As has been said many times before, D'Antoni told the Press that it was not his job to develop young players and made jokes about playing defense.
He was a one-dimensional coach who wore out his starters with 7-man rotations. He had a gimmick -- seven seconds or less -- and he had a great Point Guard.
Too many flaws. Too many limitations.
I hear what you're saying, and I understand it. It's misguided and ill-conceived, but I get the allure. Many people on this board don't understand how a good basketball player is made. They are of the irrational notion that the way you develop players is by giving them playing time. If a player sucks, how do you improve him? Give him minutes. And if a player REALLY SUCKS? The coach must develop him even more. How can he do fhat? Why, give him more minutes, of course!
This idea that the coach must reward bad players for sucking is backwards, but the truth is that players don't get developed during the 3,936 minutes of game time that exists during a season. They develop themselves during the other 523,000 minutes that are left over. These are minutes that the fans don't see. But you must remember that these minutes do, in fact, exist, even if Steve Albert isn't describing the events that transpire within them.
As for the "D'Antoni can't adjust his gameplan because he only knows how to run his 7 Seconds or Less gimmick"? That statement contradicts itself. 7 Seconds or Less was an adjustment! He had a team 63-19 team one season, and then two of the three guys who could actually create plays - Joe Johnson and Amare Stoudemire - were gone the next. He assessed what he had and decided to push the strengths of a very, VERY flawed team to the max. Every time you didn't push the ball, you were resigning yourself to potentially relying on Shawn Marion creating a running, one handed push shot from 19 feet. The team needed their opposition to make mistakes, and the best way to do that is to not allow them to set up their defense. Otherwise, Boris Diaw would be exposed for what he was.
D'Antoni's mistake wasn't his system. His mistake was telling people - who would've had no idea how to analyze it otherwise - what made it work.