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...
tkf wrote: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...
I compare it to the guy Larry Brown replaced in Detroit. This was a team already prepared and ready to take the next step. Drew came in and took the foundation and 1st 5floors that already stood, his only contribution were the roof shingles.
DurzoBlint wrote:tkf wrote: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...
I compare it to the guy Larry Brown replaced in Detroit. This was a team already prepared and ready to take the next step. Drew came in and took the foundation and 1st 5floors that already stood, his only contribution were the roof shingles.
Funny, Brown took over for Carlisle and won. Carlisle took over for Avery Johnson (who lost in finals)and won. Sometimes one guy is not enough!
Perhaps the coach coming in can fill the need that might be more obvious. Im sure to some degree Woodson was able to do this which is to build upon a foundation and complete it. If Melo/MDA were never to blend then a change was good. MDA saw it and knew the gig was up with him. To his credit, Melo is playing at a highter level. If Woodson can take the best of MDA and others and make it work, he is a "Better coach" for the knicks.
What MDA is doing in LA is not visable yet. He obviously thinks and made the impression to Kupchak that he can make it work.
I hope it does, the man is not evil. Stubburn with his convictions is no reason for hate.
I'd love to see the lakers surge to the finals and lose in 7 games to the Knicks!
They improved nearly every year under Carlyle and then they fire him after reaching the finals. I have little doubt in my mind that Carlyle would have won it had he not been replaced with Nutty Larry
DurzoBlint wrote:They improved nearly every year under Carlyle and then they fire him after reaching the finals. I have little doubt in my mind that Carlyle would have won it had he not been replaced with Nutty Larry
Im not going to ask you what your thinking is as it was a while ago but what was it that Dumars saw that necessitated a change?
Avery Johnson took his team to the finals and was up in its series? Cube and Donnie Nelson saw something as well.
Its a bold move to make coaching changes like that. Its not like the coach is not having success, its to get them one more level higher.
Nalod wrote:DurzoBlint wrote:They improved nearly every year under Carlyle and then they fire him after reaching the finals. I have little doubt in my mind that Carlyle would have won it had he not been replaced with Nutty Larry
Im not going to ask you what your thinking is as it was a while ago but what was it that Dumars saw that necessitated a change?
Avery Johnson took his team to the finals and was up in its series? Cube and Donnie Nelson saw something as well.
Its a bold move to make coaching changes like that. Its not like the coach is not having success, its to get them one more level higher.
I wondered about that myself. Maybe it was the fact that Larry had yet to ruin his reputation in the league at the time and was considered among the very best. Doubt anyone other than Joe really knows.
What annoyed me last night from the announcers and often with comments here is this idea that MDA doesn't adjust his system. That's not true at all. When he had Zach and Jamal we didn't run a pure SSOL system. When we had Duhon running the show he had to slow things down and mostly simplify things due to the lack of high BB IQ players on the roster. In fact at no point in his time in NY did MDA actually run his system the way he did in PHX. Even last year he tweaked things to try and run the offense thru Melo. The only problem was Melo wasn't in great shape nor did he have his skills in regular season form, so he shot the ball terribly and was getting his shot blocked repeatedly. Not to mention TD being a disaster at PG. Still MDA did in fact change his offense to try and make it work with a flawed roster. In LA right now they aren't really running his system either. He tried it at 1st but only Kobe and Duhon seemed to be able to do any of it.
The odd thing is that Melo had resisted playing the way MDA was asking him and then on the Olympic team he was setting records doing exactly what MDA was asking him to do in NY. Then Melo comes in this year and again plays more in the system under Woody this year doing some of those same things MDA was asking. We now know that it wasn't that Melo couldn't do it, but it's a willingness to do it. He just didn't vibe with MDA the way he does with Woody.
In the end MDA may have his flaws, but he did change the league in a way not many other coaches have. There are a lot of teams now that used his principles and back when he started the league was totally different in how it played. SA has won using a lot of his stuff, Dallas won using a lot of his stuff, Miami too. The basic scheme we use on the Knicks is MDA's half court offense.
It also helped Detroit that the Lakers were in epic turmoil despite making it to the Finals: Malone injury, Shaq-Kobe feud apex, Kobe trial.
DurzoBlint wrote:Nalod wrote:DurzoBlint wrote:They improved nearly every year under Carlyle and then they fire him after reaching the finals. I have little doubt in my mind that Carlyle would have won it had he not been replaced with Nutty Larry
Im not going to ask you what your thinking is as it was a while ago but what was it that Dumars saw that necessitated a change?
Avery Johnson took his team to the finals and was up in its series? Cube and Donnie Nelson saw something as well.
Its a bold move to make coaching changes like that. Its not like the coach is not having success, its to get them one more level higher.
I wondered about that myself. Maybe it was the fact that Larry had yet to ruin his reputation in the league at the time and was considered among the very best. Doubt anyone other than Joe really knows.
Joe has already said it: Carlyle had difficulty communicating with the players and the players themselves were getting grumpy.
Can we all join together and make sure that this grossly regurgitated topic does not become a 50 pager??
PLEASE!!
Who cares? You like MDA or don't like him ... we have heard it too many times (from each side).
We have a good coach, the right chemistry, we are winning, Let It Be.
Of course we can still make backhanded comments in arbitrary threads just to bait the MDA idolizers - thats a given 
mrKnickShot wrote:Can we all join together and make sure that this grossly regurgitated topic does not become a 50 pager??PLEASE!!
Who cares? You like MDA or don't like him ... we have heard it too many times (from each side).
We have a good coach, the right chemistry, we are winning, Let It Be.
Of course we can still make backhanded comments in arbitrary threads just to bait the MDA idolizers - thats a given
It was a good discussion until you decided to join in.
Nalod wrote:Nalod wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:Can we all join together and make sure that this grossly regurgitated topic does not become a 50 pager??PLEASE!!
Who cares? You like MDA or don't like him ... we have heard it too many times (from each side).
We have a good coach, the right chemistry, we are winning, Let It Be.
Of course we can still make backhanded comments in arbitrary threads just to bait the MDA idolizers - thats a given
It was a good discussion until you decided to join in. There was reaching over the isle and agreement. This is the first sign that MDA hype is getting over done.
I am done with it. I think it is over. It also helps that we have a coach who has had a great record here.
If he failed, this discussion / argument would have gone on forever.
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..
DREW DREW DREW....DREW DREW.... I see what you guys did there
mrKnickShot wrote:Nalod wrote:Nalod wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:Can we all join together and make sure that this grossly regurgitated topic does not become a 50 pager??PLEASE!!
Who cares? You like MDA or don't like him ... we have heard it too many times (from each side).
We have a good coach, the right chemistry, we are winning, Let It Be.
Of course we can still make backhanded comments in arbitrary threads just to bait the MDA idolizers - thats a given
It was a good discussion until you decided to join in. There was reaching over the isle and agreement. This is the first sign that MDA hype is getting over done.
I am done with it. I think it is over. It also helps that we have a coach who has had a great record here.
If he failed, this discussion / argument would have gone on forever.
Hey, im with you!
Lets do this:
"Its over when MrKNickShot says its over"!
Knicks are doing real well. To me thats enough. When KNicks do well, I hope the whole world is happy. Even MDA! His failure don't make Knicks wins or losses any sweeter or bitter. So I hope he does well. Just a personal thing. I always believe folks should be good losers and gracious winners.
So now we can have 20 closing statements and perhaps someone gets lucky and gets "the last word in edgewise".
Woodson is doing a better job for the knicks than MDA. Sounds good to me.
This thread would've been more appropriate to create when Woodson first took over, since the jury wasn't out at that point.
Time and a much stronger record has easily answered the question.
We're talking sports here. All of that "It depends how you look at it" or "it depends on how the style fits" crap doesn't work.
Sports go by numbers.
And the numbers are clearly not in favor of Mike D'antoni.
fishmike wrote: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
21-9 over 30 games? When did this happen? After the slow start they were 19-11 over the next 30.
fishmike wrote:and the show goes on
What did the Muppets say?
Movin Right Along....Ha Ha Ha
Waiting for Phil to tell the Lakes he can fix this and save the season. And then waiting for Phil to get that team humming and playing great ball within 2 weeks.
