Fuck D'Antoni!

[JMarkJohns]

NYHoopsCoverage, ZagsBlog.com (http://www.zagsblog.com/2010/03/21/dantoni-i-dont-like-to-play-bad-rookies/#more-30430)
Mike D’Antoni says he likes to play rookies, just not “bad rookies.”

D’Antoni became defensive Sunday when told that former Knick and current Houston Rockets rookie Jordan Hill said he wasn’t given “the opportunity” to play during his tenure in New York. Hill was dealt to Houston by the Knicks during a three-team deal Feb. 18.

“I don’t like to play bad rookies , I like to play good rookies,” D’Antoni said before Houston met the Knicks Sunday at MSG.

Hill was the No. 8 pick in last June’s NBA Draft but was constantly compared to Milwaukee rookie Brandon Jennings, who was chosen 10th and is in contention for Rookie of the Year honors. The Knicks needed a point guard more than they appeared to need another frontcourt player.

“Jordan was in a position where we had Al [Harrington], Jared [Jeffries], David Lee, I tried to go with [Darko] Milicic for a while,” D’Antoni said.

“He didn’t get a great chance, I agree. But at he same time we’re trying to thread the needle and make the playoffs. There was no reason to say, ‘Jared, you don’t play. Let’s play Jordan.’”

He added: “It’s hard to do that. Until he has proven that he can beat the veteran out. Because you start putting rookies in and you got veterans sitting over there and the veterans [are] playing better. That’s not good for anybody.”
__________________________________________________ ___________

You mean it's not good for your career win percentage... Typical short-sighted D'Antoni, sacrificing the future on the altar of the immediate...

Funny how on an even better team, in the thick of playoff contention, but for a coach who can develop players, Hill is now being developed - AND BEATING OUT JEFFERIES... Hill is receiving a large quantity of consistent minutes, being utilized in the offense, and, tonight, at Madison Square Garden, in front of fans who gave up on him and the coach that never gave him a chance, Hill put up a career high in points at 13, chipping in 5 rebounds and 3 assists in 25 minutes of play in a Houston win.

Not too shabby for a bad rookie.

D'Antoni would rather ruin a player than develop him if said player isn't the ready-set-go, offensively-skilled type (preferably guard) from the start.

[Lars]

Not gonna lie, Im lovin me some Jordan Hill.

[Kai]

From Jordan Hill's Twitter after today's game: "Giv me da opportunity and ill make da most out of it...DA GOOD ROOKIE!!! ; )"

[JMarkJohns]

From Jordan Hill's Twitter after today's game: "Giv me da opportunity and ill make da most out of it...DA GOOD ROOKIE!!! ; )"

That's his facebook status as well... I'm glad to see him not only stick it to D'Antoni by proving his worth, but also by proving his worth in a win in which he was a big part.

[Reeko_Htown]

I fucking love Daryl Morey.

He saw the untapped potential and got him for a bag of yag off tube socks.

[PGDynasty24]

d'antoni is pretty big for his britches considering the teams he has coached have never proved anything when it mattered. Steve Nash,Amare,Marion made him look like a better coach then he actually is

[TIMMYD!]

How does a coach anywhere expect a rookie to beat out a veteran when you don't see what his worth is by playing him in a game?

[icem]

lol untapped potential... jordan hill fuckin sucks... just look at his game, its so damn awkward and he is not doing anything special for the rockets. the rockets dont really have a choice but to play him since they traded landry and are thin up front. jordan hill will never be anything special in this league, BOOK IT.

[BRHornet45]

son watch your mouth!

[djohn2oo8]

lol untapped potential... jordan hill fuckin sucks... just look at his game, its so damn awkward and he is not doing anything special for the rockets. the rockets dont really have a choice but to play him since they traded landry and are thin up front. jordan hill will never be anything special in this league, BOOK IT.

How funny thatyou say look at his game, and you can't name anything specifically wrong with it. Lame dude, just lame attempt

[Reeko_Htown]

lol untapped potential... jordan hill fuckin sucks... just look at his game, its so damn awkward and he is not doing anything special for the rockets. the rockets dont really have a choice but to play him since they traded landry and are thin up front. jordan hill will never be anything special in this league, BOOK IT.

If only we had a savior...someone name Ian....:rolleyes

Hill is already better than Ian so doesn't that make him the Alpha Omega?

[icem]

How funny thatyou say look at his game, and you can't name anything specifically wrong with it. Lame dude, just lame attempt

sure i can i just dont really feel the need to... but heres a few things, low IQ, poor footwork, awkward around the basket, and to top if off hes not even that athletic. hes not what the knicks were hoping for thats why the shipped his ass out, no need to waste time on kwame brown in a power forwards body.

[Indazone]

Watching Jordan Hill is like watching Landry come in his rookie year and just decimate opponents. Dude gets to the glass and is taller. He can finish in traffic. Cannot believe D'Antoni would say somthing as stupid as this. Well yes I can...he's a moron.

[mogrovejo]

N
He added: “It’s hard to do that. Until he has proven that he can beat the veteran out. Because you start putting rookies in and you got veterans sitting over there and the veterans [are] playing better. That’s not good for anybody.”

True. It's not even good for the rookie.

Fans want to see young players on the court at all costs. 90% of the NBA fanbase complains their coach doesn't like young players/rookies. They're more worried with novelty and an outside chance of finding the new big thing than with the quality of the basketball they're paying for.

[icem]

Watching Jordan Hill is like watching Landry come in his rookie year and just decimate opponents. Dude gets to the glass and is taller. He can finish in traffic. Cannot believe D'Antoni would say somthing as stupid as this. Well yes I can...he's a moron.

lol @ hill being anywhere NEAR landry, even as a rookie.... wtf are you smokin ??

[JMarkJohns]

sure i can i just dont really feel the need to... but heres a few things, low IQ, poor footwork, awkward around the basket, and to top if off hes not even that athletic. hes not what the knicks were hoping for thats why the shipped his ass out, no need to waste time on kwame brown in a power forwards body.

If you were aware of Hill's basketball history, you'd understand why some of this is, and also appreciate just how far he's come in such a short period of time in organized basketball. It's obvious he has flaws... players can develop from that. As for the IQ, that couldn't be further from the truth. Adelman cautioned Houston fans to temper their expectations of Hill because his playing time was likely to be light at first due to Adelman's complex offensive schemes. True to his word, Hill played as sparingly as before. However, he caught on and is now contributing, making the smart play and even nets crunch time minutes in close games (though I can't speak for today, as I was on the road). His footwork has improved immensely from his first reps as a freshman at Arizona, and he has increased productivity in every key statistic all while increasing his role within the offense under three different coaches and in three different schemes in his time at Arizona.

Too many coaches, a short time as a big man (late growth spurt in high school found him with new potential in a game he hadn't played in an organized fashion) and then a limited role with his first pro team has his footwork and timing at this level looking awkward. But he is one of the hardest workers out there, and is devoted to playing team basketball. He won't light the league on fire, but he can be a very important player on good teams. If you disagree, that's fine, but it's because of your own blindness and ignorance of the facts.

He is awkward now. Most big men are. Let him develop within a system and with a consistent role and he'll prove his worth. He already is, if you cared to look.

[Indazone]

Did you even watch Landry his rookie year? He was getting beat out in the summer league by Mike Harris. Of all players Harris! Then midseason his practices were good enough and Adleman put him in. Started destroying competition with his dunks right away.

Yeah, I see that same ability to get to the hoop and dunk in Jordan Hill.

[mogrovejo]

There's nothing more annoying than fans overrating the performance of scrubs/young players in March/April.

[JMarkJohns]

True. It's not even good for the rookie.

Fans want to see young players on the court at all costs. 90% of the NBA fanbase complains their coach doesn't like young players/rookies. They're more worried with novelty and an outside chance of finding the new big thing than with the quality of the basketball they're paying for.

Most fanbases don't have D'Antoni as their coach. Big men need time on the court to get accustomed to size and speed of this game. The Knicks weren't going anywhere, yet Hill never saw the court. Perhaps his lack of progression with New York also stems from non-structured scrimmages and lax practices (if any practice at all) and then non-structured offensive schemes that require skills that Hill didn't come complete with, nor was taught by his NBA coach.

[mogrovejo]

Most fanbases don't have D'Antoni as their coach. Big men need time on the court to get accustomed to size and speed of this game. The Knicks weren't going anywhere, yet Hill never saw the court. Perhaps his lack of progression with New York also stems from non-structured scrimmages and lax practices (if any practice at all) and then non-structured offensive schemes that require skills that Hill didn't come complete with, nor was taught by his NBA coach.

Which proves that D'Antoni is not the exception.

[JMarkJohns]

There's nothing more annoying than fans overrating the performance of scrubs/young players in March/April.

Wrong. Fanbases diminishing a first-year player based upon his time under D'Antoni is more annoying. That "scrub" is playing winning basketball for a team that's in playoff contention and is getting better and better by the game. Does he have a long way to go? Sure. Has anyone said anything about future All-Star selections? No. What was said was the facts of the matter. Hill was a better player than D'Antoni gave him credit for, deserved more PT from D'Antoni, and deserves the shot, even this late in his rookie year, that was never given to him by his first professional team.

[icem]

Did you even watch Landry his rookie year? He was getting beat out in the summer league by Mike Harris. Of all players Harris! Then midseason his practices were good enough and Adleman put him in. Started destroying competition with his dunks right away.

Yeah, I see that same ability to get to the hoop and dunk in Jordan Hill.

yes i did see his rookie year as i am actually from houston. hill's game at this point is nowhere near it. and who the fuck is hill dunking on ?? no one. he isnt nearly as explosive as landry. hill is kwame brown, sorry. when yao comes back, this kid will only be used to give a 2nd string guy a breather.

[mogrovejo]

Wrong. Fanbases diminishing a first-year player based upon his time under D'Antoni is more annoying. That "scrub" is playing winning basketball for a team that's in playoff contention and is getting better and better by the game. Does he have a long way to go? Sure. Has anyone said anything about future All-Star selections? No. What was said was the facts of the matter. Hill was a better player than D'Antoni gave him credit for, deserved more PT from D'Antoni, and deserves the shot, even this late in his rookie year, that was never given to him by his first professional team.

I wasn't even thinking specifically about Hill. I consider Hill a young player, not a scrub. He's potential to be a decent role-player, although nothing more. He's better now than at the start of the season, when he was so horrible that putting him on the floor would hurt, not help, his development.

But there are plenty of Jordan Hills every season. How many 20 points games has Bill Walker had since he was traded to the Knicks? It seems that in this case D'Antoni is the guy willing to give a chance to the young players...

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

There's nothing more annoying than fans overrating the performance of scrubs/young players in March/April.


JHill would have been performing better early on if Antoni gave him a chance.

[JMarkJohns]

Which proves that D'Antoni is not the exception.

D'Antoni's history provides a context that differs with how you hold and now paint his treatment of young players/rookies. Whether or not he's an exception, most coaches of bottom-5 teams with POS players like Jefferies on their roster will play the top-10 pick some consistent minutes. This isn't a Darko on the eventual Championship Pistons. Hill is proving with minutes that he's more than capable as a rookie, and anyone who says he has no potential beyond the 7-point, 6-rebound in 18 minutes per game production he's been putting up lately doesn't know anything about Hill, or doesn't care, or is blind.

His potential may not be anything greater than Al Horford, but so the fuck what!

[mogrovejo]

JHill would have been performing better early on if Antoni gave him a chance.

How do you know?

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Players are gonna look bad when they know their coach will bench them after the first shot they miss. Antoni is great at killing the confidence of young players.

[mogrovejo]

D'Antoni's history provides a context that differs with how you hold and now paint his treatment of young players/rookies. Whether or not he's an exception, most coaches of bottom-5 teams with POS players like Jefferies on their roster will play the top-10 pick some consistent minutes. This isn't a Darko on the eventual Championship Pistons. Hill is proving with minutes that he's more than capable as a rookie, and anyone who says he has no potential beyond the 7-point, 6-rebound in 18 minutes per game production he's been putting up lately doesn't know anything about Hill, or doesn't care, or is blind.

His potential may not be anything greater than Al Horford, but so the fuck what!

Jordan Hill won't even come close to Al Horford, who, btw, is a fucking All-Star.

What's your opinion on AJ Price and Josh McRoberts?

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

How do you know?


Hill didn't start playing basketball till the middle of high school. He wasn't gonna get better sitting on the bench. He needed time on the court to get used to the NBA. You're talking to two people who watched pretty much all of JHill's college games. The guy was a project in college and get better every game he played. Same thing applies to him in the NBA.

Now how do you "know" Hill will never be anything more than a role player?

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Jordan Hill won't even come close to Al Horford, who, btw, is a fucking All-Star.

What's your opinion on AJ Price and Josh McRoberts?


:lmao comparing Jordan Hill to Josh McRoberts.

[mogrovejo]

Hill didn't start playing basketball till the middle of high school. He wasn't gonna get better sitting on the bench. He needed time on the court to get used to the NBA. You're talking to two people who watched pretty much all of JHill's college games. The guy was a project in college and get better every game he played. Same thing applies to him in the NBA.

Why?


Now how do you "know" Hill will never be anything more than a role player?

Because he lacks the feel for the game + shot-creation skills + off-hand to be more than that.



:lmao comparing Jordan Hill to Josh McRoberts.

I wasn't comparing them. You really struggle at reading comprehension.

[JMarkJohns]

I wasn't even thinking specifically about Hill. I consider Hill a young player, not a scrub. He's potential to be a decent role-player, although nothing more. He's better now than at the start of the season, when he was so horrible that putting him on the floor would hurt, not help, his development.

But there are plenty of Jordan Hills every season. How many 20 points games has Bill Walker had since he was traded to the Knicks? It seems that in this case D'Antoni is the guy willing to give a chance to the young players...

Athletic wing vs. traditional big man ... Please don't compare. D'Antoni doesn't know what to do with players like Hill. D'Antoni couldn't figure out how to utilize Kurt Thomas with any consistency, and Thomas was fully established and had skills that fit needs of D'Antoni bigs.

As for the "developed" argument, in the game he was given a shot, he played well given the minutes. He averaged 6 ppg and 4 rpg in the three games he was given double-digit minutes with New York. That was in an average of 13 minutes a game. The difference is the consistency of his minutes. Nobody can look good when they are only being played to be pulled.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Because he lacks the feel for the game + shot-creation skills + off-hand to be more than that.


He's been playing basketball for a little more than 5 years. Is it impossible for someone as new to the game as he is to get better?

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Why?


Um, simple logic... How is Jordan Hill gonna get better sitting on the bench?

[mogrovejo]

Athletic wing vs. traditional big man ... Please don't compare. D'Antoni doesn't know what to do with players like Hill. D'Antoni couldn't figure out how to utilize Kurt Thomas with any consistency, and Thomas was fully established and had skills that fit needs of D'Antoni bigs.

So the problem now isn't youth but rather position?

Interesting how Lee is having a career season with D'Antoni. Not to mention Stoudemire.


As for the "developed" argument, in the game he was given a shot, he played well given the minutes. He averaged 6 ppg and 4 rpg in the three games he was given double-digit minutes with New York. That was in an average of 13 minutes a game. The difference is the consistency of his minutes. Nobody can look good when they are only being played to be pulled.

Either you didn't watch the games or your bias is clouding your judgement. I saw most of the games where Hill was getting rotational minutes by the end of December/beginning of January and he was extremely raw/unproductive-to-bad in most of them. He didn't play well at all.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Not to mention Stoudemire.


D'antoni was horrible for the development of Amare. Anyone who doesn't realize that is blind. D'antoni turned him into a 1 dimensional pick and roll scorer and never focused on developing him as a complete basketball player.

[mogrovejo]

He's been playing basketball for a little more than 5 years. Is it impossible for someone as new to the game as he is to get better?

Everyone has the potential to get better, especially rookies. That's why he can develop into a decent role-player.


Um, simple logic... How is Jordan Hill gonna get better sitting on the bench?

Most NBA coaches (and non-NBA coaches) disagree that force feeding raw young players with rotational minutes significantly helps their development. They have practices, they have film sessions, they have the minutes they earn and they have garbage time. And to put together serious improvement, they have the Summer.

Playing time is great for young players who already have put things together to some extent or are very close to it and in that case it sure helps, especially when it comes to defensive readings.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Doing gimmicky things to inflate a players' stats and developing a player are two completely different things. What has Quentin Richardson done since the Suns traded him? D'antoni turned him into a lazy slob who camped 30 feet from the basket and did nothing other than chuck 3's.

[mogrovejo]

D'antoni was horrible for the development of Amare. Anyone who doesn't realize that is blind. D'antoni turned him into a 1 dimensional pick and roll scorer and never focused on developing him as a complete basketball player.

LOL, this D'ANtoni hate is ridiculous. Didn't he play Stoudemire? I thought players would develop their skills by playing.

Blaming D'Antoni for Stoudemire lack of defense is idiotic.

[mogrovejo]

I wonder how Suns fans disgruntled with D'Antoni lead with the fact that their team defense only got worse once D'Antoni was fired.

[JMarkJohns]

Jordan Hill won't even come close to Al Horford, who, btw, is a fucking All-Star.

Based on what?

Rookie Year
Horford: 32 mpg, 10 ppg, 10 rpg, 1 bpg

Since joining the Rockets, Hill has played 15+ mpg and is averaging 6 ppg, 5 rpg and 0.5 bpg ... give him Horford minutes, and that is 12 ppg, 10 rpg, 1 bpg.

I don't care if Hill isn't playing 32 mpg, in the games he's played 20+ minutes, his production speaks to his ability. He's averaging 11 ppg and 7 rpg in the six games he's netted 20+ minutes, and is doing such in a 26 mpg average. So his statistics are right on par with Horford when given the minutes. Factor in he's doing this after being thrust onto a new team and one already in playoff contention vs. doing it with the same team from suckdom on up and I think he's showing very good potential. Adelman, as already mentioned, wouldn't be playing him, let alone playing him these minutes if he wasn't able to contribute at the playoff level he requires.

Which basically contradicts everything D'Antoni said in criticism of the kid.

Which basically contradicts every blabber you have made.

So?

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Everyone has the potential to get better, especially rookies. That's why he can develop into a decent role-player.


I'm not saying he will be an all star. I'm saying it's too early to declare he never will be an all star. Chances are, you're right, he'll never be an all star, but he has the talent to be one. Check his freshman stats at UA compared to his junior stats, the improvement is remarkable, and he still has plenty of room to grow. He's practically a novice to the game.

[mogrovejo]

Doing gimmicky things to inflate a players' stats and developing a player are two completely different things. What has Quentin Richardson done since the Suns traded him? D'antoni turned him into a lazy slob who camped 30 feet from the basket and did nothing other than chuck 3's.

You probably need some psychiatric help to deal with your traumas with D'Antoni. Wasn't Q-Rich with the Suns for only 1 season? How is D'Antoni responsible for his game? He didn't even changed his game much, he's basically the same player he ever was, only older and more complacent.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

D'Antoni was fired.


He was?

[JMarkJohns]

So the problem now isn't youth but rather position?

Interesting how Lee is having a career season with D'Antoni. Not to mention Stoudemire.

Different levels of skill. Lee was already this, his stats are inflated because of tempo. D'Antoni restricted Amare to strictly PnR. Amare's game is so much more well-rounded without D'Antoni.


Either you didn't watch the games or your bias is clouding your judgement. I saw most of the games where Hill was getting rotational minutes by the end of December/beginning of January and he was extremely raw/unproductive-to-bad in most of them. He didn't play well at all.

By the end of December Hill was demoted. In the month of December, Hill averaged 8 minutes in just two games played, so WTF are you talking about? I follow Hill and all Wildcats as a paid moderator for a UA forum, and while this may speak to my "bias" as you'd put it, such also speaks to my qualifications. I've ripped into plenty of former UA players. Hill NEVER got the chance to be productive in New York, and such was admitted by D'Antoni... GO BACK AND READ THE ARTICLE!

[mogrovejo]

Based on what?

Talent


Rookie Year
Horford: 32 mpg, 10 ppg, 10 rpg, 1 bpg

Since joining the Rockets, Hill has played 15+ mpg and is averaging 6 ppg, 5 rpg and 0.5 bpg ... give him Horford minutes, and that is 12 ppg, 10 rpg, 1 bpg.

I don't care if Hill isn't playing 32 mpg, in the games he's played 20+ minutes, his production speaks to his ability. He's averaging 11 ppg and 7 rpg in the six games he's netted 20+ minutes, and is doing such in a 26 mpg average. So his statistics are right on par with Horford when given the minutes. Factor in he's doing this after being thrust onto a new team and one already in playoff contention vs. doing it with the same team from suckdom on up and I think he's showing very good potential. Adelman, as already mentioned, wouldn't be playing him, let alone playing him these minutes if he wasn't able to contribute at the playoff level he requires.

Which basically contradicts everything D'Antoni said in criticism of the kid.

Which basically contradicts every blabber you have made.

So?

I won't even address the "on a per minute basis and extrapolating from this 20 games sample then he was just as good statistically as this other guy!" argument. We're all grown up here.

You need to make up your mind: either he's developed since the start of the season or D'Antoni hindered his development. You can't have it both ways.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

I wonder how Suns fans disgruntled with D'Antoni lead with the fact that their team defense only got worse once D'Antoni was fired.


They replaced D'antoni with a bigger idiot (Porter) and a dumber version of D'antoni (Gentry), all the while trading Raja Bell and Boris Diaw. The Suns defense got worse because they made no real commitment to making it better.

[JMarkJohns]

Most NBA coaches (and non-NBA coaches) disagree that force feeding raw young players with rotational minutes significantly helps their development. They have practices, they have film sessions, they have the minutes they earn and they have garbage time. And to put together serious improvement, they have the Summer.

It's clear you have zero understanding of D'Antoni.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Anyone who says "D'antoni was fired" instantly shows he dosnn't pay any attention to the Suns and is talking out of his ass.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

It's clear you have zero understanding of D'Antoni.


Evident when he said D'antoni was fired.

[icem]

Athletic wing vs. traditional big man ... Please don't compare. D'Antoni doesn't know what to do with players like Hill. D'Antoni couldn't figure out how to utilize Kurt Thomas with any consistency, and Thomas was fully established and had skills that fit needs of D'Antoni bigs.

As for the "developed" argument, in the game he was given a shot, he played well given the minutes. He averaged 6 ppg and 4 rpg in the three games he was given double-digit minutes with New York. That was in an average of 13 minutes a game. The difference is the consistency of his minutes. Nobody can look good when they are only being played to be pulled.

he couldnt get consistent minutes because he wasnt good enough, PERIOD

its the knicks, its not like he couldnt have got minutes if he was good enough. he couldnt beat out jared fuckin jeffries ???? LOL. one of the most overpaid scrubs ever.

[mogrovejo]

They replaced D'antoni with a bigger idiot (Porter) and a dumber version of D'antoni (Gentry), all the while trading Raja Bell and Boris Diaw. The Suns defense got worse because they made no real commitment to making it better.

So, the problem wasn't D'Antoni but the lack of quality defensive players? I agree, I always thought that D'Antoni was doing a great job getting an average defensive team out of that roster.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

What's funny is I can find a verbatim quote from D'antoni that says, "I'm not here to develop players." He said those exact words.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

So, the problem wasn't D'Antoni but the lack of quality defensive players? I agree, I always thought that D'Antoni was doing a great job getting an average defensive team out of that roster.


They appeared average on paper because they used their offense to trick bad teams into forcing bad shots. Against good teams, their defense was terrible.

D'antoni has never and will never coach a good defensive team. The Suns were just dumb enough to think him leaving for Knicks instantly made them a good defensive team. They need to do a lot of things to be a good defensive team, and one of them was finding a new coach, Gentry not being that coach.

[JMarkJohns]

Talent

I won't even address the "on a per minute basis and extrapolating from this 20 games sample then he was just as good statistically as this other guy!" argument. We're all grown up here.

Time will tell. I see his potential as to where Horford is now. I think by then end of his rookie contract, he'll be a 14/15 ppg, 9-10 rpg, 1+ bpg PF in this league.


You need to make up your mind: either he's developed since the start of the season or D'Antoni hindered his development. You can't have it both ways.

Wrong, again... I'm not saying D'Antoni developed him at all... I'm saying that Hill was developed enough (from college, summer league) to deserve more minutes in NY (as per his per minute averages), and, that by NOT giving him the developmental minutes, he worked to stunt his growth. As evidenced by his time in a structured system and when given consistent minutes, Hill has shown the ability that was barely glimpsed in the next to no minutes he received in the very few games he played in.

As I showed, his per-minute averages are not that different. The biggest factor in the increased production is the minutes received and the structure of the system played in - two aspects of D'Antoni that worked against Hill's development in New York (lack of minutes and lack of structure).

[mogrovejo]

What's funny is I can find a verbatim quote from D'antoni that says, "I'm not here to develop players." He said those exact words.

No NBA coach is. Adelman isn't in Houston to develop Jordan Hill either. That's why players focus on development during the Summer, not the season.

If you want your coach to be focused on developing players, you should follow a D-League team.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

No NBA coach is. Adelman isn't in Houston to develop Jordan Hill either. That's why players focus on development during the Summer, not the season.

If you want your coach to be focused on developing players, you should follow a D-League team.


So you're saying the development of players doesn't rest on the head coach at all?

[mogrovejo]

Time will tell. I see his potential as to where Horford is now. I think by then end of his rookie contract, he'll be a 14/15 ppg, 9-10 rpg, 1+ bpg PF in this league.



Wrong, again... I'm not saying D'Antoni developed him at all... I'm saying that Hill was developed enough (from college, summer league) to deserve more minutes in NY (as per his per minute averages), and, that by NOT giving him the developmental minutes, he worked to stunt his growth. As evidenced by his time in a structured system and when given consistent minutes, Hill has shown the ability that was barely glimpsed in the next to no minutes he received in the very few games he played in.

As I showed, his per-minute averages are that different. The biggest factor in the increased production is the minutes received and the structure of the system played in - two aspects of D'Antoni that worked against Hill's development in New York (lack of minutes and lack of structure).

When exactly has Jordan Hill turned into a better player? After a couple of days in Houston? During his trip from NY to TX? Or he's been roughly the same player all season and the only difference is that he's now playing more minutes?

[JMarkJohns]

he couldnt get consistent minutes because he wasnt good enough, PERIOD

its the knicks, its not like he couldnt have got minutes if he was good enough. he couldnt beat out jared fuckin jeffries ???? LOL. one of the most overpaid scrubs ever.

And yet, beating out "jared fuckin jeffries ???? LOL" is exactly what he's done in Houston, despite the Rockets being more in "playoff contention" than the Knicks ever were.

You really have no idea what you're talking about. It's clear you've seen him play, but also clear you can't make anything of it. His per-minute productivity isn't that different in Houston than in New York, the difference is increased minutes and more structure. Both of these elements/aspects are on the coach, D'Antoni.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

When exactly has Jordan Hill turned into a better player?

Jordan Hill freshman stats: 4.7 points, 4.1 rebounds
Jordan Hill Junior stats: 18.3 points, 11.0 rebounds

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

It's funny how everyone has only seen Jordan Hill in limited minutes against the Knicks and they know more about him then people who watched him play 3 years of college ball.

[mogrovejo]

They appeared average on paper because they used their offense to trick bad teams into forcing bad shots. Against good teams, their defense was terrible.

Numbers?



D'antoni has never and will never coach a good defensive team. The Suns were just dumb enough to think him leaving for Knicks instantly made them a good defensive team. They need to do a lot of things to be a good defensive team, and one of them was finding a new coach, Gentry not being that coach.

Put him in charge of a team with good defensive players and he'll instantly coach a good defensive team. The influence of the coach and defensive systems for the defensive prowess of a team is wildly overrated. It reminds me of Celtics fans declaring Thibodeau a genius. Once Garnett went down, the Cs defense went from one of the bests in the history of the league to merely average - at the level of D'Antoni's Suns.

[JMarkJohns]

When exactly has Jordan Hill turned into a better player? After a couple of days in Houston? During his trip from NY to TX? Or he's been roughly the same player all season and the only difference is that he's now playing more minutes?

Yes, that's what I'm saying. He's been the same player - as evidenced by his per-minute rates - the entire season. The difference in Houston vs. New York that is now working to develop Hill is he's receiving more minutes and has a coach that provides structure, both in practice, where Adelman said Hill would have to prove himself (and, evidently, did) and in the game where plays are run, not where play is dictated by something as random as instincts of the player with the ball in his hands. Having the increase in minutes and the structure are elements of Hill's development that D'Antoni wasn't providing, and that by not providing either in any real capacity, D'Antoni worked to stunt Hill's development.

It's not difficult. Hill, admittedly by D'Antoni, wasn't given the chance. D'Antoni says it's because Jefferies was better. Yet that same Jefferies was beat out by that same Hill in relatively short order once in Houston. His production rate isn't much better, so it's largely the increased and more structured role.

[mogrovejo]

Jordan Hill is playing in Houston like he was playing in NY. He's just spending more time on the floor. To call this "improvement" is to have a very wild notion of what "improvement" is.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Numbers?



It's evident by their lack of playoff success vs. their regular season success. Their defense went to shit against disciplined teams that didn't fall for their gimmicky offense and found ways to attack the offensive boards and have patience in the half court.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Jordan Hill is playing in Houston like he was playing in NY. He's just spending more time on the floor. To call this "improvement" is to have a very wild notion of what "improvement" is.


Not nearly as wild as thinking D'antoni did any favors for Amare.

[JMarkJohns]

Jordan Hill is playing in Houston like he was playing in NY. He's just spending more time on the floor. To call this "improvement" is to have a very wild notion of what "improvement" is.

I'm not calling it improvement. I'm calling increased production. You and I are arguing similar points. Your assertion is that this production rate was crap in NY, and I'm asserting that he didn't receive the PT to make an educated opinion. You can see that this rate is enough to be a benefit and be a quality role player in Houston, and how this same rate of production is similar to that of Al Horford as a rookie. So, I'm confused as to where your assertion is grounded. Because D'Antoni didn't give him PT? D'Antoni admitted to not wanting to develop him because he was a bad rookie, but that same player with a similar production rate is now a significant contributor on a playoff team with little else than increased PT and structure.

[mogrovejo]

Yes, that's what I'm saying. He's been the same player - as evidenced by his per-minute rates - the entire season. The difference in Houston vs. New York that is now working to develop Hill is he's receiving more minutes and has a coach that provides structure, both in practice, where Adelman said Hill would have to prove himself (and, evidently, did) and in the game where plays are run, not where play is dictated by something as random as instincts of the player with the ball in his hands. Having the increase in minutes and the structure are elements of Hill's development that D'Antoni wasn't providing, and that by not providing either in any real capacity, D'Antoni worked to stunt Hill's development.

It's not difficult. Hill, admittedly by D'Antoni, wasn't given the chance. D'Antoni says it's because Jefferies was better. Yet that same Jefferies was beat out by that same Hill in relatively short order once in Houston. His production rate isn't much better, so it's largely the increased and more structured role.

The idea that D'Antoni's offense isn't good is truly bizarre.

IMO Jeffries is a better player than Hill right now. Jeffries is a good-to-very good defender; Hill is a poor one.

Calling improvement and development to additional minutes is crazy. At most that means a player has the opportunity to show his talents. But it's not improvement and improvement isn't a necessary corollary of playing more time. Otherwise it'd be fairly easy to develop players!

Anyway, if Jordan Hill falls out of favour with Adelman I'll be glad to bump this thread. Prediction: it will happen to some extent. Follow-up prediction: you won't be such a big fan of Adelman when that happens. And I'm generally pretty good at predictions.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Either you didn't watch the games or your bias is clouding your judgement.


This is pure comedy. You're accusing JMJ of having a biased viewpoint when it's blatantly obvious you're blindly defending D'antoni because you're Italian and D'antoni was one of the best Italian league guards ever and is Italian. If he was an American coach you wouldn't give a shit.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

The idea that D'Antoni's offense isn't good is truly bizarre.


In the closing minutes of a close game against a playoff team D'antoni's offense is terrible. If you wanna drop 120 points on the Clippers, then D'antoni is an offensive genius.

[mogrovejo]

Can we stop talking about "rate of production" and avoid making the uber-stupid comparison with Al Horford, a guy who almost stole the ROY award from Kevin Durant?

Per 36 minutes, Josh McRoberts averaged 15.6 pts, 12.9 rbs, 2.6 assts, .600FG% in his rookie season. Jordan Hill is nowhere near this "rate production" and yet he's going to have a better career (which shouldn't be difficult).

[mogrovejo]

This is pure comedy. You're accusing JMJ of having a biased viewpoint when it's blatantly obvious you're blindly defending D'antoni because you're Italian and D'antoni was one of the best Italian league guards ever and is Italian. If he was an American coach you wouldn't give a shit.

Dude, you're pathetic. I'm not Italian. :lmao

[mogrovejo]

:rollinIs there anyone in this board who owns himself so much as DuncanownsKobe?

Not only I'm not Italian, I don't even care much for D'Antoni. He's a good coach, but not one of my favourites.

But this episode explains how some people here discuss basketball: it's all about likings/disliking/emotions, little about proper reasoning.

[icem]

And yet, beating out "jared fuckin jeffries ???? LOL" is exactly what he's done in Houston, despite the Rockets being more in "playoff contention" than the Knicks ever were.

You really have no idea what you're talking about. It's clear you've seen him play, but also clear you can't make anything of it. His per-minute productivity isn't that different in Houston than in New York, the difference is increased minutes and more structure. Both of these elements/aspects are on the coach, D'Antoni.

because jeffries is not in their future plan AT ALL. they'll get rid of him and his contract if they can. obvious you are going to play a guy like hill when you have a thin frontline and you hope to see something out of a project player like him to keep him around or be attractive to another team to help deal for a better player. im saying hill will never be anything more than an average player at his best. im not exactly sure what you guys are seeing in him, and yes i have watched several rocket games since the trade. all i see is bust written all over him

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Dude, you're pathetic. I'm not Italian. :lmao


There's some reason you're a huge D'antoni fan, it's obvious. No one with an unbiased opinion of D'antoni says stuff about how much he helped the Suns' D. The people who say D'antoni was fired are always D'antoni apologists trying to paint the picture D'antoni was run out of Phoenix.

[eyeh8u]

From Jordan Hill's Twitter after today's game: "Giv me da opportunity and ill make da most out of it...DA GOOD ROOKIE!!! ; )"

im glad to see that stern's 1 year of college is really working, Hill must have ruined the curve in his English comp class.

[mogrovejo]

There's some reason you're a huge D'antoni fan, it's obvious..

You were wrong, deal with it.

And I'm not a D'Antoni fan.

And the Suns defence under D'Antoni was pretty decent considering the defensive quality of the players in those rosters.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

The Italian thing was a shot in the dark. It's the internet, I could care less of I was wrong. I'm still 100% positive there's something clouding you're view of D'antoni.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

You were wrong, deal with it.

And I'm not a D'Antoni fan.

And the Suns defence under D'Antoni was pretty decent considering the defensive quality of the players in those rosters.


You were wrong about D'antoni being fired, which makes it clear you know absolutely nothing about the situation. If you did, you would know he wasn't fired.

[mogrovejo]

The Italian thing was a shot in the dark. It's the internet, I could care less of I was wrong. I'm still 100% positive there's something clouding you're view of D'antoni.

What's clouding my view of D'Antoni from your perspective is a lack of any particular emotion, positive or negative, towards him and his work. You simply aren't used to this kind of assessment.

[The Franchise]

Not gonna lie, Im lovin me some Jordan Hill.

Me too!! I'm actually glad D'Antoni considered him a bad rookie. Had he played him in NY, we probably wouldn't have gotten him in the trade. After he bulks up this summer, and get's a chance to work with coach Sikma, I can see his development taking a big jump next season.

[mogrovejo]

You were wrong about D'antoni being fired, which makes it clear you know absolutely nothing about the situation. If you did, you would know he wasn't fired.

Yeah, he wasn't technically fired. :rolleyes

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

What's clouding my view of D'Antoni from your perspective is a lack of any particular emotion, positive or negative, towards him and his work. You simply aren't used to this kind of assessment.


Oh yes I'm quite used to the assessment you're giving of D'antoni, plenty of Suns fans I know share your opinion, and all of them are huge D'antoni apologists who say ignorant shit like "D'antoni was fired".

[mogrovejo]

What we concluded so far is that Hill is playing in Houston the same way he played in New York (and producing at the same level) - yet, he's improved much since he left D'Antoni's tenebrous influence behind him.

Great logic.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Yeah, he wasn't technically fired. :rolleyes


No, he wasn't fired at all. The Suns wanted him to stay, Sarver and Kerr publicly said this, but he wanted permission to talk to other teams. He left on his own whim. Sarver's own words, "I begged him to stay".

[mogrovejo]

Oh yes I'm quite used to the assessment you're giving of D'antoni, plenty of Suns fans I know share your opinion, and all of them are huge D'antoni apologists who say ignorant shit like "D'antoni was fired".

I'm not a D'Antoni apologist, like I am not a JVG or Thibodeau hater.

I just think, like most in the coaching community, that the importance of coaches to the defensive prowess of their teams is, at this level, negligible.

[JMarkJohns]

The idea that D'Antoni's offense isn't good is truly bizarre.

It's a gimmick offensive that works to magnify specific skills. It's very good at it. However, it's a system based on instincts and chaos and isn't for everyone. Hill was never a player D'Antoni could fully utilize. I mentioned D'Antoni's failure with Kurt Thomas already. However, Hill's rookie production rate, even with bullshit minutes, was solid for a rookie big man. I've already shown the comparison to Horford, who was a unanimous selection to the All-Rookie team.


IMO Jeffries is a better player than Hill right now. Jeffries is a good-to-very good defender; Hill is a poor one.

And yet, Hill has managed to steal a good bunch of Jeffries' minutes as Rockets.


Calling improvement and development to additional minutes is crazy. At most that means a player has the opportunity to show his talents. But it's not improvement and improvement isn't a necessary corollary of playing more time. Otherwise it'd be fairly easy to develop players!

No shit. Note the bolded phrase. Does experience not help development? The experience he's now gaining will only benefit him. It's not "improvement" but rather increased production. I understand that. Once again, I've been saying this since the beginning. This, however, works to improve his game and development much more so than being wasted on a bench does.


Anyway, if Jordan Hill falls out of favour with Adelman I'll be glad to bump this thread. Prediction: it will happen to some extent. Follow-up prediction: you won't be such a big fan of Adelman when that happens. And I'm generally pretty good at predictions.

Do I think Hill is a life-long Rocket? No... He may be dealt in the summer. But the point is, Adelman has given Hill the chance that D'Antoni did not, and did so in a similar context as D'Antoni was claiming. Playoff race? CHECK! Depth at the position: Scola, Hayes, Battier, Jeffries? CHECK! And yet he's proving his worth, first in limited minutes, then with significant minutes.

I've said all there is to say... This wasn't a thread to sing the praises of Hill. It was to call out the blatant hypocrisy of D'Antoni's comments (made yesterday) given the context of Hill on Houston, where Hill has beat out Jeffries, a player D'Antoni just had to play over him, and where he's done so on a playoff contending team.

It was to call out the incessant excuses of D'Antoni for his own failings as a coach. D'Antoni was the one who couldn't find a way to utilize the production rate of Hill that now benefits Houston.

[JMarkJohns]

What we concluded so far is that Hill is playing in Houston the same way he played in New York (and producing at the same level) - yet, he's improved much since he left D'Antoni's tenebrous influence behind him.

Great logic.

Nobody has said anything like this. You really need to reread the differing views in this thread.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

I'm not a D'Antoni apologist, like I am not a JVG or Thibodeau hater.

I just think, like most in the coaching community, that the importance of coaches to the defensive prowess of their teams is, at this level, negligible.


That's something I agree on. I was a fan of D'antoni leaving, I wasn't a fan of the attitude that D'antoni was the one reason the Suns weren't a good defensive team. I had a problem with the fact D'antoni didn't care if the Suns sucked at defense, the fact he sold draft picks because he didn't like using young players, and how little he used the bench. The bad defense is on Nash more than anyone.

Amare is never gonna be a great defensive player, but the fact D'antoni didn't hold him accountable at all for bad D bothered me.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

mogro, if all you're saying in this thread is that the impact if coaching is overrated, then sorry. I thought you were trying to argue D'antoni is some great coach.

[mogrovejo]

I've already shown the comparison to Horford, who was a unanimous selection to the All-Rookie team.

Again? Have you seen the comparison to Josh McRoberts? It just doesn't work that way. What's so difficult to understand about this? I can get you dozens of rookies with per minute numbers similar to Al Horford/Jordan Hill who were complete scrubs.


No shit. Note the bolded phrase. Does experience not help development? The experience he's now gaining will only benefit him. It's not "improvement" but rather increased production. I understand that. Once again, I've been saying this since the beginning. This, however, works to improve his game and development much more so than being wasted on a bench does.

The problem is that Hill isn't showing anything he didn't show in NY.

Again, you, like most fans, are vastly overrating the benefits of getting playing time to the improvement of some players. How much better do you think Petro is going to be after all the minutes he lucked into with the Nuggets this season?


I've said all there is to say... This wasn't a thread to sing the praises of Hill. It was to call out the blatant hypocrisy of D'Antoni's comments (made yesterday) given the context of Hill on Houston, where Hill has beat out Jeffries, a player D'Antoni just had to play over him, and where he's done so on a playoff contending team.

That argument is... weird.

Oh well, I suppose that a Hoosiers fan is now complaining about how stupid is Adelman for playing Hill ahead of Jeffries when Jeffries had beat out Hill in NY.



It was to call out the incessant excuses of D'Antoni for his own failings as a coach. D'Antoni was the one who couldn't find a way to utilize the production rate of Hill that now benefits Houston.

LOL. What does this mean? Even you say that Hill doesn't fit D'Antoni philosophy ( I don't particularly agree, but whatever).

[JMarkJohns]

This thread has certainly taken some weird turns.

Once again, my intent with the thread: This wasn't a thread to sing the praises of Hill. It was to call out the blatant hypocrisy of D'Antoni's comments (made yesterday) given the context of Hill on Houston, where Hill has beat out Jeffries, a player D'Antoni just had to play over him, and where he's done so on a playoff contending team.

It was to call out the incessant excuses of D'Antoni for his own failings as a coach. D'Antoni was the one who couldn't find a way to utilize the production rate of Hill that now benefits Houston.

I've been a follower of the NBA since 1988, and a religious follower since 1991. I've spent a ton of my adult life as someone who analyzed sports for fun and for a living (for 5+ years). I'm not convinced the impact of coaching is overrated. Not at all. Maybe there's expectations of a specific coach that are unreasonable, but there's a reason why the same coaches win everywhere they go, sometimes with great talent, other times with only good or average.

I think there are many things, some subtle, that a coach does or stresses that has a significant impact on the game. DoK has given a few examples related to D'Antoni already.

[Indazone]

Jordan Hill: D'Antoni buried me on bench

Rookie Jordan Hill, the Knicks' lottery pick last year, charged that coach Mike D'Antoni held him back during his brief, forgettable stint in New York.

The 6-foot-10 Hill, who faces the Knicks today at the Garden as a Rocket, was dispatched in the Feb. 18 Tracy McGrady blockbuster trade after team president Donnie Walsh gave up on the eighth pick.

Walsh felt it was more important to open up even more salary cap space, doubting that Hill would develop into an All-Star. In essence, Walsh was admitting to a mistake with the selection.

Hill has moved past another former Knick, Jared Jeffries, in the Rockets' rotation.

"Coach D'Antoni, he relies on his veterans more than rookies," Hill told the Houston Chronicle. "He feels like his rookies need to learn more their first year so they could get everything down pat. I understood. I just wanted to wait patiently until my time was coming."

An active Hill has been a breath of fresh air in Houston. In nine games, he has averaged 5.9 points and 4.9 rebounds in 15 minutes. On Friday in Boston, Hill scored 11 points and grabbed seven boards in 27 minutes.

"My chance was here [in Houston] and I'm making the best of it," Hill said. "Fans there [in New York], they know what I can do. I just didn't have the opportunity to show it."

Hill hid his distaste for his role when he was with the Knicks. He spent most of his Knicks days on the bench, starting the season out of the rotation.
Hill's remarks come after fellow rookie Toney Douglas was given the starting point guard job after being used little in the season's first half. Douglas has carried the club to a 3-1 record in four starts.

Walsh said before the 2009 draft that the Knicks "can't make a mistake" with their lottery pick.


http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/knicks/hill_an_buried_me_on_bench_ZMBe5CQXRG1GiFLiCc4TnO

Right out of the JVG school of thought for rookies. Better seen on the bench than heard.

[JMarkJohns]

Again? Have you seen the comparison to Josh McRoberts? It just doesn't work that way. What's so difficult to understand about this? I can get you dozens of rookies with per minute numbers similar to Al Horford/Jordan Hill who were complete scrubs.

The problem is that Hill isn't showing anything he didn't show in NY.

Again, you, like most fans, are vastly overrating the benefits of getting playing time to the improvement of some players. How much better do you think Petro is going to be after all the minutes he lucked into with the Nuggets this season?

The difference is talent and upside. I've given you a small sampling of how this production rate continues as minutes increase, which results in statistcs such as 11 ppg, 7 rpg and 1 bpg in 25 minutes a game.



That argument is... weird.

Oh well, I suppose that a Hoosiers fan is now complaining about how stupid is Adelman for playing Hill ahead of Jeffries when Jeffries had beat out Hill in NY.

LOL. What does this mean? Even you say that Hill doesn't fit D'Antoni philosophy ( I don't particularly agree, but whatever).

There's nothing weird about it. D'Antoni said Hill wasn't worthy of more playing time because he couldn't beat out Jeffries, who was needed to try and make a playoff push. Yet, apart from D'Antoni, Hill has taken significant minutes away from that same Jeffries, and has done so within the same context of playoff contention.

It points out that D'Antoni is full of shit. He couldn't figure out how to utilize a production rate, so he buried the player (note the games played in December and brief demotion to the NBDL).

At this point it's pretty clear we both agree that Hill is a similar player now with Houston that he was with NY. The difference is the minutes received. You say they don't matter that much to development, while I say they do. You say his increased production with increased minutes is par for the course, I'm saying it speaks to his higher potential. I think if Hill was the incompetent D'Antoni paints him to be, then Hill wouldn't be playing right now for a team with much more to lose by playing him. D'Antoni said Hill was a bad rookie, but this is based upon very limited minutes. With increased minutes, Hill has proven to be better than what D'Antoni gave him credit for.

I don't see how this thread devolved so quickly or got so confounding.

[mogrovejo]

How many minutes has Hill played in Houston? 150 or something? Again, I can give you plenty of rookies who put similar or better numbers per minute in similar situations. It doesn't even make sense to talk about the "increased minutes yet per minute production didn't decline" stuff at this point. You can make the argument about talent and upside, but in that case just drop the production per minute nonsense and, obviously, the nutty Al Horford comparison.

I can't see that D'Antoni's hypocrisy.
Coach A thinks player x is better than player Y.
Coach B, otoh, prefers player y over player x.
What's the big deal? It's not like Hill was tearing things apart when he was playing - in some moments, especially at the start of the season, he looked pretty bad. It's not like he's doing it now. Where's the hypocrisy?

[The Franchise]

How many minutes has Hill played in Houston? 150 or something? Again, I can give you plenty of rookies who put similar or better numbers per minute in similar situations. It doesn't even make sense to talk about the "increased minutes yet per minute production didn't decline" stuff at this point. You can make the argument about talent and upside, but in that case just drop the production per minute nonsense and, obviously, the nutty Al Horford comparison.

I can't see that D'Antoni's hypocrisy.
Coach A thinks player x is better than player Y.
Coach B, otoh, prefers player y over player x.
What's the big deal? It's not like Hill was tearing things apart when he was playing - in some moments, especially at the start of the season, he looked pretty bad. It's not like he's doing it now. Where's the hypocrisy?

I'm sure glad you're not a Rockets coach. :lol

[mogrovejo]

I'm sure glad you're not a Rockets coach. :lol

I also don't think Adelman is an hypocrite for playing Hill ahead of Jeffries.

[mogrovejo]

Was Adelman wrong for not playing Hedo more in his rookie season? Does anyone remember how that season went for Turkoglu? His come out party vs the Lakers in the playoffs?

The funny thing is that there's a good chance that next season we'll be reading Rockets fans bitching about Adelman not playing some random rookie and hindering his development (or some prospect like Hill or Buddinger). Or maybe a guy like Dorsey or Taylor explodes playing for another team. Heck, give Dorsey 20 minutes per game and he'll look a Jordan Hill type of player.

[Lars]

Dude is a stud!

[NBAfan83]

Was Adelman wrong for not playing Hedo more in his rookie season? Does anyone remember how that season went for Turkoglu? His come out party vs the Lakers in the playoffs?

The funny thing is that there's a good chance that next season we'll be reading Rockets fans bitching about Adelman not playing some random rookie and hindering his development (or some prospect like Hill or Buddinger). Or maybe a guy like Dorsey or Taylor explodes playing for another team. Heck, give Dorsey 20 minutes per game and he'll look a Jordan Hill type of player.

The problem I think you guys are havng is that mogro here is arguing that Jordan Hill is as good in Houston as he was with the knicks, the only difference is that hill is getting more minutes, thus he is getting better stats.

But if you actually look at the number of minutes played by hill in houston and knicks, you see that in 100 less minutes, hill has already gotten the same amount of assist, almost the same points, almost the same rebounds, and etc... at a better FG% shooting clip.

Obviously you can't gauge all that on a couple of games, but the fact remains that Hill and Jeffries so far have almost played identical minutes, with Hill having 180 and jeffries having 175 minutes, but the big difference are in the production during that period, where Hill is not quite, but almost twice as productive in the same amount of minutes.

So for argument sakes. Do we say that a 30 year old jared jeffries has more upside and potential than a 23 year old, just learned to play bball, athletic Jordan Hill? Cuz if that's the case, then the stats arent' showing that, and even if we went for 20+ games, it's gna take jeffries a while to catch up with how far ahead Hill is in terms of production.

And besides have you seen jeffries play? he is horrible, heck i'd take josh mcroberts over this scrub, not playing a raw rookie, over a veteran scrub is just being a dumbass coach.

[The Third Man]

because jeffries is not in their future plan AT ALL. they'll get rid of him and his contract if they can. obvious you are going to play a guy like hill when you have a thin frontline and you hope to see something out of a project player like him to keep him around or be attractive to another team to help deal for a better player. im saying hill will never be anything more than an average player at his best. im not exactly sure what you guys are seeing in him, and yes i have watched several rocket games since the trade. all i see is bust written all over him

Long version-
You are full of fucking shit. You don't know how Landry played as a rookie (he was welded to the bench for the first few months after being on the bubble to make the team due to a poor preseason performance) and your take on Hill is silly. He has put up good numbers in his minutes with the Rockets and his defense has been credible (five blocks against the Celtics). He is steadily playing more minutes and giving more production. There is no hint of bust there considering where he was drafted and the expectations people had of him. It's fucking absurd to suggest otherwise.

Short version- you don't know shit about dick. Stop posting.

[Kai]

http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/2010/images/03/21/harrington-hill-battier.jpg

FWIW:

Chris Bosh 2003-2004 per 36 minutes
10.2 shots a game for 46%, 4 free throws /g at 70%, 8 rbds (2.7 or), 12 points, 1.1 ast, .9 stl. 1.5 blk

Amare Stoudemire 2002-2003 per 36 minutes
11.6 shots a game for 47%, 7 free throws /g at 67%, 10 rbds (3.5 or), 15 points, 1ast, 1stl, 1.2 blk

Jordan Hill 2009-2010 per 36 minutes
12 shots a game at 46%, 4 free throws /g at 70%, 10 rbds (4.6 or), 14 points, 1 ast, 1 stl, 1.2 blk

courtesy of larsv8

[Kai]

Here are the highlights of Hill's last 2 games for those of you who want to see what all the fuss is about:

w-3FbJVaHGk

nRfxgeH2MbU

[mogrovejo]

http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/2010/images/03/21/harrington-hill-battier.jpg

FWIW:

Chris Bosh 2003-2004 per 36 minutes
10.2 shots a game for 46%, 4 free throws /g at 70%, 8 rbds (2.7 or), 12 points, 1.1 ast, .9 stl. 1.5 blk

Amare Stoudemire 2002-2003 per 36 minutes
11.6 shots a game for 47%, 7 free throws /g at 67%, 10 rbds (3.5 or), 15 points, 1ast, 1stl, 1.2 blk

Jordan Hill 2009-2010 per 36 minutes
12 shots a game at 46%, 4 free throws /g at 70%, 10 rbds (4.6 or), 14 points, 1 ast, 1 stl, 1.2 blk

Josh McRoberts 2007-2008 per 36 minutes
12.9 shots per game at 60%, 12.9 rbds (2.6 or), 15.4 points, 2.6 ast, 1.3 stl

Aaron Gray 2006-2007 per 36 minutes
11.9 shots a game at 50%, 6 free throws /g at 57%, 15.5 points, 9.9 rbs (4.1 or), 2.4 ast, 1.2 stl, 1 blk

Shelden Williams 2006-2007 per 36 minutes
9 shots a game at 47%, 3.4 free throws /g at 77%, 11 points, 10.3 rbds (3.1 or), 1 ast, 1.2 stl, 1 blk

Johan Petro 2005-2006 per 36 minutes
9 shots a game at 51%, 2.1 free throws /g at 62.7%, 10 points, 8.3 rbds, 0.5 ast, 1 stl, 1.5 blk

Josh Boone 2005-2006 per 36 minutes
9.2 shots a game at 58%, 6 free throws /g at 55%, 16 points, 9.5 rbds, 0.5 ast, 1 stl, 1 blk

courtesy of larsv8 & Mogrovejo

Fixed. Do you want me to go on? Because I can, like forever.

Some people here have a way to discredited their own point that goes beyond radical masochism...

(and LOL @ the X shots a game... per 36 minutes).

[mogrovejo]

The problem I think you guys are havng is that mogro here is arguing that Jordan Hill is as good in Houston as he was with the knicks, the only difference is that hill is getting more minutes, thus he is getting better stats.

But if you actually look at the number of minutes played by hill in houston and knicks, you see that in 100 less minutes, hill has already gotten the same amount of assist, almost the same points, almost the same rebounds, and etc... at a better FG% shooting clip.

Obviously you can't gauge all that on a couple of games, but the fact remains that Hill and Jeffries so far have almost played identical minutes, with Hill having 180 and jeffries having 175 minutes, but the big difference are in the production during that period, where Hill is not quite, but almost twice as productive in the same amount of minutes.

So for argument sakes. Do we say that a 30 year old jared jeffries has more upside and potential than a 23 year old, just learned to play bball, athletic Jordan Hill? Cuz if that's the case, then the stats arent' showing that, and even if we went for 20+ games, it's gna take jeffries a while to catch up with how far ahead Hill is in terms of production.

And besides have you seen jeffries play? he is horrible, heck i'd take josh mcroberts over this scrub, not playing a raw rookie, over a veteran scrub is just being a dumbass coach.

It's 7 assists (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/hilljo01/splits/2010/), for Pete's sake. How hard is this to understand? Heck he got 7 assists in 173 minutes for Houston but he got 5 in under 80 minutes for the Knicks (check his 9 games in December and January). Ha! He actually got worse since December!

Jeffries is a fringe rotation player pretty much like Hill is at this point. He's a very good defender. I know this because I've actually seen Jeffries playing, tons of minutes, and I'm not basing my assessment in a dozen minutes in a random game in March.

And btw, Jeffries was the guy delivering the win for the Rockets in NY with his huge defensive plays down the stretch. He stopped the Knicks from scoring in multiple possessions all by himself.

[NBAfan83]

Fixed. Do you want me to go on? Because I can, like forever.

Some people here have a way to discredited their own point that goes beyond radical masochism...

(and LOL @ the X shots a game... per 36 minutes).

I think you are taking this argument all wrong.

All those PHX posters are arguing is that:

A) Jordan Hill will be a better player than Jared Jeffries, actually he already is a better player.
B) D'antoni said he doesn't play bad rookies/bad players. Yet he plays jared jeffries.
C) All discussion on how good or bad jordan hill will be is stupid, cuz you can't predict the future. But if you wanted to try to predict it, analyzing the past is the best way; Which is why PHX fans would have more knowledge than yourself considering they've seen him play more.
D) You'd think if d'antoni just straight up hated Jordan Hill, he would have him traded, and how can the knicks get anything for value for hill if you never see him play, unless he doesn't care bout the knicks future, which would make him a crappy coach.
E) Hell Marcin Gortat averages less points and rebounds than hill, yet we know he's got what it takes to be a starting C, hell Orlando paying him 35 mil. or something.

so in conclusion, your neither wrong nor right bout Jordan Hill, but i'll say your closer to wrong though.

[Kai]

Fixed. Do you want me to go on? Because I can, like forever.

Some people here have a way to discredited their own point that goes beyond radical masochism...

(and LOL @ the X shots a game... per 36 minutes).

hence the "FWIW"

[NBAfan83]

It's 7 assists (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/hilljo01/splits/2010/), for Pete's sake. How hard is this to understand? Heck he got 7 assists in 173 minutes for Houston but he got 5 in under 80 minutes for the Knicks (check his 9 games in December and January). Ha! He actually got worse since December!

Jeffries is a fringe rotation player pretty much like Hill is at this point. He's a very good defender. I know this because I've actually seen Jeffries playing, tons of minutes, and I'm not basing my assessment in a dozen minutes in a random game in March.

And btw, Jeffries was the guy delivering the win for the Rockets in NY with his huge defensive plays down the stretch. He stopped the Knicks from scoring in multiple possessions all by himself.

Well let's put it this way, your comparing a 30 year old jeffries with a 23 year old Hill.

As of now, Hill's got him beat in most of the stats in almost the same amount of minutes.

But your argument is on defense, where there is really no good stat for it, blocks don't count really as it's a useless defensive stat, for me at least.

Ok, right now, sure maybe jeffries is better on defense, but you gotta remember that the knicks at the time are like 25th in that category. Worse case scenario putting hill instead of jeffries you go down to 27th or 28th worse in that category, big whoop, knicks don't own their pick and they ain't gna reaching playoffs w/out lebron neway. So why not at least play Hill so the fan at least sees or perceives the organization actually is trying to win, rather than play it's "Veterans".

D'antoni could at least have done it for the fans considering the chances of Hill staying in Knicks SHOULD be higher than jeffries staying with the Knicks, so if your gonna argue D'antoni is doing it so the team will gel more, that argument went out the window.

Also remember Hill is 23 and jeffries is 30, whose to say hill won't be better or as good as jeffries when he's that age.

Just like durant is gna improve on D the older he gets.

[jimo2305]

i havent been watching hill's game so i dunno.. but for d'antoni to say such a thing.. that's pretty childish..

lest he forgets.. hill is a human being trying to make a career out of this.. why deny him an opportunity? i mean.. also.. if he's such a bad rookie why'd you draft him #8 overall?

smh

[mogrovejo]

9:42 94-98 Al Harrington offensive foul (Jared Jeffries draws the foul)
9:06 96-98 Al Harrington personal foul (Jared Jeffries draws the foul)
5:41 103-106 Al Harrington offensive foul (Jared Jeffries draws the foul)
3:57 107-109 Jared Jeffries blocks Tracy McGrady's 20-foot jumper
2:29 107-110 Toney Douglas offensive foul (Jared Jeffries draws the foul)
0:49 114-110 Toney Douglas offensive foul (Jared Jeffries draws the foul)
0:03 116-110 Jared Jeffries blocks David Lee's 25-foot three point jumper

Maybe he's better on defence? Maybe? Again, Jeffries delivered the win for the Rockets yesterday.

[mogrovejo]

I think you are taking this argument all wrong.

All those PHX posters are arguing is that:

A) Jordan Hill will be a better player than Jared Jeffries, actually he already is a better player.
B) D'antoni said he doesn't play bad rookies/bad players. Yet he plays jared jeffries.
C) All discussion on how good or bad jordan hill will be is stupid, cuz you can't predict the future. But if you wanted to try to predict it, analyzing the past is the best way; Which is why PHX fans would have more knowledge than yourself considering they've seen him play more.
D) You'd think if d'antoni just straight up hated Jordan Hill, he would have him traded, and how can the knicks get anything for value for hill if you never see him play, unless he doesn't care bout the knicks future, which would make him a crappy coach.
E) Hell Marcin Gortat averages less points and rebounds than hill, yet we know he's got what it takes to be a starting C, hell Orlando paying him 35 mil. or something.

so in conclusion, your neither wrong nor right bout Jordan Hill, but i'll say your closer to wrong though.

You should re-read the thread. What people are arguing is that D'Antoni hindered Hill's development by not playing him more, unlike Adelman.

Jesus, Hill is one of the multiple rookies that has trouble getting playing time in his first season because he's so raw than minutes on the floor are more likely to hurt than to help him.

If people have emotional problems with D'Antoni, take them to the psychiatrist.

[Kai]

Again, Jeffries delivered the win for the Rockets yesterday.

:toast

[mogrovejo]

So why not at least play Hill so the fan at least sees

D'antoni could at least have done it for the fans


This is the what this fuss is all about. This is why pretty much every coach in the NBA is criticized by not liking to play rookies - from Doc Rivers to Popovich, from D'Antoni to Nelson, from Kuester to Jim O'Brien.

Fans love and overrate young players. It's as simple as that.

[djohn2oo8]

You should re-read the thread. What people are arguing is that D'Antoni hindered Hill's development by not playing him more, unlike Adelman.

Jesus, Hill is one of the multiple rookies that has trouble getting playing time in his first season because he's so raw than minutes on the floor are more likely to hurt than to help him.

If people have emotional problems with D'Antoni, take them to the psychiatrist.

In order for him to develop, he has to play

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

i havent been watching hill's game so i dunno.. but for d'antoni to say such a thing.. that's pretty childish..

lest he forgets.. hill is a human being trying to make a career out of this.. why deny him an opportunity? i mean.. also.. if he's such a bad rookie why'd you draft him #8 overall?

smh


That was undoubtedly Walsh who drafted Hill, not D'antoni. D'antoni was never a fan of using draft picks. He was head coach of the Suns for 4 drafts (2004, 2005, 2006, 2007). #7 overall pick in 04 was traded for cash considerations and a 2005 first rounder. The 2005 pick they traded for was then traded a year later as a throw in in a trade just because they didn't want to have to use the pick. In 2006, the year D'antoni was Coach and GM, they had two first round picks, and sold them both and afterwards D'antoni said he had no interest in drafting young players. In 2007, they again had two picks, sold the first one, and used the 2nd one simply because a rule prevents teams from trading their pick two years in a row. Since D'antoni left, the Suns have used every pick they had. That's not coincidence.

[jimo2305]

interesting tho.. barbosa played significant minutes as a rookie under d'antoni.. and what about his relationship with galinari? galinari made it clear he wanted to play for d'antoni..

[NBAfan83]

You should re-read the thread. What people are arguing is that D'Antoni hindered Hill's development by not playing him more, unlike Adelman.

Jesus, Hill is one of the multiple rookies that has trouble getting playing time in his first season because he's so raw than minutes on the floor are more likely to hurt than to help him.

If people have emotional problems with D'Antoni, take them to the psychiatrist.

or maybe hill said something bad to d'antoni in the start of the season, or maybe wrong first impression, all we're doing is theorycrafting.

Nobody knows why hill didn't play more with the knicks, if we are to believe what D'antoni says, and btw you can't trust half the shit you read in the media cuz there are two sides to the equation, ALWAYS.

BUT, what we do know is that Hill is getting a chance to play in Houston, and he isn't doing that bad at all, actually he's doing pretty decent SO FAR, a full 82 game season will be the real test of how good he will be.

That's your opinion on hill, which may or may not be the right one, whose to say that such a raw player like hill wouldn't benefit from more play time. But whatever the case, he doesn't seem to be dumb rookie mistakes, YET, he might hit the rookie wall in a couple of games, but if you never let him start running, how he gonna hit that wall?

[NBAfan83]

9:42 94-98 Al Harrington offensive foul (Jared Jeffries draws the foul)
9:06 96-98 Al Harrington personal foul (Jared Jeffries draws the foul)
5:41 103-106 Al Harrington offensive foul (Jared Jeffries draws the foul)
3:57 107-109 Jared Jeffries blocks Tracy McGrady's 20-foot jumper
2:29 107-110 Toney Douglas offensive foul (Jared Jeffries draws the foul)
0:49 114-110 Toney Douglas offensive foul (Jared Jeffries draws the foul)
0:03 116-110 Jared Jeffries blocks David Lee's 25-foot three point jumper

Maybe he's better on defence? Maybe? Again, Jeffries delivered the win for the Rockets yesterday.

Like I said, it would be like me comparing lebron now and durant now, compare them at least based on their rookie level for a more realistic comparison.

Jeffries has been in the league for what? 7 years? whose to say Hill won't be better or as good as jeffries after 7 years?

[NBAfan83]

This is the what this fuss is all about. This is why pretty much every coach in the NBA is criticized by not liking to play rookies - from Doc Rivers to Popovich, from D'Antoni to Nelson, from Kuester to Jim O'Brien.

Fans love and overrate young players. It's as simple as that.

Like I said, if your on a contender, it kinda makes sense not to play the rookies, since it might ruin chemistry and etc... you might lose important games and etc... That's fine.

But when your on a crappy team, and you still not playing your rookies, instead your playing your scrubby vets, then that's on the coach.

Hell if your vets are 30+ years old, your rookies are 20+ years old, your team is lottery bound, and you don't play your rookies? Your a complete dumbass. At least develop your young players chemistry, so that next year you stand a better chance at more wins.

[Xsatyr]

Carl Landry rookie year- 24 years old

Jordan Hill rookie year- 22 years old

Room to grow, don't you think?

Also Hill is already a better rebounder than Landry.

[mogrovejo]

But when your on a crappy team, and you still not playing your rookies, instead your playing your scrubby vets, then that's on the coach.

Hell if your vets are 30+ years old, your rookies are 20+ years old, your team is lottery bound, and you don't play your rookies? Your a complete dumbass. At least develop your young players chemistry, so that next year you stand a better chance at more wins.

Most basketball coaches don't agree with this. I don't. Playing unready players at any given level may hurt more than help their development. Young players tend to develop bad habits in those situations. Then it takes a lot of work to break down those bad habits.

Honestly, have you never thought why this kind of complain is so common? We're talking here about D'Antoni and Hill but I can give you, and I kid you not, hundreds of examples, from the NBA and European basketball. Have you never wondered "hey, if so many coaches are reticent to play rookies even when they have nothing to lose maybe, just maybe, there is no linear relation between playing time and the development of the player"?

And I'm not even addressing the fact that, unlike most fans like to think, the priority of NBA head-coaches is not to develop young players, even in the late part of lost seasons.

I'll never understand why there aren't more people following the D-League.

[Indazone]

Spanoulis as a rookie has something to say about playing time..lol

[NBAfan83]

Most basketball coaches don't agree with this. I don't. Playing unready players at any given level may hurt more than help their development. Young players tend to develop bad habits in those situations. Then it takes a lot of work to break down those bad habits.

Honestly, have you never thought why this kind of complain is so common? We're talking here about D'Antoni and Hill but I can give you, and I kid you not, hundreds of examples, from the NBA and European basketball. Have you never wondered "hey, if so many coaches are reticent to play rookies even when they have nothing to lose maybe, just maybe, there is no linear relation between playing time and the development of the player"?

And I'm not even addressing the fact that, unlike most fans like to think, the priority of NBA head-coaches is not to develop young players, even in the late part of lost seasons.

I'll never understand why there aren't more people following the D-League.

i honestly doubt that the head coach is really in charge of developing young players. I attribute 10% of a players development to the head coach, it's not like the coach has so much time to sit down and talk with all his players and make sure their playing to the best of their abilities. That's why a coaching staff has so many members in it because there is only so much one man can do.

BUT I do agree that increasing ones playing time increases a players development. Now here is the thing, you really have to analyze the word development, does it mainly mean, more minutes played, better level of play? Not really, let's analyze this further.

I'm assuming you've played ball before in an organized league of some sort, cuz you seem to know your stuff, so let's look at this from that perspective.

Unless you have a big ego, or your lebron james, as a rookie, you know your only going to get a certain amount of minutes, and that's fine, as long as they are consistent minutes, minutes you feel you can showcase to the coach and to your team how well you can play.

When your not getting those minutes, everything sags, not just production. The stats that you see, is a combination of confidence, skill and playing time. When your going from 13 minute one game, 6 minute in garbage time another, to DNP-CD's your never going to develop a rhythm, offensively or defensively.

Also not every NBA player is so mentally strong that they don't mind being the 5-10 minute guy, and just bring that energy all the time, regardless if it's for 2 minutes or 20 minutes. More consistent playing time just lends itself to the player psyche making them better basketball player.

Bottom line, some players need playing time to develop offensively and defensively due to either their limitations mentally, team cohesion and etc...

On a basketball team, sometimes only the good players get acknowledgment, while some bench players never are "good/cool" enough to merit praise from their teammates. And let's not kid ourself, NBA players like other players want to be praised by their teammates, it builds team chemistry when everyone's closer to each other, and when your team is not as talented as other teams, team chemistry goes a long way in securing a few wins, you'd normally not win.

Also i'd like to point out players who deserve playing time, but completely suck when they don't have the ball in their hands. Two come to mind immediately, dwight howard and andrew bynum, the minute they are not getting touches, defense and offense start sucking, same thing when their in foul trouble, this might be because their mental midget, or it might be because they never get into a rhythm in a game.

[Kai]

mogrovejo, I tend to agree with a lot of what you have to say about responsibilities and development. You seem to know what you're talking about. That being said, it doesn't seem as though you have really watched all that much of Jordan Hill since he has joined the Rockets, which coincidentally, is the only time I've watched him.