PDA

View Full Version : Hollinger: New Suns Coach To Bring Old Style Back



duncan228
02-16-2009, 07:17 PM
New Suns coach to bring old style back (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=Suns-090216)
By John Hollinger

PHOENIX -- Mike D'Antoni was 3,000 miles away. Yet his presence in the room couldn't possibly have been larger.

Ten months after the Suns allowed him to leave for New York and declared they would play slower, smarter, tougher basketball, they made a philosophical U-turn by firing head coach Terry Porter and replacing him with assistant Alvin Gentry; at Monday's news conference, they all but announced to the world that they were going to let the greyhounds run free again.

Gentry was D'Antoni's assistant for all four years of the D'Antoni-Steve Nash era, when the Suns gave Nash the keys to the offense that set a blistering pace and befuddled opponents with its shooting, spacing and passing.

Even after last season's trade for Shaquille O'Neal, the Suns lit it up -- they finished the season 15-5 and Amare Stoudemire went absolutely bonkers down the stretch. Unfortunately, a tough first-round pairing with San Antonio and an untimely 3 from the Spurs' Tim Duncan in Game 1 led to a first-round playoff exit.

Porter never clicked with this group, focusing too much on an O'Neal-oriented post offense while essentially turning Nash into a role player. And with the Suns floundering at ninth place in the West, a change seemed inevitable. With speculation rampant, Porter was left twisting in the wind all through All-Star Weekend before the Suns finally cut the rope -- though general manger Steve Kerr insisted that no decision had been made until Sunday, when he went to Porter's house and gave him the news.

"I knew this team had a difficult transition," Kerr said. "But frankly I probably underestimated the difficulty of the transition."

Kerr, of course, was the one pushing for such a transition. His icy relationship with D'Antoni and his focus on being a more defensive-oriented, slow-paced team in the mold of the Spurs led to the decision to let D'Antoni leave and hire Porter, his former San Antonio teammate, in his place.

"I hired Terry because I believe in him, and I still do," Kerr said. "[But] the dynamics were tough ... it was probably the most difficult job in the league that he stepped into."

Now Kerr's ready to change his stripes entirely. No longer will the Suns try to cram square pegs into round holes in order to emulate the Spurs.

"It's important in my job to move on if something is not working," said Kerr. And, to his credit, he's doing that. Actually, moving on may be a bit of a misnomer ... moving back is more like it.

With D'Antoni no longer available, Kerr hired the next-best thing: Gentry, who was D'Antoni's assistant during the glory years and knows more than anybody what made those clubs tick. And if you had to describe what made those clubs tick in seven seconds or less, you'd probably choose the words "Steve Nash."

Certainly Gentry would, because Nash is about to become the focal point of the offense again.

"We are who we are," Gentry said. "We have to go back to trying to establish a breakneck pace like we did in the past. We have to open up more lanes for Steve, he's the motor behind the whole car. We've got to give him every opportunity to be successful at what he does. That means penetrate, find open guys, screen on the ball more. It's a really unique team. We have to play [that way] to be successful."

He left out what it doesn't mean -- slowing everything down to dump it into Shaq and wait for a double-team. But he thinks O'Neal can still thrive in a more up-tempo environment, much as he did at the end of last season.

"If he's playing out on the wing and passing between guys' legs," said Gentry in reference to O'Neal's All-Star Game antics the night before, "he can play in that system."

Gentry said the team's 107-97 win over Detroit on Feb. 8 offered a blueprint for how this team should play. Nash had 21 assists in that game as the Suns hung a 62-point first half on the Pistons and then cruised to victory.

"We established our inside game, we got in the bonus early, and we were able to get out and run," he said.

Gentry's mandate doesn't extend beyond the end of this season, at which time the Suns will re-evaluate how to proceed. He's used to the drill though -- this is the third time he's been an interim coach. "I'm on a multiweek contract," he joked.

But he thinks this is a credible contender if it gets back to its old style and plays that way consistently.

"We have enough talent that we should not be on the outside looking in for the playoffs," Gentry said. "We just never quite got on that roll that we've been on the last four years."

He noted that the team had posted a 10-game winning streak in each of the previous four seasons but hadn't this season. He could have added that they never even got halfway -- Phoenix's longest run this season is four games, and its best 10-game stretch is just 7-3.

And whether the Suns can indeed turn things around may depend less on Gentry's coaching acumen and more on Robert Sarver's wallet. Rumors of an Amare Stoudemire trade for expiring contracts and younger players won't go away, and if it happens, the Suns are almost certain to take a step back in the West.

Kerr wouldn't comment on those rumors, instead choosing to focus on his team's rediscovered identity as an up-tempo, offensive team.

Also left unsaid, after Kerr and Gentry talked for 20 minutes at Monday's news conference, were two words that loomed over the entire decision: Mike D'Antoni.

IronMexican
02-16-2009, 07:23 PM
Sounds exciting an fun. Shaq might start looking as skinny as his Orlando days :lol

ElNono
02-16-2009, 08:26 PM
Is that the we'll never win an NBA championship style? What's the point?

Xylus
02-16-2009, 08:31 PM
Is that the we'll never win an NBA championship style? What's the point?

The point seems to be: It might not win us a championship, but at least we'll make the playoffs.

mytespurs
02-16-2009, 08:49 PM
The point seems to be: It might not win us a championship, but at least we'll make the playoffs.

True but the Suns have been making the playoffs for a number of years-I guess it's time to take the next step = nba finals or a championship.

Question: with a coaching change & change back to the run & gun, is it too late for the Suns?

Dex
02-16-2009, 08:50 PM
I'm actually excited to see the Suns start running again.

I may not like the team, but it's hard to deny that the style is fun to watch.

resistanze
02-16-2009, 09:13 PM
Do they even have the pieces to run anymore?

pauls931
02-16-2009, 09:19 PM
Do they even have the pieces to run anymore?

Richardson likes to go fast.

Lakers>Spurs
02-16-2009, 09:20 PM
Nash, J-rich, Barbosa, STAT. That's all you need to run.

Kobe™
02-16-2009, 09:53 PM
http://i39.tinypic.com/6iryiw.jpg

Bob Lanier
02-16-2009, 09:55 PM
I may not like the team, but it's hard to deny that the style is fun to watch.
I don't seem to have much trouble doing it. Whassa matter with you?

Armando
02-16-2009, 09:56 PM
Richardson likes to go fast.



:lol

Austin_Toros
02-16-2009, 10:08 PM
Do they even have the pieces to run anymore?

that's what i was thinking. apart from Nash, i'm doubtful.

i don't phoenix can be the run-and-gun team they were in the shawn marion days..

Xylus
02-16-2009, 10:10 PM
The team's been most successful this season when they push the pace. It might seem like Shaq would inherently slow the team down, but that hasn't really been the case.

Ghazi
02-16-2009, 10:31 PM
Is that the we'll never win an NBA championship style? What's the point?



I refuse to believe that run and gun is doomed to never win a title.

Just because it hasnt happened, doesnt mean it wasnt possible

For example, beloved Mavs win it all in '03 if not for Kerr bullshit shots and Dirk's bullshit injury.

If Sarver kept Johnson, who knows. They lost in '05 to the Spurs because they were young as fuck, in a few years perhaps they were ready to leapfrog the Spurs.

Even then, without Johnson, in 2007, who knows how that series turns out if not for a bullshit technicality.

Having a stout defense USUALLY wins championships, but not always (2006 Dallas Mavericks, and one of the Laker teams earlier this decade had an average D).

m33p0
02-16-2009, 10:32 PM
Richardson likes to go fast.
55mph over the speed limit fast... with an unrestrained kid at the back to boot!

ElNono
02-16-2009, 10:39 PM
The 2006 Dallas Mavericks was one of the top defensive teams in the league. Are you high or something? The reality is that when the playoffs come around the pace slows down. It's inevitable. And at that point SSOL is useless. Strong post scoring/defense becomes paramount. There's a reason Shaq and Duncan have been in practically every NBA Final this past decade, don't you think?
Run and gun fails. There hasn't been a championship worthy team like that since the showtime lakers, and that team played defense and had arguably one of the best players ever in Magic Johnson.

m33p0
02-16-2009, 10:55 PM
I refuse to believe that run and gun is doomed to never win a title.

Just because it hasnt happened, doesnt mean it wasnt possible

For example, beloved Mavs win it all in '03 if not for Kerr bullshit shots and Dirk's bullshit injury.

If Sarver kept Johnson, who knows. They lost in '05 to the Spurs because they were young as fuck, in a few years perhaps they were ready to leapfrog the Spurs.

Even then, without Johnson, in 2007, who knows how that series turns out if not for a bullshit technicality.

Having a stout defense USUALLY wins championships, but not always (2006 Dallas Mavericks, and one of the Laker teams earlier this decade had an average D).
it has happened. the bill russell celtics was a fastbreaking team and they won 11. and then there's the showtime lakers and they also won multiple championships. the offense is sound if you have the guys that can make it work. but these teams rely on defense to get the fastbreak started. the ssol suns just hope their opponents miss.

Lakers>Spurs
02-16-2009, 11:01 PM
Richardson likes to go fast.

:lmao:lmao:lmao

Cry Havoc
02-17-2009, 12:37 AM
Richardson likes to go fast.

:lmao :toast

Lars
02-17-2009, 01:18 AM
retarded front office is retarded

Spurtacus
02-17-2009, 02:03 AM
So Amare's staying. Why not trade Nash for a young PG who can run faster and play some D?

MrChug
02-17-2009, 02:19 AM
Hollinger: New Suns Coach To Bring Old Style Back

Yes...because it worked so well in the past Alvin. :rolleyes

Ghazi
02-17-2009, 02:26 AM
it has happened. the bill russell celtics was a fastbreaking team and they won 11. and then there's the showtime lakers and they also won multiple championships. the offense is sound if you have the guys that can make it work. but these teams rely on defense to get the fastbreak started. the ssol suns just hope their opponents miss.


The suns in 2007 weren't a "horrible defensive team" though. Per 100 possessions they were like 13th or 14th in the league, which isn't great of course, but certainly not "horrible".

The Mavs of 2003 similarly weren't AS bad defensively as they were made out to be.

So I think a juggernaut offense + mediocre defense + fast pace + below average rebounding can indeed win a title. After all, Mavs basically did it in '03 if not for BS shots from Kerr and Dirk's injury, and the Suns basically did it in '07 if not for technicalities.

mogrovejo
02-17-2009, 06:23 AM
I refuse to believe that run and gun is doomed to never win a title.

Just because it hasnt happened, doesnt mean it wasnt possible

For example, beloved Mavs win it all in '03 if not for Kerr bullshit shots and Dirk's bullshit injury.

If Sarver kept Johnson, who knows. They lost in '05 to the Spurs because they were young as fuck, in a few years perhaps they were ready to leapfrog the Spurs.

Even then, without Johnson, in 2007, who knows how that series turns out if not for a bullshit technicality.

Having a stout defense USUALLY wins championships, but not always (2006 Dallas Mavericks, and one of the Laker teams earlier this decade had an average D).

I completely agree, except that I personally don't like running teams form an aesthetic and stylistic point of view - my favourite NBA teams to watch are the 1) Jazz 2) Celtics 3) Spurs and none of them is exactly a run'n'gun team (except maybe the Jazz), my favourite basketball team to watch is CSKA Moscow and they can go for an entire game without a shot with less than 15 seconds on the clock and win games scoring less than 60 points.

But it surely is possible to win. Red Auerback invented the fastbreak and he won plenty of NBA championships with it. In fact, till the late 80's it was the norm. Even the Detroit Bad Boys were a fast paced team for today standards (but extremely slow for thos time standards).

Can you win without playing good defence and not being able to execute half-court sets? I doubt it. But even a bellow average defensive team with excellent rebounding and good transition defence can be good enough to win it all (the slow paced Larry Brown/Larry Bird Pacers with Miller/Smits/McKey for example).

However, there's no antinomy between a fast pace and solid defence, as it has been proved in the past, so that myth is trash. The reason the Suns never won was because of the lack of low post and pick'n'roll defence, not the pace they play.