mook
The 2018-19 season was the best I've seen
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2008
- Messages
- 8,309
- Likes
- 3,944
- Points
- 113
I'm pretty much on board with the idea that a D'Antoni team isn't likely to win a championship. But let's face it, barring some serious miracles we're a few years away from worrying about that. What we need to do is add a lot of talent to this team, and I think D'Antoni is the best coach to do that.
Wait, what? NBA coaches don't make guys more talented. They mostly just exploit existing talent.
That's true. Except a coach with an offense-only system tends to create high scoring players. After all, if the goal is to score 110 points ever night, somebody has to score those points. His system creates a lot of guys with high scoring averages. Of course, these guys aren't truly more talented, but they are perceived as being more talented. People will say, "Yeah, well that guy averages 20ppg in a D'Antoni system," but the fact is that it's still 20ppg, and that guy is perceived as more valuable than a similar talent garnering 14ppg somewhere else.
So what better place for D'Antoni than a team that's hit rock bottom? Bring him in for a season or two, watch Aldridge average 26 ppg while several others run up high teen ppg, and then fire him in a few years when we inevitably fail in the playoffs. But when you fire him, also immediately trade some of those other guys who have inflated stats before they fall to earth.
People talk about coaches and players in the long term, as though we'll have the same core in 4 years as we do now. Who is on our current roster that was here 4 years ago? Aldridge, Batum.....and that's about it. Most coaches are done in 3 years or less.
Assuming we don't land Deron Williams or some other major coups that immediately put us in the upper echelon of NBA teams, let's add D'Antoni, win a lot of regular season games while running up ridiculous scores, and then trade the over-valued guys a year or two from now, get a real championship-worthy coach, and contend.
Wait, what? NBA coaches don't make guys more talented. They mostly just exploit existing talent.
That's true. Except a coach with an offense-only system tends to create high scoring players. After all, if the goal is to score 110 points ever night, somebody has to score those points. His system creates a lot of guys with high scoring averages. Of course, these guys aren't truly more talented, but they are perceived as being more talented. People will say, "Yeah, well that guy averages 20ppg in a D'Antoni system," but the fact is that it's still 20ppg, and that guy is perceived as more valuable than a similar talent garnering 14ppg somewhere else.
So what better place for D'Antoni than a team that's hit rock bottom? Bring him in for a season or two, watch Aldridge average 26 ppg while several others run up high teen ppg, and then fire him in a few years when we inevitably fail in the playoffs. But when you fire him, also immediately trade some of those other guys who have inflated stats before they fall to earth.
People talk about coaches and players in the long term, as though we'll have the same core in 4 years as we do now. Who is on our current roster that was here 4 years ago? Aldridge, Batum.....and that's about it. Most coaches are done in 3 years or less.
Assuming we don't land Deron Williams or some other major coups that immediately put us in the upper echelon of NBA teams, let's add D'Antoni, win a lot of regular season games while running up ridiculous scores, and then trade the over-valued guys a year or two from now, get a real championship-worthy coach, and contend.
