurities. Does answering questions mean you are defending them or just answering questions?

That's fair. But I think he is only giving these media guys rope. I thought his remarks about Jeffries were well done. Maybe he should have lumped the two together and just talk about the 2010 plan to get under cap.

MDA should know better, but it doesn't take a genius to guess out which newspaper highlighted the "Bad Rookie" comment and twist it and turn it, right?

On the other hand, MDA is accessible and fairly straight-forward all things considered. If he totally shut down interviews, the media would complain about that (and so would we fans) and then make it about him having something to hide! Oh no! Kind of a no win situation IMHO.

TMS wrote:

martin wrote:

sebstar wrote:

martin wrote:

sebstar wrote:

Pharzeone wrote:ROFL. That quote has to be one of the most bizarre ones I seen in awhile from a head coach. I can't complain, I like it for my sign.

His stans, other than Nalod have been dead ass quiet. His handling of Hill is indefensible and supports the narrative that those who disapprove of him, and his job performance, have been claiming for quite sometime.

not true. The rest of the MDA supports are trolling through the Alba thread, too bored of the tired arguments.

How is this a "tired" argument. He just said this about Hill, what, a day or so ago?

hey, I thought Hill should have played more. Speak to MDA's other comments that came out of the same clips from yesterday: Hill was behind Lee, Harrington, Jefferies, Gallo, etc at the 4/5 position for minutes. He also needed to learn system (others had a head start on this from previous year) and came into training camp out of shape.

he was behind Bender too for minutes... that alone is a joke in itself & makes any of his reasoning indefensible... i don't think anyone will ever be able to figure that one out.

Jordan Hill also was behind the ball-boy that goes out on the court to wipe the sweat from the court. That kid got more court time than Hill.

martin wrote:

Pharzeone wrote:

martin wrote:

Pharzeone wrote:Martin, should we salute him for a job well done. He continues to put his foot in his mouth. He should have just avoided the issue and said all the right things. Instead he found it necessary once again to defend himself and his actions. His insecurities are one of his biggest flaws.

the whole "Bad rookies" comment is waaayyy out of context IMHO. Perhaps MDA should keep his mouth shut, but this is NY and the media we got. Did he defend his actions or did he just answer questions the best he can?

Everyone has insecurities. Does answering questions mean you are defending them or just answering questions?

That's fair. But I think he is only giving these media guys rope. I thought his remarks about Jeffries were well done. Maybe he should have lumped the two together and just talk about the 2010 plan to get under cap.

MDA should know better, but it doesn't take a genius to guess out which newspaper highlighted the "Bad Rookie" comment and twist it and turn it, right?

On the other hand, MDA is accessible and fairly straight-forward all things considered. If he totally shut down interviews, the media would complain about that (and so would we fans) and then make it about him having something to hide! Oh no! Kind of a no win situation IMHO.

You're getting way too much milage out of 'taking out of context, blame the media game'

I think I speak for all his critics when I say that we dont have anything personal against D'Antoni, its just that we feel he has performed miserably to date in a lot of different areas.

Its clear he's going to be here next year and God willing we are going to acquire some serious talent and make a legitimate campaign towards big time results in the coming years.

There are some huge red flags that have surfaced surrounding his approach to the game, player relations, ext. We take players to task all the time, so is it not fair to think that there are a few things that D'Antoni should work on and re-evaluate?

Instead of blaming the players, the media, management, ext. and calling Mike a great coach who is a complete victim, why not hold him accountable and demand the same standard of excellence he seemingly demands of everyone but himself?

Does Mike D'Antoni Hate Rookies?

3/22/2010 9:32 AM ET By Tom Ziller

To get invaluable cap space for this summer, the Knicks had to give up two potential lottery picks plus Jordan Hill, last June's New York lottery pick. Hill, however, wasn't seen as that big a loss: he hardly played for Knicks coach Mike D'Antoni, despite the fact that N.Y. remains one of the worst teams in the league and that the franchise needed all the boosted assets it could manage.

In his return to the city as a Rocket -- a legit rotation player with Houston, mind you -- Hill told the press that D'Antoni doesn't like rookies, a claim many fans and rookies have made over the years. But D'Antoni wouldn't accept that charge.

The coach fired back hard, asserting that he just don't play "bad rookies," implying, then, that Hill wasn't worth playing when he was a Knick. But that's not exactly accurate -- Hill's limited per-minute performance in New York fortold what Hill has done with Houston: 14 points and nine-plus rebounds per 36 minutes. If D'Antoni didn't give Hill much an on-court chance because of practice habits or depth issues, that's one thing. But to say that Hill is playing much better as Rocket than a Knicks -- that's just inaccurate. Hill's just getting minutes now.

But what about all those other rookies out there? Does D'Antoni hate them too?

Toney Douglas, Hill's 2009 draft classmate, has played in only 44 of New York's 70 games, and in those games is playing only 16 minutes per game. That susses out to just over 700 minutes, or 17 percent of available minutes.

Last year, then-rookie Danilo Gallinari struggled through injury. He played in only 28 games, and averaged only 14 minutes a game in those.

In his final season with Phoenix -- 2007-08 -- D'Antoni had two minor rookies, D.J. Strawberry and Alando Tucker. They played less than 400 minutes combined. In 2005-06, D'Antoni played his two minor rookies (Sharrod Ford and Dijon Thompson) even less. Ditto for 2004-05, with Jackson Vroman and Yuta Tabuse. You have to go all the way back to D'Antoni's debut season with Phoenix to find the last time he played a rookie at least 1,000 minutes -- and that was Leandro Barbosa. Frank Johnson, who coached the team through December that season, had buried Barbosa on the bench behind Stephon Marbury, Joe Johnson and who's who of crummy roleplayers. D'Antoni freed Leandrinho, and the Brazilian Blur became a key cog in D'Antoni's championship-contending Suns run.

And that's really what can't be left out of this conversation: things are different when you're contending for a title. Can you really blame D'Antoni for not playing Vroman and Strawberry and Thompson more? Of course not! Those were bit players at best, and the team fought for every win. You don't rip Mike Brown for leaving Danny Green on the bench, just like you couldn't rip Hill's new coach Rick Adelman for burying a rookie Gerald Wallace on a championship-level Kings team.

But the stakes are different for the Knicks, and D'Antoni. There was really little evident reason for Hill to be buried in New York. And -- again, barring some work ethic issues not known publicly -- Hill showed he could play in the limited Knicks opportunities he got. But for Hill to argue D'Antoni refuses to play rookies as a rule -- that's just wrong. D'Antoni just refused to play Hill and, well, all those "bad rookies" he had in Phoenix. But the best rookie he's had, Barbosa, got plenty of opportunity under D'Antoni. The "D'Antoni hates rookies" theorem just doesn't float.