D'Antoni regrets leaving PHX

[Mulli]

How so not? Go watch 70's basketball and tell me how many times you see a defender race out of the picture when a big guy comes in for a dunk? Go to a city park or high school gym and watch how often the kids practice dunking instead of shooting. The worst example of it was dozen years ago (roughly) when players started spending more time in front of a mirror then they did on their game because ESPN had started showing players' game faces. I'm not saying they can't learn defense or master the fundamentals of the game, I'm just making a point how about how it's influenced priorities.

Steve

I thought your point was that there is a whole generation who didn't play defense.

 

[AzStevenCal]

I thought your point was that there is a whole generation who didn't play defense.

Well, then, I automatically win by virtue of having confused my opponent.

Steve

 

[Mulli]

Well, then, I automatically win by virtue of having confused my opponent.

Steve

Nevermind, I knew what you were saying...

 

[AzStevenCal]

Nevermind, I knew what you were saying...

Thank you. If that hadn't worked I was going to try and induce an aneurysm for the win.

Steve

 

[Errntknght]

Its not a clear win until your adversary is reduced to calling you stupid or an idiot, etc...

 

[sunsfan88]

Because Mike's offense was predicated on not playing traditional defense in certain situations. And Amare had been better on defense, he just learned he couldn't play defense and stay on the court and he wanted to stay on the court more than anything. He's part of that generation that learned more about how to get on Sportscenter than how to play basketball.

Steve

I don't think Thibs would have insisted on playing traditional defense. I think he could have worked with what was given to him. He's that good of a defensive genius.

And I think he could have taught Amare how to play defense without fouling.

 

[Mulli]

So these comments from D'Antoni are from last year, right? Are did he say this again?

Just wondering.

 

[Joe Mama]

I thought the most frustrating thing about Mike D'Antoni was the fact that he absolutely refused to develop any sort of bench. I don't know why I was using the past tense here. He had the same problem last season with the Lakers. That's one of the things I really liked about gentry. Even when it looked like he didn't have the talent there, he got a lot out of his bench.

 

[AzStevenCal]

I thought the most frustrating thing about Mike D'Antoni was the fact that he absolutely refused to develop any sort of bench. I don't know why I was using the past tense here. He had the same problem last season with the Lakers. That's one of the things I really liked about gentry. Even when it looked like he didn't have the talent there, he got a lot out of his bench.

Yeah, I always thought his system could work with the right guys if he'd done just a little tweaking. He was convinced that what would work in Europe would work here and he never considered the extra minutes an NBA player plays over the course of 82 games and the playoffs. If he'd just lengthened his core group by one guy, they probably could have survived the season. Also, it would have left us in much better shape when one of the core players went down (as is almost inevitable).

I've never thought his system was the best way to go but if you can't build around one of the top two or three players, you have to find another way. He found part of another way but the rest of it escaped him. I don't hate him as many here do, AFAIC, he brought us back to relevance. He also gave us some very exciting years and I'm not at all sure that a more traditional coach would have brought us any more success. His style covered up for a lot of weaknesses on our roster.

Steve

 

[JCSunsfan]

I thought the most frustrating thing about Mike D'Antoni was the fact that he absolutely refused to develop any sort of bench. I don't know why I was using the past tense here. He had the same problem last season with the Lakers. That's one of the things I really liked about gentry. Even when it looked like he didn't have the talent there, he got a lot out of his bench.

I believe this too. It was the most prolific offense in the history of the league. He had the right personnel. But it just needed a little tweaking. More bench play to rest the starters. A little defensive instruction too. They did not have to play tight defense all the time but they needed to be able to lock a team up at key moments, especially in the playoffs.

 

[AzStevenCal]

I believe this too. It was the most prolific offense in the history of the league. He had the right personnel. But it just needed a little tweaking. More bench play to rest the starters. A little defensive instruction too. They did not have to play tight defense all the time but they needed to be able to lock a team up at key moments, especially in the playoffs.

That would have been nice. People often talk about how great of a defensive team the Jordan Bulls were but what I remember most about them is how they could turn it up a couple notches when they needed it. They closed out quarters with an intensity far in excess of their play the rest of the game. A couple of key stops per game is all we would have needed from them.

Steve

 

[Errntknght]

I believe this too. It was the most prolific offense in the history of the league. He had the right personnel. But it just needed a little tweaking. More bench play to rest the starters. A little defensive instruction too. They did not have to play tight defense all the time but they needed to be able to lock a team up at key moments, especially in the playoffs.

I don't believe those teams had the personnel to lock up a team but they didn't need to play their routine shoddy defense nearly as much as they did. The underlying problem was that 'Antoni didn't value defensive play enough. For example recall the infamous game against the Spurs where he didn't let Kurt Thomas on the floor until it was too late.

Then there was Marcus Banks who was a terrific defender when motivated but Mike didn't do anything to bring that out. Banks was a flawed player, suffering from the shooting disease as he did, but imagine if Mike had let his defensive play determine how long he got to stay on the floor instead of yanking him the second he put up an ill advised shot. Contrast that with his treatment of Barbosa who was more flawed but his failings were mostly on the defensive end - Leandro also panicked when he was subbed in for Nash. Mike pampered him to the point of bringing his brother in to baby sit him. There was nothing wrong with that and it helped a good bit but putting a similar amount of thought and effort into helping Marcus would probably have paid dividends, too.

That leads me in to what I think was the most important flaw in D'Antoni's coaching - though I agree wholly with his European mindset being a big problem. There was a very specific problem with the bench - lack of anything resembling a back up for Nash. The team lost ground every minute that Steve sat on the bench. IIRC, we had seven different players as his backup over the years and all of them played the worst ball of their careers in that role. It was clear (to me, anyway) that until that problem was solved the team would never reach its full potential. Mike just tried the same thing over and over - and got the same result over and over.

 

[JCSunsfan]

I am not sure what to say about the idea that Marcus Banks was a better player (or less flawed) than LB. It seems absolutely outlandish to me.

 

[Covert Rain]

the knicks were also accused of playing terrible defense and pretty much being a joke. then DA was fired and immediately, the entire team started playing better, went 20-6 and the next season actually won a playoff round and was 2 games away from the ECF...as opposed to DA who has won ONE playoff game since 2008.

DA is a bad coach. His Nuggets team was terrible the one year he coached there, the Knicks were a joke for the majority of his tenure before he quit there and the Lakers were the laughingstock of the league last year and lost the number 1 FA in the summer.

This. I have said before that the Suns won despite D'Antoni. I still maintain D'Antoni squandered an opportunity. A better coach would have gotten us at least one title IMO.

 

[BC867]

I am not sure what to say about the idea that Marcus Banks was a better player (or less flawed) than LB. It seems absolutely outlandish to me.

Errntknght didn't say that Banks was a better player than Barbosa.

He said that if D'Antoni had recognized Banks' defensive strengths (and knew what to do with it) as much as he used Barbosa's strength (instant offense), we would have been a better all-around team.

And, even on offense, instant offense in the body of a point guard does not make a backup point guard.

 

[Mainstreet]

Errntknght didn't say that Banks was a better player than Barbosa.

He said that if D'Antoni had recognized Banks' defensive strengths (and knew what to do with it) as much as he used Barbosa's strength (instant offense), we would have been a better all-around team.

And, even on offense, instant offense in the body of a point guard does not make a backup point guard.

I don't think Banks had any strengths outside of summer league.

 

[Superbone]

Bank's strengths is an oxymoron.

 

[sunsfan88]

Then there was Marcus Banks who was a terrific defender when motivated but Mike didn't do anything to bring that out. Banks was a flawed player, suffering from the shooting disease as he did, but imagine if Mike had let his defensive play determine how long he got to stay on the floor instead of yanking him the second he put up an ill advised shot. Contrast that with his treatment of Barbosa who was more flawed but his failings were mostly on the defensive end - Leandro also panicked when he was subbed in for Nash. Mike pampered him to the point of bringing his brother in to baby sit him. There was nothing wrong with that and it helped a good bit but putting a similar amount of thought and effort into helping Marcus would probably have paid dividends, too.

Barbosa was more flawed than Banks? Banks is so horrible I wouldn't keep him for his defense, offense, rebounding or whatever over Barbosa. Hell no.

It is extremely offending that Barbosa and Banks are even being mentioned together. Barbosa is one of the best bench players in Suns franchise history. I wouldn't even disrespect Shannon Brown by putting him with Banks.

Lets place guys like Warrick, Banks, Beasley all in the same category.

 

[TJ]

I thought the most frustrating thing about Mike D'Antoni was the fact that he absolutely refused to develop any sort of bench. I don't know why I was using the past tense here. He had the same problem last season with the Lakers. That's one of the things I really liked about gentry. Even when it looked like he didn't have the talent there, he got a lot out of his bench.

Agree 100%. 7 1/2 man rotations with a fast, uptempo team is the reason his teams always ran out of gas by the playoffs.

I can remember screaming for Jalen Rose to get playing time when he was here...and especially when Amare and Diaw were suspended during the San Antonio series.

 

[95pro]

all dantoni could have done was to substitute banks for nash with a min or two left in the first half.

 

[Errntknght]

Barbosa was more flawed than Banks? Banks is so horrible I wouldn't keep him for his defense, offense, rebounding or whatever over Barbosa. Hell no.

It is extremely offending that Barbosa and Banks are even being mentioned together. Barbosa is one of the best bench players in Suns franchise history. I wouldn't even disrespect Shannon Brown by putting him with Banks.

Lets place guys like Warrick, Banks, Beasley all in the same category.

I figured I'd offend a few people by comparing Banks and Barbosa, but if you look at their stats prior to Banks coming here you'll see they were very similar - Barbs with an edge in shooting and Banks an edge in assists. Both were modestly successful bench combo guards with three years in the league. The big difference between them was that Marcus was a good defender and Leandro was stinky.

Leading up to that we'd had experienced SG Jimmy Jackson filling in as backup to Nash then we brought in Yuta Tabuse, Smush Parker and Andre Barrett to try out as backup point and D'Antoni dismissed each of them after a brief audition. It was watching that process that led me to predict that Banks was doomed before he ever set foot on the floor. In retrospect I wonder if D'Antoni wanted to prove our GM was incompetent and that he should have that job, too. At the time that never occurred to me but I could see that Mike had no patience with any prospective PG and if anything spelled disaster for a young guy that was it.

It was like he had a limited amount of patience and he spent it all on Barbosa - to the point of hiring his brother Dan D'An to mentor him, if you recall.

Predictably, IMO, Banks was a disaster and has been reviled ever since - which is mostly undeserved. Barbosa thrived as never before, having the best year of his career.

If a person in authority treats someone as a valued person they will try to prove him right, and if he treats someone as worthless they try to prove him right, too - though now and then there is someone with enough belief in themselves they'll use it as a motivation to do everything they can to prove that person wrong.

 

[BC867]

If a person in authority treats someone as a valued person they will try to prove him right, and if he treats someone as worthless they try to prove him right, too - though now and then there is someone with enough belief in themselves they'll use it as a motivation to do everything they can to prove that person wrong.

Yes, it would be an uphill fight for a player to overcome a coach's self-fulfilling prophecy for that player. Especially if it is about a power struggle involving the coach and GM.

 

[AzStevenCal]

We pursued Banks as a Free Agent expecting him to be somewhat of a finished product. We drafted Barbosa as a young, untested and undeveloped project. So, of course, we dealt with them in different ways. Keep in mind that Leandro had very little basketball behind him but Banks had a 4 year college career (2 years at UNLV plus CC) along with 3 years in the NBA and we had the same problem with him that every team has had with him. He makes horrible decisions, often at the worst possible times.

And his defense was overrated IMO. He was a pretty good on-the-ball defender but that was it. Of course, we made matters even worse by trying to turn him into a shooting guard but we're not the only team to try to fix a broken point guard by turning him into an off guard. The one I never understood was Brevin Knight, I really thought he'd make a great change of pace backup but we got rid of him without even giving him a fair chance. I don't remember if that was Mike's first year or the year before but I've often though that he'd have been a decent option to run our offense behind someone like Nash.

Steve

 

[Mainstreet]

Barbosa was more flawed than Banks? Banks is so horrible I wouldn't keep him for his defense, offense, rebounding or whatever over Barbosa. Hell no.

It is extremely offending that Barbosa and Banks are even being mentioned together. Barbosa is one of the best bench players in Suns franchise history. I wouldn't even disrespect Shannon Brown by putting him with Banks.

Lets place guys like Warrick, Banks, Beasley all in the same category.

I tend to agree with your viewpoint. I just can't think of anything good to say about Banks tenure with the Suns. At least Warrick had some moments where he was fun to watch.

 

[AzStevenCal]

I tend to agree with your viewpoint. I just can't think of anything good to say about Banks tenure with the Suns. At least Warrick had some moments where he was fun to watch.

I guess it's all a matter of perspective. I was never a Banks fan but IMO he was so much better than Warrick. I still maintain that Warrick was the worst team defender I have ever seen in my 50+ years of watching the NBA. He'd give you 10 or 15 good games a year on the offensive side of the ball but even if he gave you 82 of those he'd still be one of the worst players in the game. Banks played pretty good defense and was even more likely to win you a game on the offensive end then Warrick was. Unfortunately, he was prone to giving the game away every now and then too but still, I'd take him over Warrick by a long shot.

Steve