"You Gotta Love It Baby" Official Jazz thread

[falafel]

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).

Without a real posiition in this debate, I'll ask: why would you expect Nash (or any other player) to return to their previous production after a coach leaves? I suspect that you don't think that. However, that doesn't mean that the coach didn't impart new skill, awareness, leadership ability, etc., all of which remains with the player after the coach is gone.

I see no reason to suggest that just because Nash is playing as well without D'Antoni as he did with him it must mean that D'Antoni didn't have a significant impact on him. Especially since (I understand) Nash is still playing in the same type of system put in place by D'Antoni.

[Surfah]

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.

I said there are teeth to that argument. But if you want something definitive, I don't believe that Steve Nash ever would have won an MVP let alone two had he played for a coach that didn't use a system like Mike D's. So what if other coaches could have done that? They didn't. Depsite MD's departure Nash and the Suns are enjoying the same success because they're still playing MD's style of ball. Porter and Gentry were smart enough to keep the offense doing what MD proved to be successful.

I don't understand your last argument. Don't most 'styles' exist independent of the coaches who use them? I never argued that MD was innovative in his system. Nearly everything in basketball is derivative of someone else. Just because he isn't the author of it doesn't diminish the results he had with it. And those results for both Phoenix and Nash seem to speak pretty loudly.

[Donuthole]

I said there are teeth to that argument. But if you want something definitive, I don't believe that Steve Nash ever would have won an MVP let alone two had he played for a coach that didn't use a system like Mike D's. So what if other coaches could have done that? They didn't. Depsite MD's departure Nash and the Suns are enjoying the same success because they're still playing MD's style of ball. Porter and Gentry were smart enough to keep the offense doing what MD proved to be successful.

Actually, Porter wasn't. And that's why he's gone.

[Surfah]

Actually, Porter wasn't. And that's why he's gone.

You're right.

[MarkGrace]

I don't understand your last argument. Don't most 'styles' exist independent of the coaches who use them? I never argued that MD was innovative in his system. Nearly everything in basketball is derivative of someone else. Just because he isn't the author of it doesn't diminish the results he had with it. And those results for both Phoenix and Nash seem to speak pretty loudly.

My point is, what has D'Antoni specifically done that made Steve Nash? What about the way he contributed to Nash's success was unique or inherent to him as an individual? What did he do with the Suns/Nash that no other coach could do? I don't really see anything.

The point you make about innovation is a good one, because up until now we keep talking about "his system." What is his system? It's just basic run-and-gun basketball, which has existed for decades. Really there is no D'Antoni system. All he did was play run-and-gun, and that seemed to suit Nash. To the extent that Nash benefited from a certain style of play, then I agree with you.

But to me there's still a step between Nash benefiting from run-and-gun and your claim that D'Antoni made him that still hasn't been connected. Because, as we've seen, you can remove D'Antoni from the equation and still get more or less the same result. And to me, if someone is truly making another person, once that person is gone, there should be some type of corresponding drop. But with Nash the only time we've seen is a drop is when a certain style is gone, not any particular individual.

[Surfah]

My point is, what has D'Antoni specifically done that made Steve Nash? What about the way he contributed to Nash's success was unique or inherent to him as an individual? What did he do with the Suns/Nash that no other coach could do? I don't really see anything.

The point you make about innovation is a good one, because up until now we keep talking about "his system." What is his system? It's just basic run-and-gun basketball, which has existed for decades. Really there is no D'Antoni system. All he did was play run-and-gun, and that seemed to suit Nash. To the extent that Nash benefited from a certain style of play, then I agree with you.

But to me there's still a step between Nash benefiting from run-and-gun and your claim that D'Antoni made him that still hasn't been connected. Because, as we've seen, you can remove D'Antoni from the equation and still get more or less the same result. And to me, if someone is truly making another person, once that person is gone, there should be some type of corresponding drop. But with Nash the only time we've seen is a drop is when a certain style is gone, not any particular individual.

Doesn't a coach get credit for introducing a system to a team regardless if it has existed for decades? Do you think Steve Nash would have won two MVPs if Frank Johnson had stayed the coach of the Suns?

As to your last point, isn't Nellie Ball essentially what D'Antoni runs? Why did Nash's production go up markedly after joining the Suns?

And yes, I understand that I just responded with 4 questions.

[MarkGrace]

I wants answers...not questions!

[Surfah]

I wants answers...not questions!

My point is, what has D'Antoni specifically done that made Steve Nash? What about the way he contributed to Nash's success was unique or inherent to him as an individual? What did he do with the Suns/Nash that no other coach could do? I don't really see anything.

[Blueintheface]

Jazz are in 1st place in the division. D'Antoni coaches a team Jazz fans want to see fail more miserably than they have. Let's get back on point.

[MarkGrace]

My point is, what has D'Antoni specifically done that made Steve Nash? What about the way he contributed to Nash's success was unique or inherent to him as an individual? What did he do with the Suns/Nash that no other coach could do? I don't really see anything.

And I still don't get any answer to these questions. I already knew Nash won two MVPs. Figures.

[Surfah]

And I still don't get any answer to these questions. I already knew Nash won two MVPs. Figures.

Yeah and Nash would have won those MVP's playing under a different coach in Phoenix, right? I guess the hot weather down there is the reason Nash all of a sudden started averaging 3-4 assists more per game and had career highs in PPG, rebounds and shooting %.

Tell me how Don Nelson's system is different than D'Antoni's and then explain why all of a sudden Nash started becoming a 1st team All-NBA and All-Star regular?

[MarkGrace]

Yeah and Nash would have won those MVP's playing under a different coach in Phoenix, right? I guess the hot weather down there is the reason Nash all of a sudden started averaging 3-4 assists more per game and had career highs in PPG, rebounds and shooting %.

Now we're all the back to where I started:

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

This isn't going too well.

[falafel]

Now we're all the back to where I started:


This isn't going too well.

Didn't SMR already debunk that statement?

[MarkGrace]

Didn't SMR already debunk that statement?

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.

Nash is playing posting numbers very similar to his MVP years, sans D'Antoni. That's where this whole discussion got started. To me the answer to Surfah's question of whether he could have had MVP like performances under another coach in Phoenix is clearly yes, since that's exactly what he's doing right now.

[Surfah]

Nash is playing posting numbers very similar to his MVP years, sans D'Antoni. That's where this whole discussion got started. To me the answer to Surfah's question of whether he could have had MVP like performances under another coach in Phoenix is clearly yes, since that's exactly what he's doing right now.

So you think if Gentry was the coach instead of D'Antoni that Nash would have had the same success? Sorry I'll never buy that. Just because another coach can have success with a player doesn't diminish the precious coach's ability. Wouldn't a good coach impart certain things to a player that he'd carry on?

Would you argue that Nellie Ball is distinctivly different than what D'Antoni does? If not, then why the dramatic increase in Nash's production?