Reply With Quote
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.
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 in jeffries ???? LOL. one of the most overpaid scrubs ever.
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.
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.
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.
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.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.
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).
Last edited by JMarkJohns; 03-21-2010 at 11:22 PM.
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?
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?
And yet, beating out "jared in 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.
Jordan Hill freshman stats: 4.7 points, 4.1 rebounds
Jordan Hill Junior stats: 18.3 points, 11.0 rebounds
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.
Numbers?
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.
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.
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.
It's evident by their lack of playoff success vs. their regular season success. Their defense went to 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.
Not nearly as wild as thinking D'antoni did any favors for Amare.
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.
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.
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 .
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.
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).
Dude, you're pathetic. I'm not Italian.
Is 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.
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
Dude, you're pathetic. I'm not Italian.
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.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions