Home
News Post



Mike D'Antoni is the new Lakers coach for four more years. There are obvious questions about the Laker's ability to run his fast-paced offense and also as to whether the defense can hold up with D'Antoni's system -- not to mention the simple question of can D'Antoni win a championship. But folks around LA believe there is reason for hope. But what about you OS?

Are the Lakers better or worse off than they were beforehand with D'Antoni as coach?

Vote in our poll on your right on the frontpage and above you in the forums.

Game: NBAReader Score: 9/10 - Vote Now
Platform: SportsVotes for game: 2 - View All
Member Comments
# 1 KSOR24 @ 11/13/12 07:16 PM
Anybody not named Mike Brown is an upgrade at the coaching position.
 
# 2 eaterofworlds888 @ 11/13/12 07:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by KSOR24
Anybody not named Mike Brown is an upgrade at the coaching position.
agreed but it isn't much of an upgrade.
 
# 3 Joobieo @ 11/13/12 07:44 PM
Why you would pick this guy over Phil Jackson is beyond me.
 
# 4 wallofhate @ 11/13/12 07:51 PM
Definately worse off. Phil would have had the triangle which would have been great for all. Instead you get Antonio which benefits the wing players and Nash but Nash isn't a spring chicken anymore and with the lack of emphises on defense and post play I think it leaves the Lakers third at best in the west and missing out making the conference finals when it's all said and done
 
# 5 jhendricks316 @ 11/13/12 07:59 PM
I was shocked that Jackson didn't get the job. But, it isn't Kobe, Pau, and Andrew for the triangle anymore. So, I appreciate the "forward thinking".
 
# 6 tarek @ 11/13/12 08:36 PM
Could be brilliant, could be terrible, as long as the Lakers realise that they will just have a parrot on the sidelines squawking 'Go! Go! Go!' instead of any coherent gameplan.
D'Antoni has many many flaws, and his 'system' has been exposed as something that can only be successful if it has 'his' players running the show.
The Knicks learnt a hard lesson over the last 4 years that all-offense and no-defense led to nothing. The Knicks under Mike Woodson have been a completely different story.

Now, if D'Antoni learnt from his experience in NY and has become less stubborn, more willing to have utilise a defensive coordinator/gameplan and can make SIMPLE adjustments, well, things could go differently.

Personally, D'Antoni should be an assistant NBA coach, nothing more.
 
# 7 tarek @ 11/13/12 08:37 PM
Oh, and wait until you watch him stammer through a press conference. Geez.
 
# 8 CAMPBLACKMAMBA24 @ 11/13/12 09:09 PM
Chris Webber said it best imo. "If I was in the barbershop with the fellows we all would be asking "HOW IN THE HELL DID HE GET THIS JOB???

By All Star break Kobe will be asking to be traded. Howard won't re-sign. Still in shock about this and the Laker brass can put whatever spin they want on this but they really have screwed up this time.
 
# 9 tarek @ 11/13/12 10:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerseySuave4
Better off than with Mike Brown but not as good as they'd be with Phil. None of D'Antoni's teams played defense and I don't really think the players fit his system other than Nash & Dwight. Much like Melo, Kobe needs the ball in his hands so this system isn't ideal for him. They aren't loaded with 3 point shooters which is another key in this offense. Add to that the lack of D and the fact that Nash couldn't guard a decent PG when he was younger and healthy and that's enough to spell trouble against teams like San Antonio or OKC.
Excellent points. Summarizes the D'Antoni system quite well.
 
# 10 beast10 @ 11/13/12 10:39 PM
Welli guess new Mike will know how to run the offense something that Brown couldn't do but new Mike can't run defense ! )
 
# 11 Arod2k9 @ 11/13/12 10:40 PM
I would had gone with Mike Dunleavy instead a better overall coach than Danphony!
 
# 12 tarek @ 11/13/12 10:59 PM
Here is a quick analysis of D'Antoni the coach:

He has coached a total of 727 NBA games.
Of these, he coached 399 without Steve Nash, and 328 with Nash. Roughly 55/45 split.

His coaching record WITH Nash is 232-96 (.707%) which would rank him slightly higher than Phil Jackson's career W% of .704%

His coaching record WITHOUT Nash is 156-243 (.391%) which puts him in the company of legendary Clippers coach Elgin Baylor and John Calipari (who might be a brilliant NCAA coach but as an NBA coach?)

I think it's fair to say that a sample size of 727 games is enough to get a read on a coach. And the read on D'Antoni is that with a particular leader (PG) in Nash, his system worked and he achieved success. Without that he is essentially a BELOW average NBA coach.

Now, the Lakers DO have Nash. But is Nash the same player as he was in D'Antoni's Suns reign? Would he have the same role on the Lakers?

Like it has been written before, D'Antoni needs a certain group and a particular leader to push his system in a successful manner. As an assistant, with a competent head coach, his system would probably work. But with him calling the shots it historically doesn't seem like it's worked.

I'm sorry to harp on about this but really this coach ruined 4 years of Knicks basketball and was soooo stubborn he couldn't admit he was at fault. The Knicks (even under the smallest of sample sizes) under Woodson are now 23-6 and the only undefeated NBA team.

The Lakers have such a strong team to turn it over to this imbecile. What a shame.
 
# 13 DBMcGee3 @ 11/14/12 09:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerseySuave4
Better off than with Mike Brown but not as good as they'd be with Phil. None of D'Antoni's teams played defense and I don't really think the players fit his system other than Nash & Dwight. Much like Melo, Kobe needs the ball in his hands so this system isn't ideal for him. They aren't loaded with 3 point shooters which is another key in this offense. Add to that the lack of D and the fact that Nash couldn't guard a decent PG when he was younger and healthy and that's enough to spell trouble against teams like San Antonio or OKC.
I could see this working out better than most do. To me, Phoenix had a couple of really, really good years (barely, barely beaten by the Spurs) back when they had Nash, A'mare and Joe Johnson together. While Nash is older obviously, Kobe and Howard are both big improvements over JJ and Stoudemire, especially defensively. If D'Antoni brings in Nate McMillan as an assistant, I could see their D being good enough to get to the Finals. People forget that Artest is arguably the best perimeter defender in the league (not named LeBron). Kobe has been All NBA defensive team 4 or 5 times, and Howard is the best defensive big man in the world. Can they beat Miami? I doubt it, but I expect them to be pretty formidable by the end of the year, if they stay healthy of course.
 
# 14 nuckles2k2 @ 11/14/12 10:43 AM
Wait until that game where the Lakers are getting hammered on the boards early in the 2nd Q, and Dwight is still on the bench for "regular rest."

Kobe'll be looking at MDA like "why in the hell is Jamison still out here?!?!?!"

MDA's response:



The man makes no "on-the-fly" adjustments. And then when he's asked about it after the game.....oh boy...
 
# 15 Bunselpower32 @ 11/14/12 11:21 AM
Lakers - Mike Brown + Mike D'Antoni = Same number of big ego players.

Seriously, Kobe won't be able to handle the drop in scoring that will necessarily have to come his way in order for the Lakers to win without mouthing off. And I would never trade for Howard, let alone sign him to a long term deal because he's still so immature. The problem is, Nash and Pau have to control the ball a lot for this to work, and I don't think the other two can handle that.
 

Post A Comment
Only OS members can post comments
Please login or register to post a comment.