Knicks · Most Brilliant Article on Knicks Problems (page 1)

The trick for coaches is not discovering the secret of winning basketball chemistry (ball movement, help defense, gently stroking a picture of John Wooden, etc.) or even devising the perfect strategic system (all sorts of approaches have won games). It's finding the right system for a given set of players and convincing them to cooperate.

Based on his public behavior and portrayal in Seven Seconds or Less, D'Antoni doesn't seem to have much interest in the second part of that job. And why would he? It's a crappy job. The guys who are manifestly the best at it — the Larry Browns, the Phil Jacksons, the Van Gundies, the Thibodeaus — are relentlessly, annoyingly on-message. They are stubborn, grinding pedants or evangelically self-confident egomaniacs.

he comes off as someone who, while aware of his players' psychological quirks, doesn't consider it his duty or business to get involved in mind games or counseling. He's an adult and his assistant coaches are adults, he seems to think; they're going to do their jobs — staying up late to scout opponents and create game plans — and it's his players' jobs to show up in the morning and listen. Given a star player who doesn't really match his style, D'Antoni's not going to conduct an elaborately undignified Mean Girls campaign to try and badger that player into cooperation. Mike D'Antoni has millions of dollars and a house in Italy and a system that will work if his players just pay attention, and he'll be goddamned if he's going to spend his time undermining Carmelo with management or telling Iman Shumpert again that the playbook prescribes a dribble-handoff at a weakside post player when initial drive action is stopped at the elbow. D’Antoni is a fed-up parent who’s just going to let the kid keep whining on principle. He already said they’re not going to McDonald’s and he’s not going to say it again.

The reality is that the Divas of 2012 Pro Hoops don't work like that and, yes, it's on the coach to play mental health counselor.

MDA would win 50 championships in a healthier day.

I won't argue with you about it not working in New York. This much is obvious.

But if you're going to bash MDA, you must identify the CORRECT reason.

It's not that "MDA sucks at coaching". It's that he's TOO GOOD at coaching.

intransitive verb
1
: to go in a coach
2
: to instruct, direct, or prompt as a coach
transitive verb
1
: to train intensively (as by instruction and demonstration) <coach pupils>
2
: to act as coach of <coach tennis> <coach a team>

So MDA is too good at instructing, directing and prompting his team. His is too good at intensively training, because this article says that pretty much none of what the definition of being a coach is, is not a part of his job because they are all adults???

Brilliant!!!!

MarburyAnd1Crossover wrote:The second quote really explains why I'm a fan of MDA.

I won't argue with you about it not working in New York. This much is obvious.

But if you're going to bash MDA, you must identify the CORRECT reason.

It's not that "MDA sucks at coaching". It's that he's TOO GOOD at coaching.

Coaching is more about X's and O's. He believes in an offensive philosophy but doesn't know how to get very good players who have excelled at other levels and in this league to play the way he wants them to. No one says he doesn't understand the game or isn't a brilliant offensive mind. But coaching, like almost any other profession and probably more so, is also about dealing with people. To let him off the hook for not knowing how to get the most out of what he has is not holding him accountable to do his job.

And I didn't even say anything about defense.....

Anji wrote:Definition of COACH

intransitive verb
1
: to go in a coach
2
: to instruct, direct, or prompt as a coach
transitive verb
1
: to train intensively (as by instruction and demonstration) <coach pupils>
2
: to act as coach of <coach tennis> <coach a team>

So MDA is too good at instructing, directing and prompting his team. His is too good at intensively training, because this article says that pretty much none of what the definition of being a coach is, is not a part of his job because they are all adults???

Brilliant!!!!

He meets that definition. How does he not?

The bottom line is that MDA is a coach of men, but the reality of today's NBA is that coaches have to be much more than that, they have to be hand holders to children.

MSG3 wrote:

MarburyAnd1Crossover wrote:The second quote really explains why I'm a fan of MDA.

I won't argue with you about it not working in New York. This much is obvious.

But if you're going to bash MDA, you must identify the CORRECT reason.

It's not that "MDA sucks at coaching". It's that he's TOO GOOD at coaching.

Coaching is more about X's and O's. He believes in an offensive philosophy but doesn't know how to get very good players who have excelled at other levels and in this league to play the way he wants them to. No one says he doesn't understand the game or isn't a brilliant offensive mind. But coaching, like almost any other profession and probably more so, is also about dealing with people. To let him off the hook for not knowing how to get the most out of what he has is not holding him accountable to do his job.

And I didn't even say anything about defense.....

Yea, it's about dealing with people, but some people aren't worth dealing with. And I agree with MDA on this.

He's still getting the fat money and will live comfortably for the rest of his days. I don't blame him for not wanting to put his hands in the ass of a horse. MDA is still meeting the requirements of his job.

Contrast this to Melo's situation, where you have a player that is getting the fat money but he is failing to meet the requirements of his job; Melo requires extra coddling.

Who is the failure?

MarburyAnd1Crossover wrote:

Anji wrote:Definition of COACH

intransitive verb
1
: to go in a coach
2
: to instruct, direct, or prompt as a coach
transitive verb
1
: to train intensively (as by instruction and demonstration) <coach pupils>
2
: to act as coach of <coach tennis> <coach a team>

So MDA is too good at instructing, directing and prompting his team. His is too good at intensively training, because this article says that pretty much none of what the definition of being a coach is, is not a part of his job because they are all adults???

Brilliant!!!!

He meets that definition. How does he not?

The bottom line is that MDA is a coach of men, but the reality of today's NBA is that coaches have to be much more than that, they have to be hand holders to children.

If he is instructing, directing or prompting its not evident during games in either his teams play or his actions.

Not saying you have to be a hot head on the sideline or constantly yelling out directions....but whatever he's doing isn't working.

MarburyAnd1Crossover wrote:

MSG3 wrote:

MarburyAnd1Crossover wrote:The second quote really explains why I'm a fan of MDA.

I won't argue with you about it not working in New York. This much is obvious.

But if you're going to bash MDA, you must identify the CORRECT reason.

It's not that "MDA sucks at coaching". It's that he's TOO GOOD at coaching.

Coaching is more about X's and O's. He believes in an offensive philosophy but doesn't know how to get very good players who have excelled at other levels and in this league to play the way he wants them to. No one says he doesn't understand the game or isn't a brilliant offensive mind. But coaching, like almost any other profession and probably more so, is also about dealing with people. To let him off the hook for not knowing how to get the most out of what he has is not holding him accountable to do his job.

And I didn't even say anything about defense.....

Yea, it's about dealing with people, but some people aren't worth dealing with. And I agree with MDA on this.

He's still getting the fat money and will live comfortably for the rest of his days. I don't blame him for not wanting to put his hands in the ass of a horse. MDA is still meeting the requirements of his job.

Contrast this to Melo's situation, where you have a player that is getting the fat money but he is failing to meet the requirements of his job; Melo requires extra coddling.

Who is the failure?

Wait....what?! You don't blame him for not wanting to deal with his players? You are making no sense. You don't want him to try and get the best out of 2 Max contract guys and a roster full of great supporting talent? You can support him but what you just said makes no sense for a fan of a team to say about their coach in a supportive manner.

That's what's going on here.

MSG3 wrote:

MarburyAnd1Crossover wrote:The second quote really explains why I'm a fan of MDA.

I won't argue with you about it not working in New York. This much is obvious.

But if you're going to bash MDA, you must identify the CORRECT reason.

It's not that "MDA sucks at coaching". It's that he's TOO GOOD at coaching.

Coaching is more about X's and O's. He believes in an offensive philosophy but doesn't know how to get very good players who have excelled at other levels and in this league to play the way he wants them to. No one says he doesn't understand the game or isn't a brilliant offensive mind. But coaching, like almost any other profession and probably more so, is also about dealing with people. To let him off the hook for not knowing how to get the most out of what he has is not holding him accountable to do his job.

And I didn't even say anything about defense.....

You can't get to the Conference finals if you play no defense! In Pro Sports it's almost impossible to have success only playing one side of the ball. I'll leave it at that.

As for MDA's coaching style, it works well enough that his teams have been able to run like well oiled machines when he has players that actually do what he's instructing. Regardless of the talent level, when players actually listen to what MDA says they prosper. Less talented players tend to be more compliant. You have to hope that your stars are leaders and understand the importance of making their teammates actually execute what the coach is demanding. On winning teams the Top Players are the coaches advocates on the floor and in the lockerroom.

Even Phil Jackson failed to totally correct the diva issues with Shaq and Kobe. It took Jax years to finally get thru to Kobe. Does MDA even have that kind of time to work with Melo who hasn't even played 82 games under MDA so far??? I think the expectations are too high for MDA given all the change in such a short period of time. People want to ignore this, but every single year there's massive change and mid season change. It's a lot to overcome and no other coach has had this much turnover in HISTORY!!!

nixluva wrote:

MSG3 wrote:

MarburyAnd1Crossover wrote:The second quote really explains why I'm a fan of MDA.

I won't argue with you about it not working in New York. This much is obvious.

But if you're going to bash MDA, you must identify the CORRECT reason.

It's not that "MDA sucks at coaching". It's that he's TOO GOOD at coaching.

Coaching is more about X's and O's. He believes in an offensive philosophy but doesn't know how to get very good players who have excelled at other levels and in this league to play the way he wants them to. No one says he doesn't understand the game or isn't a brilliant offensive mind. But coaching, like almost any other profession and probably more so, is also about dealing with people. To let him off the hook for not knowing how to get the most out of what he has is not holding him accountable to do his job.

And I didn't even say anything about defense.....

You can't get to the Conference finals if you play no defense! In Pro Sports it's almost impossible to have success only playing one side of the ball. I'll leave it at that.

As for MDA's coaching style, it works well enough that his teams have been able to run like well oiled machines when he has players that actually do what he's instructing. Regardless of the talent level, when players actually listen to what MDA says they prosper. Less talented players tend to be more compliant. You have to hope that your stars are leaders and understand the importance of making their teammates actually execute what the coach is demanding. On winning teams the Top Players are the coaches advocates on the floor and in the lockerroom.

Even Phil Jackson failed to totally correct the diva issues with Shaq and Kobe. It took Jax years to finally get thru to Kobe. Does MDA even have that kind of time to work with Melo who hasn't even played 82 games under MDA so far??? I think the expectations are too high for MDA given all the change in such a short period of time. People want to ignore this, but every single year there's massive change and mid season change. It's a lot to overcome and no other coach has had this much turnover in HISTORY!!!

The difference between Phil and Mike is that Phil demanded things and communicated. I don't know the inner workings of the Knicks locker room but I'll bet D'Antoni doesn't have long talks with his stars. He wants them to do what he says and if they don't, whelp, arms folded or in the pockets.

MSG3 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

MSG3 wrote:

MarburyAnd1Crossover wrote:The second quote really explains why I'm a fan of MDA.

I won't argue with you about it not working in New York. This much is obvious.

But if you're going to bash MDA, you must identify the CORRECT reason.

It's not that "MDA sucks at coaching". It's that he's TOO GOOD at coaching.

Coaching is more about X's and O's. He believes in an offensive philosophy but doesn't know how to get very good players who have excelled at other levels and in this league to play the way he wants them to. No one says he doesn't understand the game or isn't a brilliant offensive mind. But coaching, like almost any other profession and probably more so, is also about dealing with people. To let him off the hook for not knowing how to get the most out of what he has is not holding him accountable to do his job.

And I didn't even say anything about defense.....

You can't get to the Conference finals if you play no defense! In Pro Sports it's almost impossible to have success only playing one side of the ball. I'll leave it at that.

As for MDA's coaching style, it works well enough that his teams have been able to run like well oiled machines when he has players that actually do what he's instructing. Regardless of the talent level, when players actually listen to what MDA says they prosper. Less talented players tend to be more compliant. You have to hope that your stars are leaders and understand the importance of making their teammates actually execute what the coach is demanding. On winning teams the Top Players are the coaches advocates on the floor and in the lockerroom.

Even Phil Jackson failed to totally correct the diva issues with Shaq and Kobe. It took Jax years to finally get thru to Kobe. Does MDA even have that kind of time to work with Melo who hasn't even played 82 games under MDA so far??? I think the expectations are too high for MDA given all the change in such a short period of time. People want to ignore this, but every single year there's massive change and mid season change. It's a lot to overcome and no other coach has had this much turnover in HISTORY!!!

The difference between Phil and Mike is that Phil demanded things and communicated. I don't know the inner workings of the Knicks locker room but I'll bet D'Antoni doesn't have long talks with his stars. He wants them to do what he says and if they don't, whelp, arms folded or in the pockets.

You think every coach gets into philosophical discussions with their players? I'm sure that MDA explains a lot of things to his players, but you think that just cuz Jax talks psycho babel to his players that they necessarily win because of it? How about he's had MJ and Kobe? Jax having the absolute most talent in the league had nothing to do with winning titles, but his Zen books and other crap did? Players will also tune that stuff out, Kobe surely did for years. Give me a KG and Allen that will just be MEN and leave all the psycho talk for the doctors office.

nixluva wrote:

MSG3 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

MSG3 wrote:

MarburyAnd1Crossover wrote:The second quote really explains why I'm a fan of MDA.

I won't argue with you about it not working in New York. This much is obvious.

But if you're going to bash MDA, you must identify the CORRECT reason.

It's not that "MDA sucks at coaching". It's that he's TOO GOOD at coaching.

Coaching is more about X's and O's. He believes in an offensive philosophy but doesn't know how to get very good players who have excelled at other levels and in this league to play the way he wants them to. No one says he doesn't understand the game or isn't a brilliant offensive mind. But coaching, like almost any other profession and probably more so, is also about dealing with people. To let him off the hook for not knowing how to get the most out of what he has is not holding him accountable to do his job.

And I didn't even say anything about defense.....

You can't get to the Conference finals if you play no defense! In Pro Sports it's almost impossible to have success only playing one side of the ball. I'll leave it at that.

As for MDA's coaching style, it works well enough that his teams have been able to run like well oiled machines when he has players that actually do what he's instructing. Regardless of the talent level, when players actually listen to what MDA says they prosper. Less talented players tend to be more compliant. You have to hope that your stars are leaders and understand the importance of making their teammates actually execute what the coach is demanding. On winning teams the Top Players are the coaches advocates on the floor and in the lockerroom.

Even Phil Jackson failed to totally correct the diva issues with Shaq and Kobe. It took Jax years to finally get thru to Kobe. Does MDA even have that kind of time to work with Melo who hasn't even played 82 games under MDA so far??? I think the expectations are too high for MDA given all the change in such a short period of time. People want to ignore this, but every single year there's massive change and mid season change. It's a lot to overcome and no other coach has had this much turnover in HISTORY!!!

The difference between Phil and Mike is that Phil demanded things and communicated. I don't know the inner workings of the Knicks locker room but I'll bet D'Antoni doesn't have long talks with his stars. He wants them to do what he says and if they don't, whelp, arms folded or in the pockets.

You think every coach gets into philosophical discussions with their players? I'm sure that MDA explains a lot of things to his players, but you think that just cuz Jax talks psycho babel to his players that they necessarily win because of it? How about he's had MJ and Kobe? Jax having the absolute most talent in the league had nothing to do with winning titles, but his Zen books and other crap did? Players will also tune that stuff out, Kobe surely did for years. Give me a KG and Allen that will just be MEN and leave all the psycho talk for the doctors office.

How about MJ and Kobe won ZERO until Phil came along. D'Antoni doesn't have to psycho analyze them but he has to instruct them. If there was ANY progress at all in the time that Melo and Amare have been together it would be evident he was rubbing off on them. But they have no clue what's happening on he court.

MarburyAnd1Crossover wrote:The second quote really explains why I'm a fan of MDA.

I won't argue with you about it not working in New York. This much is obvious.

But if you're going to bash MDA, you must identify the CORRECT reason.

It's not that "MDA sucks at coaching". It's that he's TOO GOOD at coaching.

No one cares bout huge houses in Italy or wherever.

The successful men leading sports all adjusted to times
And talents of the current day prima donnas and those
few then may have won sports championships.

This man MDA isn't winning squat we can all die 100 times
Or come back to life triple that he will never ever win on
Concept that all sports atheletes has to adjust to Mike &
His system and he don't need to adjust sys to the skills
Of atheletes n the sole reason he is a loser today.
& Wil never figure it out

Maybe more than any other sport, NBA coaches have to be really good at the mental part of the game, getting players to sacrifice their personal game, play defense, etc.

For whatever reason, this Knicks team needs a coach who is exceptionally good at that. And MDA simply is not good at that part of coaching, as this article points out.

Anyway, to say that he is doing his job, and it's up to the players and not the coach to make it happen, is ridiculous. The coach's job is to get a team to play up to its full potential. MDA has clearly not done that here.

loweyecue wrote:He definitely uses a different style. But the main issue for him with the fans and media is that he is not constantly ranting at his players. For some reason legions of fans have assumed that people who jump up and down on sidelines and scream at their star players are the gold standard of coaching. -- it would be funny if it wasn't pathetic.

PJax does not do that and I still love him so so much!

loweyecue wrote:He definitely uses a different style. But the main issue for him with the fans and media is that he is not constantly ranting at his players. For some reason legions of fans have assumed that people who jump up and down on sidelines and scream at their star players are the gold standard of coaching. -- it would be funny if it wasn't pathetic.

I think fans are seeing these broken plays and want to know what plan b or c are? It doesn't look like the players know sometimes. Maybe has his coaches do that though? If I'm a head coach I can delegate work that's not my forte (in-game play and defensive schemes) and concentrate on my specialties (rotations and offensive schemes), as long as I'm taking responsibility for everyone who reports to me.