D'Antoni had an amazing run in Phoenix. He went to a conference finals and his teams were always high scoring and fun to watch. The knock on him has been his lack of emphasis on defense and the way the Lakers are playing, he really doesn't focus on defense. He has Kobe, Artest and Dwight Howard but the lane is open for penetration almost all the time. It's obvious he doesn't spend time on an creating an efficient defensive system.
After Linsanity, I thought it was Melo who couldn't play team ball. There were so many issues with defense and offense just wasn't smooth. When Woodson took over for D'Antoni last year and the Knicks went 18-6, I thought the team just needed a change. That's how I explained the amazing record after Woodson took over.
But now that Woodson's Knicks are 17-5 so far this season without Amare and Shumpert, I am beginning to think D'Antoni was a huge mistake.
Silverfuel - D'Antoni never had a set roster and never had a lead guard.
Carmelo and Lin never had an opportunity to get acquainted. Their injuries prevented what could have been a beautiful bromance. Forget everything printed about some ego conflict. They want to win.
Mike Woodson has Assistant Coach Jason Kidd to manage the court.
Silverfuel wrote:D'Antoni had an amazing run in Phoenix. He went to a conference finals and his teams were always high scoring and fun to watch. The knock on him has been his lack of emphasis on defense and the way the Lakers are playing, he really doesn't focus on defense. He has Kobe, Artest and Dwight Howard but the lane is open for penetration almost all the time. It's obvious he doesn't spend time on an creating an efficient defensive system.After Linsanity, I thought it was Melo who couldn't play team ball. There were so many issues with defense and offense just wasn't smooth. When Woodson took over for D'Antoni last year and the Knicks went 18-6, I thought the team just needed a change. That's how I explained the amazing record after Woodson took over.
But now that Woodson's Knicks are 17-5 so far this season without Amare and Shumpert, I am beginning to think D'Antoni was a huge mistake.
This topic has been brought up like 50 mill times, but to answer your question, yes he is. Only because he preaches defense, and doesn't do a half hr walk through in that dept.
Like most coaches, you need the proper roster to execute your system. Woodson tweak MDA's system and is seeing much better results because he has high IQ pgs to work with.
Woodson challenged Carmelo, Amare and Chandler to improve. Mike Woodson also managed the offseason with a hands-on strategy. Need to monitor his stars? Attend the Olympics. Amar'e need a tutorial? Pick up the phone and call Hakeem.
Woodson also has the extra toughness to come down hard on a JR Smith and challenge him to be a better man. Not just a basketball player.
Most coaching does not take place during the game.
knicks1248 wrote:Silverfuel wrote:D'Antoni had an amazing run in Phoenix. He went to a conference finals and his teams were always high scoring and fun to watch. The knock on him has been his lack of emphasis on defense and the way the Lakers are playing, he really doesn't focus on defense. He has Kobe, Artest and Dwight Howard but the lane is open for penetration almost all the time. It's obvious he doesn't spend time on an creating an efficient defensive system.After Linsanity, I thought it was Melo who couldn't play team ball. There were so many issues with defense and offense just wasn't smooth. When Woodson took over for D'Antoni last year and the Knicks went 18-6, I thought the team just needed a change. That's how I explained the amazing record after Woodson took over.
But now that Woodson's Knicks are 17-5 so far this season without Amare and Shumpert, I am beginning to think D'Antoni was a huge mistake.
This topic has been brought up like 50 mill times, but to answer your question, yes he is. Only because he preaches defense, and doesn't do a half hr walk through in that dept.
Like most coaches, you need the proper roster to execute your system. Woodson tweak MDA's system and is seeing much better results because he has high IQ pgs to work with.
You also have to be ready, willing, and able to adjust your system to the team you have. D'antoni wasnt the right coach for this team because he 1)Didnt get along with the star player and 2)Was dead set on running his system no matter who we had. I fault the Knicks front office though. If you're gonna bring in a coach who only runs one system, then get him the players that fit that system.
TeamBall wrote:knicks1248 wrote:Silverfuel wrote:D'Antoni had an amazing run in Phoenix. He went to a conference finals and his teams were always high scoring and fun to watch. The knock on him has been his lack of emphasis on defense and the way the Lakers are playing, he really doesn't focus on defense. He has Kobe, Artest and Dwight Howard but the lane is open for penetration almost all the time. It's obvious he doesn't spend time on an creating an efficient defensive system.After Linsanity, I thought it was Melo who couldn't play team ball. There were so many issues with defense and offense just wasn't smooth. When Woodson took over for D'Antoni last year and the Knicks went 18-6, I thought the team just needed a change. That's how I explained the amazing record after Woodson took over.
But now that Woodson's Knicks are 17-5 so far this season without Amare and Shumpert, I am beginning to think D'Antoni was a huge mistake.
This topic has been brought up like 50 mill times, but to answer your question, yes he is. Only because he preaches defense, and doesn't do a half hr walk through in that dept.
Like most coaches, you need the proper roster to execute your system. Woodson tweak MDA's system and is seeing much better results because he has high IQ pgs to work with.
You also have to be ready, willing, and able to adjust your system to the team you have. D'antoni wasnt the right coach for this team because he 1)Didnt get along with the star player and 2)Was dead set on running his system no matter who we had. I fault the Knicks front office though. If you're gonna bring in a coach who only runs one system, then get him the players that fit that system.
So that's what the Lakers should do? Trade Pau and not resign Dwight?
This probably isn't the most objective, unbiased forum to ask this question on. You'd get quite different answers on a Suns forum.
Silverfuel wrote:TeamBall wrote:knicks1248 wrote:Silverfuel wrote:D'Antoni had an amazing run in Phoenix. He went to a conference finals and his teams were always high scoring and fun to watch. The knock on him has been his lack of emphasis on defense and the way the Lakers are playing, he really doesn't focus on defense. He has Kobe, Artest and Dwight Howard but the lane is open for penetration almost all the time. It's obvious he doesn't spend time on an creating an efficient defensive system.After Linsanity, I thought it was Melo who couldn't play team ball. There were so many issues with defense and offense just wasn't smooth. When Woodson took over for D'Antoni last year and the Knicks went 18-6, I thought the team just needed a change. That's how I explained the amazing record after Woodson took over.
But now that Woodson's Knicks are 17-5 so far this season without Amare and Shumpert, I am beginning to think D'Antoni was a huge mistake.
This topic has been brought up like 50 mill times, but to answer your question, yes he is. Only because he preaches defense, and doesn't do a half hr walk through in that dept.
Like most coaches, you need the proper roster to execute your system. Woodson tweak MDA's system and is seeing much better results because he has high IQ pgs to work with.
You also have to be ready, willing, and able to adjust your system to the team you have. D'antoni wasnt the right coach for this team because he 1)Didnt get along with the star player and 2)Was dead set on running his system no matter who we had. I fault the Knicks front office though. If you're gonna bring in a coach who only runs one system, then get him the players that fit that system.
So that's what the Lakers should do? Trade Pau and not resign Dwight?
What? Of course not. They never should have gotten D'antoni in the first place. Thats on them. I think our situation was a little different
This is a silly question.
Is Mark Jackson a better coach than Mike D'Antoni?
yes because Woodson, even though he kept much of what D'Antoni implemented, was smart enough to tweak it enough to suit the roster. Mike D was incapable of that.
Woody, the plays Woody calls during timeouts and the tweaks he makes during halftime are far superior to anything Mike D did.
TeamBall wrote:What? Of course not. They never should have gotten D'antoni in the first place. Thats on them. I think our situation was a little different
They jumped the gun ditching Mike Brown, Phil (in their eyes) wanted too much power and 
was all that was left.
All that's happening is Phil's demands are just going to get a little higher each day.
Woodson has a defensive plan. "D"-antoni doesn't. THat's the main difference.
DurzoBlint wrote:yes because Woodson, even though he kept much of what D'Antoni implemented, was smart enough to tweak it enough to suit the roster. Mike D was incapable of that. Woody, the plays Woody calls during timeouts and the tweaks he makes during halftime are far superior to anything Mike D did.
Absolutely. Woody knows how adapt and implement. MDA is great coach but is very stubborn.
NBA is all about the players, and then fitting a coach to them. The one talented team MDA got to coach here was playing pretty damn well before the MElo trade. After the slow start they were 21-9 over the next 30 games, and had beaten several elite teams like Chi, OKC, Dallas, Spurs and Melo's Nuggets. Felton/Amare where a great P&R combo, and every night either Gallo or Chandler went off for 20 as the 2nd scorer. That was a young team and a good team. Knicks traded away the PG that ran his system and brought in 2 slow ball ISO guys who were terrible fits for what MDA had in place. Melo didnt buy in and the rest was history.
Woodson is not only the perfect fit for this group, he seems to combine the best traits of the last 3 coaches we had.
He runs whats clearly a version of MDA's offense
He runs a swarming defense like Larry's Pistons
He's connected with some of these guys like Isiah was able to do and really get the most of them.
There isnt an NBA coach that isnt good. Doc Rivers was run out of Orlando and TMac quit on him but he won a ring in Boston. MDA's coaching in PHo and Larry's in Detroit was some of the best in NBA but those guys obviously were not able to duplicate much of that success here. Woody's ATL teams were always middle of the road (they are playing better now with less talent) and his ISO-Joe offense was brutally predictable yet he's clearly the perfect fit for this group of players. We could kinda do this all day.. I guess my point is the right fit is great and yields results, but usually its just a chemistry thing. Look at how well Doug Collin's 76ers played last year and how hard they played, but most would agree Collins is a bit of a dinosaur, yet Hubie Brown was great. Mix and match, but it starts and ends with the players. Rick Carlisle ran out of Det, and Larry immediatly wins a chip with them, but obviously Carlisle knew some things also as the Mavs won a title with him... you get the idea
Bonn1997 wrote:This probably isn't the most objective, unbiased forum to ask this question on. You'd get quite different answers on a Suns forum.
yea, and you could also flip it.. go to the Hawks forum and ask them is Drew a better coach than woodson.... not sure you are going to get an answer in woodson favor..
fishmike wrote:Woodson is not only the perfect fit for this group, he seems to combine the best traits of the last 3 coaches we had.He runs whats clearly a version of MDA's offense
He runs a swarming defense like Larry's Pistons
He's connected with some of these guys like Isiah was able to do and really get the most of them.
This is what I don't get. It sounds straight forward to you and me. Why didn't D'Antoni do this? To me it felt like he refused to change his system to match his talent. Instead he asked players to change to fit his system. Now as a fan, I wish Melo/JR and all else had done that so I didn't have to watch crap last season but would that have really brought us a championship?
It is clear Woodson has taken a lot of plays from the D'Antoni system and created his own hybrid from it. He is able to play a system that keeps turnovers ridiculously low and have good defense. We had Tyson Chandler and Shumpert last year but our defense was almost non-existent. Then Woodson takes over and we go 18-6. What was he doing so different that he was able to maximize production from the same players last season?
Same things carry over into this season. And we are stretching the floor so well with our long range shooters that Melo and Amare are going to have an open lane in the paint a lot of the times. So Woodson is able to create space, keep TO's low and get them to play solid team defense.
D'Antoni is obviously a good coach. He took the Suns to a West Conf Finals when the West was a powerhouse. Why was he such a failure in NYC? Was it just the Melo trade or is Woodson just a better coach for the Knicks?
See I think when Amare comes back he is going to flourish. I think Woodson will figure something out. Call it blind optimism but with this team defense, finding the open shooters and consistent scoring threats from Amare and Melo we could win a championship. I didn't think that with D'Antoni.
Silverfuel wrote:fishmike wrote:Woodson is not only the perfect fit for this group, he seems to combine the best traits of the last 3 coaches we had.He runs whats clearly a version of MDA's offense
He runs a swarming defense like Larry's Pistons
He's connected with some of these guys like Isiah was able to do and really get the most of them.
This is what I don't get. It sounds straight forward to you and me. Why didn't D'Antoni do this? To me it felt like he refused to change his system to match his talent. Instead he asked players to change to fit his system. Now as a fan, I wish Melo/JR and all else had done that so I didn't have to watch crap last season but would that have really brought us a championship?It is clear Woodson has taken a lot of plays from the D'Antoni system and created his own hybrid from it. He is able to play a system that keeps turnovers ridiculously low and have good defense. We had Tyson Chandler and Shumpert last year but our defense was almost non-existent. Then Woodson takes over and we go 18-6. What was he doing so different that he was able to maximize production from the same players last season?
Same things carry over into this season. And we are stretching the floor so well with our long range shooters that Melo and Amare are going to have an open lane in the paint a lot of the times. So Woodson is able to create space, keep TO's low and get them to play solid team defense.
D'Antoni is obviously a good coach. He took the Suns to a West Conf Finals when the West was a powerhouse. Why was he such a failure in NYC? Was it just the Melo trade or is Woodson just a better coach for the Knicks?
See I think when Amare comes back he is going to flourish. I think Woodson will figure something out. Call it blind optimism but with this team defense, finding the open shooters and consistent scoring threats from Amare and Melo we could win a championship. I didn't think that with D'Antoni.
Its chemistry, that simple. Like any relationship, each one has a different dymanic. Do you behave exactly the same at all the jobs you have had? No, because the environment is different and your boss is different. Same with women you date, or syblings.. coaching is kind of an intimate thing, because its very personal, so every person is going to be different.
George Karl has said he wished he had more time to work with and get through to JR, but Woody was able to much easier. Look at Felton under MDA vs. Felton under Larry Brown.
You cant force chemistry. You can work on it and make it better, or piss on it and make it worse and those two things and can happen daily depending on how volitile the individuals. Not really fair to put too much blame on the coaches for not being able to reach players most of the time. Players have to be willing to be coached.
tkf wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:This probably isn't the most objective, unbiased forum to ask this question on. You'd get quite different answers on a Suns forum.
yea, and you could also flip it.. go to the Hawks forum and ask them is Drew a better coach than woodson.... not sure you are going to get an answer in woodson favor..
Interesting point about Larry Drew doing well in ATL.
Its a complicated answer and agasin we have to adress it from the prism we look it thru.
Its obvious Woodson in his short sample (vs 3.5 years MDA was hear) is having much better results than MDA.
Does that make him better? Not sure, but it makes him a successful coach.
MDA had a great run with Suns and his system created Two MVP Nash and at team that was a bloody nose away from the finals. If MDA had won a chip might we be looking at him differently?
To answer this after watching a Laker team struggle with an all too familiar problem is not really fair.
Lets just say that Mike has a skill set that is a better fit for this team and MDA has skills that suite an athletic roster.
A roster he does not have.
So if Nash and Pau can help turn around the team and get on a run into the playoffs then perhaps we can see better. After 12 games and two starters out, can we really evaluate his coaching with the lakes?
Nalod wrote:tkf wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:This probably isn't the most objective, unbiased forum to ask this question on. You'd get quite different answers on a Suns forum.
yea, and you could also flip it.. go to the Hawks forum and ask them is Drew a better coach than woodson.... not sure you are going to get an answer in woodson favor..
Interesting point about Larry Drew doing well in ATL.
Its a complicated answer and agasin we have to adress it from the prism we look it thru.
Its obvious Woodson in his short sample (vs 3.5 years MDA was hear) is having much better results than MDA.
Does that make him better? Not sure, but it makes him a successful coach.
MDA had a great run with Suns and his system created Two MVP Nash and at team that was a bloody nose away from the finals. If MDA had won a chip might we be looking at him differently?
To answer this after watching a Laker team struggle with an all too familiar problem is not really fair.
Lets just say that Mike has a skill set that is a better fit for this team and MDA has skills that suite an athletic roster.
A roster he does not have.
So if Nash and Pau can help turn around the team and get on a run into the playoffs then perhaps we can see better. After 12 games and two starters out, can we really evaluate his coaching with the lakes?
I agree nalod, this is why I said, you really can't look at the current situation and make judgements.. because I know for sure down here in Atlanta you hear people saying that Drew is better than woodson has ever been and that is not fair....sometimes people forget the work that coach has done, sometimes they forget that a team just needs a new voice and face.... sometimes one coach is just a better fit.. it happens...
