I seriously doubt that's in the offering.

I soundly suspect Walsh long since stopped being enamored with D'Antoni's coaching-by-the-clock-versus-game-situations, defensively-delinquent competence. It amuses me how coaches (the Bulls' Tom Thibodeau being the anti-D'Antoni) demand players perform at both ends, yet coach only one end . . . and get anointed for it.

Other than Amar'e Stoudemire, whose numerous differences with D'Antoni when both worked for the Suns miraculously became non-issues once he joined New York for $99 million, not a single consequential Knicks thinks their coach can coach.

One player said Chauncey Billups, especially after he got injured, did far more coaching on the bench and in the huddle during the playoffs than D'Antoni, and "made a helluva lot more sense."

In private, the Suns veterans -- excluding Steve Nash, perhaps -- similarly degrade D'Antoni.

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/knicks/donnie_in_days_NudwZAPtJHuNPKnhHsPMpI#ixzz1Nli4evg7

Melo had issues with Karl but if he said Karl couldn't coach that wouldn't make it true. The new guys are not used to MDA's style which allows players freedom. He's not a JVG or LB type that directs everything all game. Once he gives the players the framework he expects them to know what to do. Phil Jax isn't much different. He's not up barking orders all game.

CrushAlot wrote:

VDesai wrote:I don't know what this means and I also don't believe it (who's consequential and who's not- I don't think Chauncey or Melo are good gauges at this point.) D'Antoni clearly can coach, but you need a PG who can clearly execute that vision on the floor and the only one we've had here who could do that was Felton. Chauncey has no motivation to be a gym rat, so I don't we're gonna get it from him. He's a very good player but his style doesn't mesh with this O.

I think what it means is that a system that doesn't emphasize defense, doesn't have set plays, has a preference for smaller offensive players on the court rather than bigger defender/rebounders, isn't going to win unless you have the absolute perfect point guard to play free lance and players talented enough on offense and defense to do this including overcoming the shortcomings of the coach. I don't think the Knicks have that personnel and I don't think it would be successful enough to win a championship if they did. I also think that guys coming in that might be surprised at the short practices, days off and lack of emphasis on defense. You are talking about vets that have won in the past and know what it takes to be successful as a team.

Knicks have how many vets that one in the past? 1 or 2? There's no one right way to a win a title. D'Antoni and the Knicks can win ballgames, but the trade left them with too many holes in the roster that they need to now fill in.

I think we are on the right track but ultimately our playoff loss amounted to be undermanned.

VDesai wrote:You named 3 bit players and 1 guy that has only made the playoffs with D'Antoni at the helm. So it comes down to the 2 guys from Denver and quite honeslty I don't think either Melo or Billups had enough time here to make any pronouncements about D'Antoni's coaching. Give them an offseason to adapt and then ask them their opinion.

I think we are on the right track but ultimately our playoff loss amounted to be undermanned.

bit players perhaps but did they not play on teams won or went to the finals? They played under winning coaches. Carter played for Riles, Karl and d'A? A similar claim could be made for Mason and Turiaf and the coaches they played for.

CrushAlot wrote:

VDesai wrote:I don't know what this means and I also don't believe it (who's consequential and who's not- I don't think Chauncey or Melo are good gauges at this point.) D'Antoni clearly can coach, but you need a PG who can clearly execute that vision on the floor and the only one we've had here who could do that was Felton. Chauncey has no motivation to be a gym rat, so I don't we're gonna get it from him. He's a very good player but his style doesn't mesh with this O.

I think what it means is that a system that doesn't emphasize defense, doesn't have set plays, has a preference for smaller offensive players on the court rather than bigger defender/rebounders, isn't going to win unless you have the absolute perfect point guard to play free lance and players talented enough on offense and defense to do this including overcoming the shortcomings of the coach. I don't think the Knicks have that personnel and I don't think it would be successful enough to win a championship if they did. I also think that guys coming in that might be surprised at the short practices, days off and lack of emphasis on defense. You are talking about vets that have won in the past and know what it takes to be successful as a team.

Billups:

“I’m coming around,” Billups said. “I can’t say that I’m all that comfortable yet. It’s not like any system I’ve ever played in. But I’m enjoying it and it’ll be fun.”

Clearly we need to add a young pass 1st PG. As far as the offense goes it starts and ends with the PG. The better we are at that position the better the offense will be.

Clearly we need to solve our size problem. Still Defense is MOSTLY about effort, teamwork and responsibility. It's not about systems or schemes. You need the right talent and size to begin with or teams will score at will inside. The best teams have good to great size. Since Mike has been here this team hasn't had good or great size inside. This team did make an effort to defend, but if you don't have the players who can hold down the middle at an NBA level your defense will be weak. We traded TImo, the biggest guy we had and he wasn't exactly a good defender yet anyway and the other guy Turiaf can't stay healthy. Jared is better at help D.

This team doesn't need a lot of changes just some really key additions. With the right moves, this team will be one of the better teams in the league next year. We just have to see what Donnie can get done. Every Coach has flaws. What makes the biggest difference tho is having Championship talent. The Mavs are in the finals cuz they have great talent and a very good coach. You need both.

Bippity10 wrote:Until there is a name attached to one of these statements it's just gossip to me. I do not base my personal feelings on things

"sources said"
"some player said"
"some dude in the locker room said"
"A person close to the situation said"

Until the players come forward or start revolting on the court, I pay no attention to what the writers say.

Exactly

Gossip is for middle school girls

Both Colangelos thought so.

Walsh thought high of him.

Guy in the league a while.

His defense has always been suspect.

Nalod thinks you get the team roster set then start working on filling in the pieces.

Our defense was not what kept us out of the finals this year.

Bulls offense is what kept them out. They are a wonderful team btw, just did not have the offensive guns to get it done. They were tentitive outside of Rose.

Lebron showed why he is the best on the planet. Heat showed some real stones doing the BUlls in 5.

I'd be happy for Spolestra if they win. Seems I like Riley's assistants better than his greasy ass head.

As far as Lebron and his superfriends I could care less.

Im watching this series to see heat lose. They go up on Mavs 2-0 im tuning out. Im not watching the party.

Vmart wrote:Any way you look at it MDA has to emphasis defense from day one of next year to the end more so than the offense. If MDA is the genius offensive coach that everyone says he is then he shouldn't have to worry about getting his offense to perform. Defense, defense, and more defense is what is required from the beginning to end. With that said MDA should go to Walsh and ask for a defensive guru assistant to be a part of the staff he needs to turn the defense aspects of the game over to his defensive assistant.