Skiles, not D'Antoni was Coach of the Year

phin7446 · May 10th, 2005, 02:51 PM

I can’t say it any more straightforward than this, Mike D’Antoni was not the coach of the year. I mean, he was, but at least not in my humble opinion. Simply put, the MVP can not be on the team with the coach of the year. Otherwise, Phil Jackson would have won a lot more COY titles.

It has...
Full Article

KP · May 10th, 2005, 03:04 PM

You make a good point...D'Antoni did more with more while Skiles did more with less. Karl should have gotten a lot of mention for resurecting the Nuggets, but IMO, he shouldn't have gotten it either simply because he didn't coach the whole year. I know, I know...a 32-8 record for all but two months of the season is a great job. But, where would you draw the line on future new coaches after the season starts?

Skiles would have, should have, been a great choice.

phin7446 · May 10th, 2005, 03:43 PM

I agree, Karl couldnt really win because of how late he started, although he did a tremendous job. If not Skiles I would go easily to Carlisle who did such a good job considering the circumstances. Then again, if he had known enough to take his players out of the blowout game in Detroit, he might not have been in the mess in teh first place.

To me, no matter how you slice it, Skiles was the coach of the year.

Maggie Haskins of The Back Page and SI on Campus makes a good argument for Carlisle. Here is the link

Aveosmth · May 10th, 2005, 03:51 PM

Phin,

Your articles always inspire me to write...that's definitely a good thing.

Mike D'Antoni without a doubt is the coach of the year in the NBA. My reasoning is very similar to your argument for Skiles. D'Antoni looked at his team in summer camp, and figured out that the only way he could win was to outscore the other team. His commitment to offense was one of the riskiest gambles in recent NBA history. Normally defense wins championships, but Phoenix has excelled at making other teams play their brand of basketball. D'Antoni is the man to give the credit to for that.

As good as Nash is, its D'Antoni's system that makes the Suns go. Nash won the MVP because he thrives in Phoenix's current style of play. Nash should split his MVP bonus check w/D'Antoni if he has a backbone.

Skiles did an excellent job, and I think he should have been the runner up, or maybe 3rd place. Even though they had a very nice resurgence, they did start 0-9 which is also has something to do w/coaching.

Karl shouldn't have won because he wasn't coach for the entire year. I agree totally w/you KP.

D'Antoni totally deserves the award...his team had the best record in the season in the stronger Western Conference, and the Suns made a huge improvement over the last year.

phin7446 · May 11th, 2005, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aveosmth

As good as Nash is, its D'Antoni's system that makes the Suns go. Nash won the MVP because he thrives in Phoenix's current style of play. Nash should split his MVP bonus check w/D'Antoni if he has a backbone.

Aveo,
I guess we disagree at the most basic premise of this debate. You think Nash is a product of the system, while I think the system is a product of Nash. I would continue to argue, but there's no real point here, because our conclusions are based on different central theses. But as always, it's good to hear from you. Suspects I that this could turn into a weekly debate?
Phin

Aveosmth · May 11th, 2005, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phin7446

Aveo,
I guess we disagree at the most basic premise of this debate. You think Nash is a product of the system, while I think the system is a product of Nash. I would continue to argue, but there's no real point here, because our conclusions are based on different central theses. But as always, it's good to hear from you. Suspects I that this could turn into a weekly debate?
Phin

Phin,

Youre absolutely right...we would go back & forth...here's a compromise...D'Antoni implemeneted the run & gun system in Phoenix because he knew Nash would fit right in...so the player influenced the coach to change his ideology. I think they are both deserving...D'Antoni took a huge gamble by using the Suns offense as their "defense", and its the first time I've ever seen it work so well.

Like I said before, you pick excellent topics, and before long, well be on the same side on one of them!!

Dmon3k · May 15th, 2005, 11:20 AM

I still think Carlisle just because he did the most with his team when they had every excuse in the book to call it a season. And I'm not just talking about the suspensions, although losing a player of Ron Artest caliber for a whole season hurts, along with the loses of O'neal and jackson for their times. What has really been impressive is that despite all the injuries they've dealt with on top of the suspensions, the Pacer's still were able to win. On espn, and various other places His players have missed 400 games due to injuries. That's the equivalent of almost 5 full seasons, yet they were able to finish with 44 wins, which a whole lot less than what I think anyone expected after the brawl took place.

In one article on espn's website they made this point:
No way Phoenix wins 50 games, let alone go a league-best 62-20, if Nash and Amare Stoudemire both miss half the season, the way Pacers point Jamaal Tinsley and power forward Jermaine O'Neal did due to injuries and O'Neal's 15-game suspension. And say the league had suspended Shawn Marion for the year nine games into the season, as Ron Artest was.

I'm not trying to take anything away from D'Atoni or Skiles, or George Karl, or any other coach in the league who was up for the award, but the fact is Carlisle did a great job with his team and has kept them in contention for a shot in the East, and I think he should have been coach of the year or Skiles, D'Atoni, or any other coach in the nBA this year.

focal22 · May 15th, 2005, 09:41 PM

He is no coach of the year.... shit look at all that athletic talent on that team. Not many teams could match up with them night in and night out. unless they make the finals its bogus.

phin7446 · June 10th, 2005, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by focal22

unless they make the finals its bogus.

Coach of the year isnt based on the playoffs just the regular season. And the Bulls won 17 games the year before and 45 this past season, with only the addition of some rookies. Looks pretty good to me

May 10th, 2005, 02:51 PM	#1
phin7446 Join Date: 05-04-2005 Posts: 15	Skiles, not D'Antoni was Coach of the Year I can’t say it any more straightforward than this, Mike D’Antoni was not the coach of the year. I mean, he was, but at least not in my humble opinion. Simply put, the MVP can not be on the team with the coach of the year. Otherwise, Phil Jackson would have won a lot more COY titles. It has... Full Article

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

May 10th, 2005, 03:04 PM	#2
KP Join Date: 07-08-2002 Posts: 1,988	You make a good point...D'Antoni did more with more while Skiles did more with less. Karl should have gotten a lot of mention for resurecting the Nuggets, but IMO, he shouldn't have gotten it either simply because he didn't coach the whole year. I know, I know...a 32-8 record for all but two months of the season is a great job. But, where would you draw the line on future new coaches after the season starts? Skiles would have, should have, been a great choice.

May 10th, 2005, 03:43 PM	#3
phin7446 Join Date: 05-04-2005 Posts: 15	I agree, Karl couldnt really win because of how late he started, although he did a tremendous job. If not Skiles I would go easily to Carlisle who did such a good job considering the circumstances. Then again, if he had known enough to take his players out of the blowout game in Detroit, he might not have been in the mess in teh first place. To me, no matter how you slice it, Skiles was the coach of the year. Maggie Haskins of The Back Page and SI on Campus makes a good argument for Carlisle. Here is the link

May 10th, 2005, 03:51 PM	#4
Aveosmth Join Date: 01-28-2005 Posts: 241	Phin, Your articles always inspire me to write...that's definitely a good thing. Mike D'Antoni without a doubt is the coach of the year in the NBA. My reasoning is very similar to your argument for Skiles. D'Antoni looked at his team in summer camp, and figured out that the only way he could win was to outscore the other team. His commitment to offense was one of the riskiest gambles in recent NBA history. Normally defense wins championships, but Phoenix has excelled at making other teams play their brand of basketball. D'Antoni is the man to give the credit to for that. As good as Nash is, its D'Antoni's system that makes the Suns go. Nash won the MVP because he thrives in Phoenix's current style of play. Nash should split his MVP bonus check w/D'Antoni if he has a backbone. Skiles did an excellent job, and I think he should have been the runner up, or maybe 3rd place. Even though they had a very nice resurgence, they did start 0-9 which is also has something to do w/coaching. Karl shouldn't have won because he wasn't coach for the entire year. I agree totally w/you KP. D'Antoni totally deserves the award...his team had the best record in the season in the stronger Western Conference, and the Suns made a huge improvement over the last year.

May 15th, 2005, 11:20 AM	#7
Dmon3k Join Date: 08-28-2004 Location: The ROC Posts: 73	I still think Carlisle just because he did the most with his team when they had every excuse in the book to call it a season. And I'm not just talking about the suspensions, although losing a player of Ron Artest caliber for a whole season hurts, along with the loses of O'neal and jackson for their times. What has really been impressive is that despite all the injuries they've dealt with on top of the suspensions, the Pacer's still were able to win. On espn, and various other places His players have missed 400 games due to injuries. That's the equivalent of almost 5 full seasons, yet they were able to finish with 44 wins, which a whole lot less than what I think anyone expected after the brawl took place. In one article on espn's website they made this point: No way Phoenix wins 50 games, let alone go a league-best 62-20, if Nash and Amare Stoudemire both miss half the season, the way Pacers point Jamaal Tinsley and power forward Jermaine O'Neal did due to injuries and O'Neal's 15-game suspension. And say the league had suspended Shawn Marion for the year nine games into the season, as Ron Artest was. I'm not trying to take anything away from D'Atoni or Skiles, or George Karl, or any other coach in the league who was up for the award, but the fact is Carlisle did a great job with his team and has kept them in contention for a shot in the East, and I think he should have been coach of the year or Skiles, D'Atoni, or any other coach in the nBA this year.

May 15th, 2005, 09:41 PM	#8
focal22 Join Date: 08-07-2002 Posts: 6,506	He is no coach of the year.... shit look at all that athletic talent on that team. Not many teams could match up with them night in and night out. unless they make the finals its bogus.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)