Republic: D'Antoni is proud, thankful

[Irish]

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/suns/articles/2008/07/23/20080723bickley0724.html

D'Antoni is proud, thankful

by Dan Bickley - Jul. 23, 2008 10:56 PM
The Arizona Republic


LAS VEGAS - Mike D'Antoni is happy. He's also a bit sad. And before we all move on with our lives, he'd like to tell you something:
Thanks.

"It's hard to put into words," D'Antoni said. "It was four of the best years I've ever had. I'm really proud of what the team did, and really happy that my family and I were able to live in Phoenix. On and off the court, it was the best (situation) you can have. And I'm going to miss it."

It's strange. Talking to him now, it's hard to believe he's actually gone. Exactly one year ago in the same Las Vegas hotel, D'Antoni spoke of his new attitude, the new emphasis on fun and vowed that the Suns would enjoy their road to a title in 2007-08.

That forecast couldn't have been more wrong.

To this day, D'Antoni, who is in Las Vegas serving as an assistant with Team USA, will not address the specifics of his departure. He loves Arizona and might return to the desert for good when his coaching days are over. He does not want to burn any bridges or engage in a battle of words with his previous employer. Besides, serious verbal sparring is not his style, unless we're talking about Phil Jackson.

"You turn the page," D'Antoni said. "You hate to turn it, but once you do, I'm excited. I'm going to go full boat and hopefully bring to New York what I had in Phoenix. But there are no guarantees."

At the time of his departure, I lashed out at D'Antoni for bailing on his team and a program he created. I still believe he was the best coach for the Suns, and far better than most people thought. And I was baffled by his stubbornness, the refusal to modify his approach and meld philosophies with General Manager Steve Kerr.

After all, he had the support of the owner, Robert Sarver, who agreed to fire all of the perceived traitors in the organization if it would restore D'Antoni's happiness. The head coach declined. He wished no ill will on anyone.

Anyway, enough of life in the rearview mirror. The Suns have moved on, and Kerr has had the kind of summer necessary to restore civic faith in an aging team bounced in the first round of last season's playoffs.

The signing of Matt Barnes was a nifty stroke. The role playing of draft pick Robin Lopez, who has looked very good and very big while scrimmaging against Team USA, will pay immediate dividends.

And every objective basketball mind I encounter in Las Vegas raves about the potential of Goran Dragic, the point guard of the future.

"He's the real deal," said the Pistons' Tony Ronzone, considered the top international scout in the NBA. "It's hard to find guys who are as skilled as him that understand how to play point guard. You've got your successor to Steve Nash in Phoenix."

Meanwhile, D'Antoni has a great contract, a great office (Madison Square Garden), and a great opportunity to revive a proud franchise. Best of all, he was able to sell his house in Arizona without putting it on the bargain rack. In a perfect world, he would have the Knicks atop the Eastern Conference at midseason, thus able to coach the All-Star team when the game comes to Phoenix in 2009.

We all know that isn't going to happen, but at least D'Antoni won't be hampered by salary-cap restrictions or luxury-tax concerns in New York. There also are growing rumors that he'll be able to attract LeBron James and/or Dwyane Wade when both become free agents in 2010.
Don't laugh. It could happen.

"You know what? He's actually more detailed than people think," Kobe Bryant said. "I used to think playing against Phoenix that the players are just freelancing, but he draws all that stuff up, and he can have 10 options on one play. I've never seen an offensive mind like his. And I don't know any player on this team that doesn't think (he) wouldn't be fun to play for."

James, who's hounded by these questions every time he lands in New York, remains coy on the subject.

"(Fans in New York) have a right to dream about it. I can't take that away from them," James said. "I loved the Garden way before I got to the NBA, and for some reason, when I get to the Garden, I always play well. So (the fans) want me to do it 41 games a year instead of two games a year. And it's been great (working with D'Antoni). He's one of the best coaches we have in the league. He's going to bring that style to the East Coast, and I'm very excited for him, very happy for him. Best of luck to him."
To one of the best men ever to land a coaching job in Arizona: Best of luck, indeed.

 

[da_suns_fan]

"(Fans in New York) have a right to dream about it. I can't take that away from them," James said.

You stay humble, Lebron.

 

[da_suns_fan]

btw - Looking at Lopez playing in the summer leagues, I was so impressed with how big he plays. He's a seven footer who plays like he KNOWS he's a seven footer (this sounds stupid but I think some will understand what Im saying).

He's also very long a la Tim Duncan and never gives up on a play like Tim Duncan.

I think this is gonna turn out to be a very good pick.

 

[mojorizen7]

From Kobe: I've never seen an offensive mind like his. And I don't know any player on this team that doesn't think (he) wouldn't be fun to play for."

No doubt. Unfortunately offense is only half of the equation.
I thank D'Antoni for reviving this franchise from mediocrity but that's pretty much where it ends for me. Small ball is a gimmick. How Don Nelson still gets jobs is beyond me. Maybe there is hope for Mad Mike's carreer after NY City gets tired of 50 and fade too.
I can't wait for the post-game press conferences when the NY media and fans ask questions and won't settle for "We've just got to play better."

 

[Irish]

The key to small ball is to have a special collection of small players. In 2004-05 the Suns had a shooting guard in JJ who was 6'7" 235 (bigger than many power forwards) and (5.1 rpg in 2004-05) and a 6'6" 235 SF in Richardson (6.1 rgp in 2004-05). Add in Marion at 6'7" 230 (11.3 rpg) and this was not really quite as small as people make it out to be. Look at how the Warriors were with Baron Davis at PG: 6'3" 215. Last season he averaged 4.7 rpg. IMHO you COULD win it all with a small ball lineup, but it would take a very special group to do it.

Back to the article, it is encouraging to hear Robin is playing so well. The Suns really need a good year from him if this team is going anywhere. The fact that he's not looking awful against the USA team is very encouraging.

 

[mojorizen7]

The key to small ball is to have a special collection of small players. In 2004-05 the Suns had a shooting guard in JJ who was 6'7" 235 (bigger than many power forwards) and (5.1 rpg in 2004-05) and a 6'6" 235 SF in Richardson (6.1 rgp in 2004-05). Add in Marion at 6'7" 230 (11.3 rpg) and this was not really quite as small as people make it out to be.

-Of course it was/is. I'll give you 4 big guards and a power forward & i'll throw out a front line of a 7 footer, a 6'10" PF, a 6'8" SF and an average size backcourt and
a)wear you down
b)get the calls late in games with a legitimate post-up game
c)intimidate you with physical play
in a seven game series. Assuming an even talent level of course.

Look at how the Warriors were with Baron Davis at PG: 6'3" 215. Last season he averaged 4.7 rpg.

IMHO you COULD win it all with a small ball lineup, but it would take a very special group to do it.[/quote]
-I disagree and until it happens i always will.....unless small ball became the model for the majority of teams thus putting say....12 out of 16 playoff teams competing against each other....but even then i doubt it. Not with the way the playoffs are officiated........ although the officiating would prob change along with the speed of small ball.

 

[Irish]

-
c)intimidate you with physical play
in a seven game series. Assuming an even talent level of course.

To make it work, you need to be MORE telented and have more depth (D'Antoni's fatal flaw). If I was to put together a small ball team, I'd want:

1- Every player a good three point shooter
2. Every player a physical, but very fast and great jump athletes
3. Every player a very good to great on the ball defender
4. Every player very smart and does not make many mental mistakes.
5. Every player can handle the ball in traffic, hit mid range shots, and not be overly predictable.
6. Every player has a great motor and plays hard all the time.

It's awfully hard to do that, which is why I am excited by Robin's progress. Perhaps getting a good big team really is easier than trying to create a great small team. But that does not make it impossible, just really really hard.

 

[Mainstreet]

To make it work, you need to be MORE telented and have more depth (D'Antoni's fatal flaw). If I was to put together a small ball team, I'd want:

1- Every player a good three point shooter
2. Every player a physical, but very fast and great jump athletes
3. Every player a very good to great on the ball defender
4. Every player very smart and does not make many mental mistakes.
5. Every player can handle the ball in traffic, hit mid range shots, and not be overly predictable.
6. Every player has a great motor and plays hard all the time.

It's awfully hard to do that, which is why I am excited by Robin's progress. Perhaps getting a good big team really is easier than trying to create a great small team. But that does not make it impossible, just really really hard.

I think small ball is much more about how the game is played (speed, spacing, passing and shooting) than it is about the size of the players. However, since there are not enough bigs that can play this style, smaller players are used. However as Irish pointed out, to successfully play small ball a team needs talent and depth to maximize energy.

 

[BC867]

I'll give you 4 big guards and a power forward & i'll throw out a front line of a 7 footer, a 6'10" PF, a 6'8" SF and an average size backcourt and
a)wear you down
b)get the calls late in games with a legitimate post-up game
c)intimidate you with physical play
in a seven game series. Assuming an even talent level of course.

]I disagree and until it happens i always will.....unless small ball became the model for the majority of teams thus putting say....12 out of 16 playoff teams competing against each other....but even then i doubt it. Not with the way the playoffs are officiated........ although the officiating would prob change along with the speed of small ball.

You're a traditionalist and a realist, mojorizen. And there aren't too many of us left.

Small ball does not work in the "second season" if a team expects to advance. Never has. And as long as the refs honor aggressive play, it won't.

 

[HooverDam]

Saying 'small ball doesn't work' is ridiculous. It ignores specific situations of teams on a year to year basis and is just an easy way for people to simplify things and not have to actual bother thinking. But hey, it works for morons like Greg Anthony, so I guess the silly theory has that going for it.

 

[mojorizen7]

Saying 'small ball doesn't work' is ridiculous. It ignores specific situations of teams on a year to year basis and is just an easy way for people to simplify things and not have to actual bother thinking. But hey, it works for morons like Greg Anthony, so I guess the silly theory has that going for it.

Elaborate please....how the hell is being a disbeliever in small ball a shortcut to rational thinking?

 

[HooverDam]

Elaborate please....how the hell is being a disbeliever in small ball a shortcut to rational thinking?

Because its a lazy way of making an argument. Instead of looking at what actually happened in a given year to a given 'small' team (were the Suns 'small' or uptempo? Does uptempo not work according to these ridiculous theorists? Who knows) people just take the lazy way out and say 'small ball doesn't work'. Instead of looking at actual facts and realizing in the Suns case it was a lack of depth in most of the recent years NOT their small, uptempo style that doomed them. Was it small ball that broke Joe Johnsons face and had no one to fill in for him? Was it small ball that wrecked Amares knee? Was it small ball that caused them all to be suspended? The Suns were bigger this year, but didn't go as far. So clearly its a lot more complicated than 'small vs big', but people don't want to bother thinking.

If the Suns had more depth, which would've meant better drafting, better management of contracts, etc., they very well could've won it all or have been in the finals. But, people chose not to blame the actual reasons for the Suns shortcomings and instead blame 'small ball' because its easier.

 

[mojorizen7]

Glad you elaborated on the SUNS run of bad luck. I also agree that depth is an issue completely unrelated to going "big" or "small." However I've stated reasons for why bigger,stronger,defensive minded teams that control tempo and rebounding are winning titles over the Golden State's,the Phoenix Suns',the Dallas Mavericks', the Sacramento Kings' of the world. I'm not throwing out a mindless simple theory that "small ball sucks" and thats it.
If you play small....you tend to get beat up & worn down by game #95.
If you play small...you rely on jump shooting at crunch time which can kill u.
If you play small.....you cannot control the glass and force your tempo.
If you play small.....you cannot defend the paint where and 1's will kill u.
Now how does having lack of depth solve any of the problems i mentioned above? None. Zero.
I respect your opinion on this but don't tell me that i have no reasons to believe in what i do & that i'm taking the easy way out by making a moronic statement with no basis of fact.
We've gone round & round on this and i suspect we'll continue to do so & thats cool with me. I enjoy debating this subject. Funny how you always mention Greg Anthony though....like he's the ONLY guy who publicly criticizes small ball......the successful coaches in this game don't play small ball for good reason.

 

[HooverDam]

I mention Greg Anthony because anyone who's ever seen him on TV ought to be shocked that he makes it through every day with out falling into an open manhole cover. He leaks stupidity at an alarming rate.

If you play small....you tend to get beat up & worn down by game #95.

Having depth leads to not getting warn down. Being 'big' or 'small' doesn't have much to do with this. Shaq is big, and often has to sit large parts of seasons so he doesn't get warn down. Luckily for him most of the teams he was on had enough depth/talent at other positions to make that OK.

If you play small...you rely on jump shooting at crunch time which can kill u.

If you have depth, you can bring in another shooter off the bench who may not be cold. Like Cotton always said, 'you can never have enough shooters.'

If you play small.....you cannot control the glass and force your tempo.

Charles Barkley was 6'4'', size isn't the sole key to rebounding. Its a skill like any other portion of the game that can be developed given the will. Having longer arms, or more strength certainly helps, but its not everything. Again, its a lazy argument to reduce everything to 'big' versus 'small'. I'm not pro small, I'm pro skill (which often happens to coincide with smaller players, but not always).

If you play small.....you cannot defend the paint where and 1's will kill u.

I'm not advocating starting Steve Nash at Center, anyone who's ever read my posts on this board knows how much I loved Kurt Thomas. He was a big who could actually shoot a jumper and pass pretty well. Obviously post defense is important and size and strength help with that, however Kurt Thomas is one of the leagues best post defenders and is 'only' 6'9''. A team with talented, quick, agile, wing players who can defend can deny the ball into the post a lot too, after all the first step to post defense is keeping the ball out of the post in the first place.

Now how does having lack of depth solve any of the problems i mentioned above? None. Zero.

Wrong, see above.


Personally I enjoy basketball as an up-tempo game with skilled players. The game we saw the NBA devolve into after the Jordan era was not the way basketball ought to be played and the ratings reflected that. I want big guys who can pass and shoot. I want wing players who can run like track stars and jump out of the gym.

I want rule changes like a wider court (would make for more steals) and trapezoidal key (would lead to better shooting big men) to open the game up and increase the skill aspects. Teams that dump the ball down to some testosterone riddled giant and let him shoot a 4 footer off the glass every possession make me and most fans want to kill themselves. Its like exploiting a glitch in a video game, the glitch needs to be fixed.

If you look at the history of basketball, its a game thats gotten faster and more skill oriented over the years. There was once a time when just having a single giant on your team like George Mikan or Wilt Chamberlin could make you a top team, thankfully rule changes have helped curb that. The key has continually widened, the 24 second clock was added, the three point line was added, hand checking was outlawed, etc. If you want to be a 'traditionalist', thats fine, but the game thankfully is continuing its forward march towards speed, skill and a more open feel.

 

[BC867]

Saying 'small ball doesn't work' is ridiculous.

Which is why I said, "Small ball does not work in the second season if a team expects to advance. Never has. And as long as the refs honor aggressive play, it won't."

All of the Suns coaches and Don Nelson have won how many championships?

Partial quoting is not a quote.

 

[Ciani]

Which is why I said, "Small ball does not work in the second season if a team expects to advance. Never has. And as long as the refs honor aggressive play, it won't."

All of the Suns coaches and Don Nelson have won how many championships?

Actually, Boston won the Finals with the ability to put a very good small lineup on the floor down the stretch, and the Spurs went small a lot of times in their championship runs and there are a lot of other examples for successful small ball lineups in the playoffs.

Of course, these teams had great big lineups as well, in other words they had depth to play any style, which was not the case with the Suns. The lack of depth is not just D'antoni's fault, he was obviously part of the problem though.

 

[mojorizen7]

Having depth leads to not getting warn down. Being 'big' or 'small' doesn't have much to do with this. Shaq is big, and often has to sit large parts of seasons so he doesn't get warn down. Luckily for him most of the teams he was on had enough depth/talent at other positions to make that OK.

It has everything to do with it. If your just substituting small starters for more small bench guys you're going to get the same results. Have you ever played basketball against a bigger,stronger team? It's fun as long as your 20 footers are falling. Shaq gets worn down because he's old. And those other teams he played on brought another big off the bench....not a PF.

If you have depth, you can bring in another shooter off the bench who may not be cold. Like Cotton always said, 'you can never have enough shooters.'

If you think that jump shooting your way to a title is the blueprint for success then i can't help you there.

Charles Barkley was 6'4'', size isn't the sole key to rebounding. Its a skill like any other portion of the game that can be developed given the will. Having longer arms, or more strength certainly helps, but its not everything. Again, its a lazy argument to reduce everything to 'big' versus 'small'. I'm not pro small, I'm pro skill (which often happens to coincide with smaller players, but not always).

I agree....but bigger stronger players will outrebound smaller guys 9 times out of 10 using less energy.

I'm not advocating starting Steve Nash at Center, anyone who's ever read my posts on this board knows how much I loved Kurt Thomas. He was a big who could actually shoot a jumper and pass pretty well. Obviously post defense is important and size and strength help with that, however Kurt Thomas is one of the leagues best post defenders and is 'only' 6'9''. A team with talented, quick, agile, wing players who can defend can deny the ball into the post a lot too, after all the first step to post defense is keeping the ball out of the post in the first place.

Kurt Thomas is a STRONG 6'9" like Barkley was a strong 6'4".
It takes alot out of your small guys to ask them to defend with speed & quickness though....
I understand your fondness for pretty basketball but pretty hasn't gotten it done anywhere in the past so to define success by pure entertainment value is an understandable view for many....but there are just as many that have seen enough that philosophy from the SUNS and demand a "result" instead of a "product."

 

[shazaam6]

Actually, Boston won the Finals with the ability to put a very good small lineup on the floor down the stretch, and the Spurs went small a lot of times in their championship runs and there are a lot of other examples for successful small ball lineups in the playoffs.

Of course, these teams had great big lineups as well, in other words they had depth to play any style, which was not the case with the Suns. The lack of depth is not just D'antoni's fault, he was obviously part of the problem though.

Exactly there are times when a different strategy works better against certain teams depending on the other teams players. That is why Dallas couldn't beat Golden State. They couldn't go big and pound them.

After no decent centers on the Suns for so long, we now have 2 and a dominant power forward at the same time. We can pound when we want to now.

 

[mojorizen7]

Actually, Boston won the Finals with the ability to put a very good small lineup on the floor down the stretch, and the Spurs went small a lot of times in their championship runs and there are a lot of other examples for successful small ball lineups in the playoffs.

Of course, these teams had great big lineups as well, in other words they had depth to play any style, which was not the case with the Suns. The lack of depth is not just D'antoni's fault, he was obviously part of the problem though.

Who did Boston go small with?
The majority of times that the SPURS go small is either due to foul trouble or just to toy with the SUNS
Seriously though, sure teams will occasionally go small for little stretches here & there but that clearly qualifies as the "exception" and not the "rule."

 

[dreamcastrocks]

I'm proud of what we did here too. Basketball has been more enjoyable these past few years than it has ever been without D'Antoni.

 

[Irish]

What do we mean by "works"? If you mean winning the championship ti it simple. You need a more superstars than the other team. As far as I can tell, the Pistons are the only team without an ultra elite player and they never repeated.

Size per say is not really the answer. In the last three championships by the Bulls they had a 6'8" power forward named Rodman who had 16 rpg in one season. The reason we don't call it a "small ball" team was that Phil Jackson did not believe in the running game. But that was a team with only one big in the starting lineup and he was the infamous Luc Longley.

 

[Arizona's Finest]

I'd like to focus on the Dragic part of the story rather then the Post DA arguments that we all love so much. To me thats very uplifiting to hear.

Hopefully hes as good as Milos Vujanic

 

[Irish]

I'd like to focus on the Dragic part of the story rather then the Post DA arguments that we all love so much. To me thats very uplifiting to hear.

Hopefully hes as good as Milos Vujanic

At least healthier.

Actually, Dragic has a reputation for being a great defender, which Milo never was. I'm encouraged to hear he has some real talent as a playmaker, because that's one of the keys to becoming a Suns PG.

 

[JCSunsfan]

Kurt Thomas is a STRONG 6'9" like Barkley was a strong 6'4".
It takes alot out of your small guys to ask them to defend with speed & quickness though....
I understand your fondness for pretty basketball but pretty hasn't gotten it done anywhere in the past so to define success by pure entertainment value is an understandable view for many....but there are just as many that have seen enough that philosophy from the SUNS and demand a "result" instead of a "product."

KT is still on of the best pure low post defenders I have ever seen. His skills are so fundamentally sound. He uses his body, is always in the right position, his hands are always up (straight up), claims the right space on the floor, understands his opponent's strengths and moves them away from that spot.

Its not flashy, but it is so effective. The one thing that frustrated me most about DAntoni was his lack of use of KT's skills.

 

[HooverDam]

What do we mean by "works"? If you mean winning the championship ti it simple. You need a more superstars than the other team. As far as I can tell, the Pistons are the only team without an ultra elite player and they never repeated.

Size per say is not really the answer. In the last three championships by the Bulls they had a 6'8" power forward named Rodman who had 16 rpg in one season. The reason we don't call it a "small ball" team was that Phil Jackson did not believe in the running game. But that was a team with only one big in the starting lineup and he was the infamous Luc Longley.

Its hopeless Irish, people don't want to be bothered to think. Its much easier to just dismiss things out of hand. Never-mind the Bulls were a small team that won 6 titles in the 90s.