"You Gotta Love It Baby" Official Jazz thread

[smokymountainrain]

So what's the theory now? He's having arguably his best season.

Not really. His assists are about the same from his best seasons, but his points, FG%, 3pt FG% and turnovers are all worse.

[MarkGrace]

Both the Suns and Knicks were better off with D'Antoni. The Suns were a completely different team as they went from being irrelevant to being contenders every season.

Sorry, but it is easy for me to understand why he keeps getting jobs.

But they haven't necessarily been worse off without him. In Phoenix he had a 65% win percentage, since they're about 60%. In two seasons in New York he more or less has the same win percentage as the previous two seasons with Isiah.

And this really isn't all that much of a discussion if we keep treating everything except the coach as static.

Though in the end, I guess I don't disagree with the getting jobs thing -- there are a lot of shitty coaches out there, so he probably has a place. I just disagree with the idea that he wins more than he should.

[LiveCoug]

Why in the world are people defending D'antoni? The Knicks are 26-47. They are awful. They have an all star. Overachieving? I guess if 5 games out of the 3rd worst team is overachieving......

[Surfah]

So what's the theory now? He's having arguably his best season.

Has that team's style of play changed since his departure (aside from the abysmal Shaq experiment where they just ran without him)?

[Surfah]

Why in the world are people defending D'antoni? The Knicks are 26-47. They are awful. They have an all star. Overachieving? I guess if 5 games out of the 3rd worst team is overachieving......

You're right. The Jazz, now that is an overachieving team.

[smokymountainrain]

Why in the world are people defending D'antoni? The Knicks are 26-47. They are awful. They have an all star. Overachieving? I guess if 5 games out of the 3rd worst team is overachieving......

I think they have crappy players and are lucky to have won 26 games to this point in the season.

Oh, and that all-star...how good was he before D'Antoni arrived?

[MarkGrace]

Not really. His assists are about the same from his best seasons, but his points, FG%, 3pt FG% and turnovers are all worse.

20 pp40 is only a point or so of his career best
13.4 ap40 is tied for his all-time high mark
Assist ratio of 39.2 is essentially tied for the 2nd best mark of his career
Usage rate is at a career best 24.4
Rebound rate is essentially tied for his best mark ever
Third highest career fg%
Career high at the free throw line

How do you get to "not really" when I say "arguably" having the best season? Some numbers are up, some are down, but overall everything is mostly in line with his best seasons. And this is at the advanced age of 36.

[LiveCoug]

I think they have crappy players and are lucky to have won 26 games to this point in the season.

Oh, and that all-star...how good was he before D'Antoni arrived?

You are giving D'antoni credit for David Lee's progression in the league? Dude's a player, he woulda flourished under anyone.

Knicks suck, D'antoni is an average to barely above average coach. This is a silly argument.

[smokymountainrain]

20 pp40 is only a point or so of his career best
13.4 ap40 is tied for his all-time high mark
Assist ratio of 39.2 is essentially tied for the 2nd best mark of his career
Usage rate is at a career best 24.4
Rebound rate is essentially tied for his best mark ever
Third highest career fg%
Career high at the free throw line

How do you get to "not really" when I say "arguably" having the best season? Some numbers are up, some are down, but overall everything is mostly in line with his best seasons. And this is at the advanced age of 36.

I was just looking at his per game numbers. I didn't go as deep as you. I stand corrected.

[smokymountainrain]

You are giving D'antoni credit for David Lee's progression in the league? Dude's a player, he woulda flourished under anyone.

Except that he wasn't flourishing until D'Antoni got there.

Heck, he wasn't even very good in college. He averaged 13 and 9 in his best season - there is a reason he was a 2nd round pick.

[Blueintheface]

I think they have crappy players and are lucky to have won 26 games to this point in the season.

Oh, and that all-star...how good was he before D'Antoni arrived?

David Lee is the anti-D'Antoni = a power forward that plays...gasp...under the rim and inside of 18 feet!!! He tried his hardest to get Stoudamire traded (Amare didn't do him any favors by asking for those trades as well) while coaching every other player 7 ft and under to shoot the ball from 25 feet away. He's a European player and coach, period. David Lee became an All-star because he works hard, and is in the same mold as Milsap. I don't think Sloan has done much to improve Milsap's game, I just think players like these have a knack that doesn't come with physical size and athleticism. They hustle and claw and have a feel for the game.

[MarkGrace]

Except that he wasn't flourishing until D'Antoni got there.

Heck, he wasn't even very good in college. He averaged 13 and 9 in his best season - there is a reason he was a 2nd round pick.

You're doing the same thing with Lee as you just did with Nash. Which is curious because you're always the type to look at per-minute and pace/opportunity stuff.

The storyline is that Lee's perfect fit in Mike D'Antoni's system allowed him to flourish last season. In reality, it was more a matter of opportunity. Lee's PERs under Isiah Thomas were just as good, but he was backing up Eddy Curry and playing at a slower pace. Between the Knicks' dramatically increased tempo under D'Antoni and an extra five minutes per game for Lee, he added more than five points to his scoring average to give the appearance of a breakout year.

[MarkGrace]

Has that team's style of play changed since his departure (aside from the abysmal Shaq experiment where they just ran without him)?

That's what I'm saying. There's no magic to D'Antoni...each team has been able to play comparable ball without him.

(ftr, even with the Shaq experiment year under Porter/Gentry they played at the same pace they do now and did under D'Antoni)

[Surfah]

That's what I'm saying. There's no magic to D'Antoni...each team has been able to play comparable ball without him.

(ftr, even with the Shaq experiment year under Porter/Gentry they played at the same pace they do now and did under D'Antoni)

That's my point.

Nash was never an MVP player until he got to run in D'Antoni's system. The fact that he's still having success and as you stated arguably the best of his career is because he's still playing in essentially the same style and pace - D'Antoni's.

[MarkGrace]

That's my point.

Nash was never an MVP player until he got to run in D'Antoni's system. The fact that he's still having success and as you stated arguably the best of his career is because he's still playing in essentially the same style and pace - D'Antoni's.

I am not a Mike D'antoni fan either but I think there are some teeth to the argument that he made Nash a two-time MVP (I am okay with the first, but the second? ).

I guess I read your comment wrong. I thought you meant D'Antoni made him an MVP (since that's more or less what it says right there), and so the obvious flip side of that is without D'Antoni he shouldn't be playing at the same level (which he still clearly is).

To the extent that it's just been a fast pace/high number of possessions that's suited his ability, couldn't any number of coaches have done that? I mean at their best the Suns played to about 96 possessions per game, and for the last few years several teams have played at least that fast (and previous to the late 90s, most teams played that fast). Couldn't Nash have been maximized playing for any of those other teams? Does it really have anything to do with D'Antoni himself? I think certain style suits him, but I guess since that style exists independent of D'Antoni I don't agree that D'Antoni made him.