Mike D'Antoni Discussion: post in 7 seconds or less

A good defensive coach can play Boozer on the floor for 30 minutes and still have a Top ranked D (Thibs). Coaching can have a strong impact on defense. This team would be average on that end with a good D coach... slightly below average with your average coach, and the league's worst with D'Antoni. Either way, we're not staring at a 15-19 record with this roster.

Armani wrote:A good defensive coach can play Boozer on the floor for 30 minutes and still have a Top ranked D (Thibs). Coaching can have a strong impact on defense. This team would be average on that end with a good D coach... slightly below average with your average coach, and the league's worst with D'Antoni. Either way, we're not staring at a 15-19 record with this roster.

yea I agree somewhat on the defensive coach but you act like Bulls are made up of bunch of old dudes like ours.

khmrP wrote:

Armani wrote:A good defensive coach can play Boozer on the floor for 30 minutes and still have a Top ranked D (Thibs). Coaching can have a strong impact on defense. This team would be average on that end with a good D coach... slightly below average with your average coach, and the league's worst with D'Antoni. Either way, we're not staring at a 15-19 record with this roster.

yea I agree somewhat on the defensive coach but you act like Bulls are made up of bunch of old dudes like ours.

Kirk and Rip aren't exactly young. Luol Deng to MWP. Boozer to Pau. Noah to Dwight. Sure, Chicago has a better personnel, but you get the gist of what I mean.

We will just outgun and outscore the opponent then, Showtime II basketball baby !

What sucks is that we have a coach who we have to adjust to instead of the other way. For example, getting Z-Bo with Phil is beast, getting Z-Bo with D'Antoni, might as well go for Chandler Parsons, terrible hire.

Man, Thibs is gonna be the next great coach if he can get a fresh derrick rose back and one more option on that Bulls team.

Sorry, I saw this and laughed out loud.

I'm sick of this Mike D'Antoni guy. I want him out. He doesn't play the right system with this team + he doesn't play defense...

extreme wrote:I'm sick of this Mike D'Antoni guy. I want him out. He doesn't play the right system with this team + he doesn't play defense...

but he brought us showtime 2.0!!!! how can you not like showtime...

Chillbongo wrote:

Weezy wrote:2.'Antoni will not, and should not be fired. I hate the hiring, I don't like him as a coach, but you cannot hire an NBA coach to what was it, at least a 3 or 4 year contract, and fire him after 23 games. You can't do it, a coach deserves more time than that to at least prove himself. The franchise would look like a joke if they did that, some coaches would probably never want to come here after seeing it, and they'd be paying 2 coaches to NOT coach, ridiculous.

Yeap my mind is blown....why did we give him a 3 year deal? Why?

No seriously, how was this a rational decision? Someone who understands owning an NBA team & GM-ing better than me, please explain.

Wouldn't a one year + team option make so much more sense?

On this matter , I'm not sure what happened during the next offseason .. if we miss the playoffs ( sure looks like we will) , is the Lakers management willing to fire MDA and see the expenses related to " coaches " being at this point ridiculous ?

Or would they make the same mistake again i.e fire a coach after several games (instead of doing it during the offseason as they should have done with Brown) if another bad start happened ... and still ended up paying 3 coaches "at the same time"

JoelMyersScrotalSack wrote:

432J wrote:

JoelMyersScrotalSack wrote:This team is garbage. You don't know anything about basketball if you think magically replacing Brown, D'Antoni or any coach with Phil would cure this team.

you just showed you don't know anything about basketball with that post

to say that phil wouldn't have been an improvement over dan tony is pure comedy

And you just showed you can't read

Phil is a better coach but there's nothing to indicate this team's issues are strictly because MDA is doing something egregiously wrong. Even his supposedly D-less Nash Suns didn't play defense like this. The team is just a mess and no coach could get this team where we all expected it to be. The way they are playing basketball right now I would really question your intelligence if you can seriously sit there watching games and think this is a result of coaching.

While most of what you said is true, I think you are kind of discrediting Phil a little bit. We run whatever system the coach has in place, I dont think you could possibly tell me this run n gun garbage we are seeing right now would be better then a controlled pace of the triangle. Theres no question Phil would not have this team playing defense this badly, no Phil team has ever been bad defensively. Dantoni, well he has a track record. Those Suns teams are of many years past, Nash was in his prime and was a little quicker defensively (still pretty bad, but better). They had atlhletes all over the wings, Amare, Bell, Marion, etc. They had solid individual pieces to play defense, and were mostly a middle of the pack defensive team which was just enough for their style of play. Just look at his stint in New York, all offense no defense, none of his teams ever showed any real potential to be a contender.

Phil would have made this a much different team. Would we all of a sudden become a top defensive team? No, but you cant seriously think this team coached by Phil would allow 120+ points a game, 100+ in 6 straight or w/e the number is. We would probably be just as good defensively under Mike Brown at worst, which is still an improvement over what we are seeing now. Phils system and coaching style are vastly different then Dantoni, we wouldnt become contenders over night with Phil, but Id be willing to bet we would at least be .500 right now, were not even close to that and this isnt a scrub roster.

What are the chances D'Antoni gets fired if we lose the next 5 games? Not saying I want this to happen, but it's about 85-90% sure we lose tomorrow and Friday, then we play Cleveland and Milwaukee, both winnable games but losing both wouldn't surprise me the way we've been playing, and finally Miami (most likely a loss). If we go into a complete free fall is it more likely the FO fires another Mike, or we trade Pau and possibly even Dwight?

For all those MDAmaniacs out there

are we having fun yet?

Maybe next time the FO won't hire a coach over the phone based on a little bit of success he had for a few years............... 5 years ago............

It's a bit more studying then pulling out those old box scores and adding them up fellas............

success has really spoiled the you know who's to the point they actually think their delusional shoot from the hip process is actually a good basketball FO philosophy operated by true basketball minds.... reality is we have 3 guys sharing one brain and that brain has no veto power over the impulse happy father/son combo.

The key to copying a concept....old time showtime..... and trying to duplicate some form of it is to first UNDERSTAND how it worked............ and MDA and these flavor of the week small ball gimmick teams are not even close no matter how much the media or FO tries to convince anyone.

to make MDA responsible for this is plain stupid. Actually this site is filled right now with asinine stuff....sadly losing decreases the quality of the site heavily.

Matter of fact is this team doesn't play defense. This team didn't play defense with a heaviliy defensively focused coach before either. This team is talented but flawed. When you score 120+ points and lose you can't blame the coach for not boxing out, not running back, not going through screens, not pressuring the ball.

For quite some times now the Lakers are dead last in forcing TOs in this league, for years they can't defend quick guards and for years they have tried to mask those issues. For years their bench players can't play any offense or defense. finally its catching up.

Mike wouldn't be here if the team didn't suck in the first place. Stop looking for a scapegoat. When a sure contender is 5 games below .500, there are a million issues with it. To capitalize on the Steve Nash signing and revive the P&R with Dwight/Gasol it did make sense to hire D'Antoni. Its easy to argue against this while they are losing but I guarantee they would have been losing anyways.

KB24 wrote:to make MDA responsible for this is plain stupid. Actually this site is filled right now with asinine stuff....sadly losing decreases the quality of the site heavily.

Matter of fact is this team doesn't play defense. This team didn't play defense with a heaviliy defensively focused coach before either. This team is talented but flawed. When you score 120+ points and lose you can't blame the coach for not boxing out, not running back, not going through screens, not pressuring the ball.

For quite some times now the Lakers are dead last in forcing TOs in this league, for years they can't defend quick guards and for years they have tried to mask those issues. For years their bench players can't play any offense or defense. finally its catching up.

Mike wouldn't be here if the team didn't suck in the first place. Stop looking for a scapegoat. When a sure contender is 5 games below .500, there are a million issues with it. To capitalize on the Steve Nash signing and revive the P&R with Dwight/Gasol it did make sense to hire D'Antoni. Its easy to argue against this while they are losing but I guarantee they would have been losing anyways.

Not saying I blame him entirely, but it certainly doesn't help that we're trying to push the tempo and run with teams that are younger and more athletic. The entire premise of D'Antoni's offense is chucking 3's, which is where teams leak out and grab the long rebounds, we play right into their hands. Not to mention there are no defensive schemes whatsoever, you can see it in players not knowing when to rotate properly, and THAT falls into poor coaching. However I agree, I don't blame D'Antoni since he's always been this way, I blame the front office for making a poor coaching hire twice. Adelman was available, and Phil was available, both much greater coaches than either of the Mikes.

KB24 wrote:to make MDA responsible for this is plain stupid. Actually this site is filled right now with asinine stuff....sadly losing decreases the quality of the site heavily.

Matter of fact is this team doesn't play defense. This team didn't play defense with a heaviliy defensively focused coach before either. This team is talented but flawed. When you score 120+ points and lose you can't blame the coach for not boxing out, not running back, not going through screens, not pressuring the ball.

For quite some times now the Lakers are dead last in forcing TOs in this league, for years they can't defend quick guards and for years they have tried to mask those issues. For years their bench players can't play any offense or defense. finally its catching up.

Mike wouldn't be here if the team didn't suck in the first place. Stop looking for a scapegoat. When a sure contender is 5 games below .500, there are a million issues with it. To capitalize on the Steve Nash signing and revive the P&R with Dwight/Gasol it did make sense to hire D'Antoni. Its easy to argue against this while they are losing but I guarantee they would have been losing anyways.

I don't know about that. Certainly, the makeup of the team has its issues, but D'Antoni is not helping either. He brings forth a system that is a bad fit for the roster, and he will not adapt his system to his players. Ever since he came over, analysts (even opposing players) have questioned D'Antoni's offensive gameplan, and we are now seeing the result. How many times have we heard our own players question our strategy in the press now? It's not a few disgruntled role players either, Kobe, Pau, Howard and Jamison have all stated to the press some kind of need of change in strategy. The only one who seems calm is D'Antoni himself (New York anyone?) Only reason people were giving him a free pass early on was that Nash was injured. Now we know he won't. The Lakers is a mess and D'Antoni certainly has to take a lot of the blame for that. You would think that a run & gun playstyle wouldn't even be considered for an old team that has huge issues with transition D, but here we are.

KB24 wrote:to make MDA responsible for this is plain stupid. Actually this site is filled right now with asinine stuff....sadly losing decreases the quality of the site heavily.

Matter of fact is this team doesn't play defense. This team didn't play defense with a heaviliy defensively focused coach before either. This team is talented but flawed. When you score 120+ points and lose you can't blame the coach for not boxing out, not running back, not going through screens, not pressuring the ball.

For quite some times now the Lakers are dead last in forcing TOs in this league, for years they can't defend quick guards and for years they have tried to mask those issues. For years their bench players can't play any offense or defense. finally its catching up.

Mike wouldn't be here if the team didn't suck in the first place. Stop looking for a scapegoat. When a sure contender is 5 games below .500, there are a million issues with it. To capitalize on the Steve Nash signing and revive the P&R with Dwight/Gasol it did make sense to hire D'Antoni. Its easy to argue against this while they are losing but I guarantee they would have been losing anyways.

agree 100%, while I dont think MDA was the rigth choice I clearly believe this team just does not have the personnel to play good D either regardless of who's at the helm.

lakerswiz wrote:

khmrP wrote:

lakerswiz wrote:

khmrP wrote:yes cause Phil would've been able to come with a plan for these slow old bums out there on defense, MDA wasn't the right choice but there's no fixing this D.

I'll spare the essay, but

LOL

says the guy who expected Brown to be there to hold up the Trophy in June

I guarantee we'd have a better record with Mike Brown right now. No doubt in my mind at all, whatsoever, in any way.

We would not be currently out of the playoffs if Mike Brown was still coaching.

sure guy, cause its not like the D wasn't sucking under Brown while the offense looked iso heavy and just plain horrible.

good god this is pathetic

i honestly can't believe some of you are saying you'd rather have brown as coach


god this site is going downhill quick

432J wrote:good god this is pathetic

i honestly can't believe some of you are saying you'd rather have brown as coach


god this site is going downhill quick

I agree it's silly/fickle to filp flop that hard core, but on the other hand at least we made playoffs with Brown.

I was instantly worried about the D'Antoni hire, but never in a million years did I think we'd miss playoffs with this roster.

432J wrote:good god this is pathetic

i honestly can't believe some of you are saying you'd rather have brown as coach


god this site is going downhill quick

not some, only 1

i've hated the dan tony hiring with a passion since day 1 and was even furious that they considered him for the job, but it scares me to think where this team would be if mike brown was head coach

watching those 4-5 games with brown as coach was just awkward. they looked so lost out there on offense and the D was just as bad

432J wrote:i've hated the dan tony hiring with a passion since day 1 and was even furious that they considered him for the job, but it scares me to think where this team would be if mike brown was head coach

watching those 4-5 games with brown as coach was just awkward. they looked so lost out there on offense and the D was just as bad

Good point. I guess we made PO's last year, but its easy to forget how truly awful that Princeton offence looked at the beginning of this year.

what offense was there under Brown? It was just ISO Kobe and let him go to work.