It is time for a Colangelo/D'Antoni Reunion in Toronto

[Apollo]

Colangelo left Phoenix because Sarver wouldn't let him operate independently. The conditions of him coming here was that he would have that freedom. Dolan has proven time after time to pull the rug out from under his GM's feet when he doesn't agree with an idea. Does NYC sound like a good fit? I don't think he and D'Antoni are soul mates so there must be more that goes into such a decision to move other than them working close together in the past.

[mcHAPPY]

No..thanks..

Honestly I see more Colangelo going 2 NY Knicks after his contract..so yeah..
Not gonna happend with raptors.

That is probably more accurate of what will happen.

The NYK will be conference elite for a few years while Colangelo and D'Antoni will win their respective Executive and Coach of the year awards.

[Dr Hannibal Lecter]

No..thanks..

Honestly I see more Colangelo going 2 NY Knicks after his contract..so yeah..
Not gonna happend with raptors.

[heinz57]

They got to the Conference Finals with the MVP of the league. And I'm not happy with consistently making the playoffs and getting out of the first round. I've said it before, but if you're happy with the Atlanta Hawks, then I've nothing in common except we cheer for the same team.

Historically, the only way you can win a Championship is if you focus on defense. Teams that focus on offense only get so far. And that's not good enough for me.

you're setting yourself up for disappointment. personally i'd be happy with the second round of playoffs.. haven't seen one of those in a good decade... in ANY sport.


i'd be ECSTATIC for a deeper playoff run, sure.... but lets be realistic.. when you're a bottom feeder, transforming into a cusp team is like bruce banner's transformation into the hulk

[JoePanini]

Steve Nash is an incredible player and I do not intend to take anything away from his accomplishments. With that said, was it all his abilities that won him the two MVP's or was it a combination of abilities, system, and surrounding roster? I think the combination.

The Atlanta Hawks have not made it past the 2nd round of the playoffs so the comparison is not quite accurate. Of the four seasons (not counting the part season in 2003-2004) D'Antoni coached the Suns, they only lost in the first round once to the Spurs in the final year with Shaq, second round to the Spurs, Conference Finals to the Mavs and Spurs. San Antonio were to the Suns as Chicago was to Knicks, Utah, or Seattle. The 2007 loss was particularly disappointing considering the hip check from Horry to Nash and subsequent suspensions that followed.

I get you chose to ignore defensive rating but using points per 100 possession the Suns under D'Antoni were not a bad defensive team. When you are shooting the ball in ideally 7 seconds or less, of course the other team is going to get more possessions hence more points per game. Look at them under Gentry. Their defensive rating has slipped to 23 last year (Conference FInal appearance to show for it, pushing the Lakers) and 26 the year before. Clearly D'Antoni must be doing something defensively.

Another issue with the pairing of D'Antoni and Colangelo was the budget minded owner in Sarver. How many draft picks and core players did they let go because of Sarver's unwillingness to spend money. Granted this could be an issue with the MLSE/OTPP as well.

The idea that defense only wins is a simple argument that is easily proven false. If defense wins championships, Milwaukee should be competing for the championship this year as they are 3rd in PPG allowed this year and 4th in defensive rating. Unfortunately for them they are not even going to make the playoffs. The Spurs have let up on defense this year (12th PPG allowed and 15th in defensive rating) but are proving to be the the best team in the league (it will be interesting to see what happens with Duncan injured), however, in 2 seasons ago when they were 2nd in PPG allowed and 5th in defensive rating they lost in the first round 4-1 to DAL. ORL has been one of the top 5 defensive teams the last 3 years (Finals loss, conference finals loss, currently 4th seed) but have little to show for it if you don't count success as anything other than a championship. From 2006-2007 until last year CLE was one of the best to one of the better defensive teams each year with nothing to show - if success is only gauged by Championships. The only team that had poor offense and great defense that won was DET in 2004. The idea of building a similar team in TOR, as I once suggested, has been dumped on as well because you can't win without a superstar - supposedly. So I'm getting a little confused - it seems expectations are stuck in textbook cases and not reality.

The idea that D'Antoni teams in PHX did not play defense is also dispelled via the defensive rating. PPG goes up because the other team gets more possessions sicne teh Suns were shooting usually in 7 seconds or less. However, when the defensive rating is 13-16th in the league based on those possessions and the D'Antoni's team is the top offensive team per 100 possessions, I like those odds.

My opinion is given the right roster, D'Antoni would continue to be successful. Given the make up of the East right now, I think the only team that could handle a proper D'Antoni team would be Boston and their time is ticking.

Obviously Tim's and other's opinions differ and compelling arguments can be made for both sides.

Personally, I'd rather have a great offensive team and an average defensive team versus a great defensive and average to below average offensive team.

The only way you get greatness on both ends is to have 2-3 future hall of famers on your team (LAL, SAS, BOS). Since that currently doesn't look promising for the Raptors, bring in D'Antoni already.

*Another consideration is the rule changes that have taken much of the physical/defensive aspects out of the game*

I agree. He has always been successful, he knows how to win games. And he'd make the Raptors a more enjoyable team.

[mcHAPPY]

They got to the Conference Finals with the MVP of the league. And I'm not happy with consistently making the playoffs and getting out of the first round. I've said it before, but if you're happy with the Atlanta Hawks, then I've nothing in common except we cheer for the same team.

Historically, the only way you can win a Championship is if you focus on defense. Teams that focus on offense only get so far. And that's not good enough for me.

Steve Nash is an incredible player and I do not intend to take anything away from his accomplishments. With that said, was it all his abilities that won him the two MVP's or was it a combination of abilities, system, and surrounding roster? I think the combination.

The Atlanta Hawks have not made it past the 2nd round of the playoffs so the comparison is not quite accurate. Of the four seasons (not counting the part season in 2003-2004) D'Antoni coached the Suns, they only lost in the first round once to the Spurs in the final year with Shaq, second round to the Spurs, Conference Finals to the Mavs and Spurs. San Antonio were to the Suns as Chicago was to Knicks, Utah, or Seattle. The 2007 loss was particularly disappointing considering the hip check from Horry to Nash and subsequent suspensions that followed.

I get you chose to ignore defensive rating but using points per 100 possession the Suns under D'Antoni were not a bad defensive team. When you are shooting the ball in ideally 7 seconds or less, of course the other team is going to get more possessions hence more points per game. Look at them under Gentry. Their defensive rating has slipped to 23 last year (Conference FInal appearance to show for it, pushing the Lakers) and 26 the year before. Clearly D'Antoni must be doing something defensively.

Another issue with the pairing of D'Antoni and Colangelo was the budget minded owner in Sarver. How many draft picks and core players did they let go because of Sarver's unwillingness to spend money. Granted this could be an issue with the MLSE/OTPP as well.

The idea that defense only wins is a simple argument that is easily proven false. If defense wins championships, Milwaukee should be competing for the championship this year as they are 3rd in PPG allowed this year and 4th in defensive rating. Unfortunately for them they are not even going to make the playoffs. The Spurs have let up on defense this year (12th PPG allowed and 15th in defensive rating) but are proving to be the the best team in the league (it will be interesting to see what happens with Duncan injured), however, in 2 seasons ago when they were 2nd in PPG allowed and 5th in defensive rating they lost in the first round 4-1 to DAL. ORL has been one of the top 5 defensive teams the last 3 years (Finals loss, conference finals loss, currently 4th seed) but have little to show for it if you don't count success as anything other than a championship. From 2006-2007 until last year CLE was one of the best to one of the better defensive teams each year with nothing to show - if success is only gauged by Championships. The only team that had poor offense and great defense that won was DET in 2004. The idea of building a similar team in TOR, as I once suggested, has been dumped on as well because you can't win without a superstar - supposedly. So I'm getting a little confused - it seems expectations are stuck in textbook cases and not reality.

The idea that D'Antoni teams in PHX did not play defense is also dispelled via the defensive rating. PPG goes up because the other team gets more possessions sicne teh Suns were shooting usually in 7 seconds or less. However, when the defensive rating is 13-16th in the league based on those possessions and the D'Antoni's team is the top offensive team per 100 possessions, I like those odds.

My opinion is given the right roster, D'Antoni would continue to be successful. Given the make up of the East right now, I think the only team that could handle a proper D'Antoni team would be Boston and their time is ticking.

Obviously Tim's and other's opinions differ and compelling arguments can be made for both sides.

Personally, I'd rather have a great offensive team and an average defensive team versus a great defensive and average to below average offensive team.

The only way you get greatness on both ends is to have 2-3 future hall of famers on your team (LAL, SAS, BOS). Since that currently doesn't look promising for the Raptors, bring in D'Antoni already.

*Another consideration is the rule changes that have taken much of the physical/defensive aspects out of the game*

[RAPS4LIFE]

Raps would also need at least a couple legit three point shooters too.

In that case, let's go JIMMER !!!

[Tim W.]

if by "get so far" you mean conference finals, what's the problem with that? I initially was against signing d'antoni but the more i think about it the more i'd be okay with it. I'd say d'antoni has just as much chance as any coach to get us consistantly into the playoffs and out of the first round, but that's just my opinion.

They got to the Conference Finals with the MVP of the league. And I'm not happy with consistently making the playoffs and getting out of the first round. I've said it before, but if you're happy with the Atlanta Hawks, then I've nothing in common except we cheer for the same team.

Historically, the only way you can win a Championship is if you focus on defense. Teams that focus on offense only get so far. And that's not good enough for me.

[ezz_bee]

the fact is that D'Antoni is not a good defensive coach and focuses on offense. And you're only going to get so far playing like that.

if by "get so far" you mean conference finals, what's the problem with that? I initially was against signing d'antoni but the more i think about it the more i'd be okay with it. I'd say d'antoni has just as much chance as any coach to get us consistantly into the playoffs and out of the first round, but that's just my opinion.

[Tim W.]

God, no. You can point to stops per possessions, or getting to most out of the roster, or whether or not he's an upgrade over Triano, but the fact is that D'Antoni is not a good defensive coach and focuses on offense. And you're only going to get so far playing like that.

Is it too much to ask to ask for a coach who preaches defense but also cares about offense? The great coaches do both. As far as I'm concerned, Da'Antoni would only be a temporary solution.

[Apollo]

i'd be down but i'd want triano to remain as an assistant coach, i think he's prolly one of the best assistant coaches out there and still has the potential to be a top head coach. but, he's starting to run out of time.

i miss triano's days of clipboard snapping.

I can't think of one instance where a head coach was removed and kept on as an assistant. I'm not saying that it's impossible but I am saying I never heard of it.

[mcHAPPY]

I'm really running wild with this now - lol.

I'm going to compare the 2004-2005 PHX team to what we currently have and what we should/could acquire.

PHX....................................TOR

Joe Johnson..........................Draft Pick
Shawn Marion........................James Johnson
Amar'e.................................Bargnani (offense only, while Amare is not the best defender, he is world class compared to Bargs)
Q. Richardson........................Daequan Cook or Nick Young (sign RFA)
Steven Hunter.......................Ed Davis
Steve Nash...........................Ray Felton (19/9 w/NYK, better D than Nash, picks up Bargs D slack in comparison with Amare)
Leandro Barbosa.....................as himself
Jim Jackson...........................James Jones (UFA)
Bo Outlaw..............................Amir Johnson
Jake Voskuhl..........................Reggie Evans (re-sign)
Walter McCarthey...................Linas Kleiza
Smush Parker.........................Bayless

The person I am struggling to fit in this wet-dream of mine is DeRozan because he is not a good 3 point shooter and pretty much every 2 or 3 to play for D'Antoni could shoot the three.

Anyways, I'm only semi-serious. I don't think it is as unrealistic as one might think given the press coming out of NY. As much as I hate to give him credit, Stephen A. Smith has certainly taken a lot of criticism (Bosh was an example) only to be proven correct. Here is his take: [URL="http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/nba/columns/story?columnist=smith_stephen&id=6246952"]These Knicks don't have a clue./URL]

[LBF]

Agreed that we have no good shooters on this team, which is important to the D'Antoni system. Otherwise, it would work.

you can easily add those in free agency, though.

[LBF]

i'd be down but i'd want triano to remain as an assistant coach, i think he's prolly one of the best assistant coaches out there and still has the potential to be a top head coach. but, he's starting to run out of time.

i miss triano's days of clipboard snapping.

[malefax]

There's plenty of evidence to suggest that he's content with Andrea's game. He didn't draft him with defense in mind. He drafted him because of his gawdy offensive skills as a 7-foot scoring demon. Andrea's game is where it should be right now according to BC, his scouts and some fans of this team. I'm sure BC reads it, watches video, but in the end, it's simply a matter of critics not really knowing much about Andrea and his vision of building around his "true centerpiece".

The best evidence of what BC thinks of Andrea's game is the contract BC gave Andrea. It pays him 10 million a year. For a seven foot guy, that says 'starter' not 'all-star'. It certainly doesn't say 'centrepiece'. You don't pay your centrepiece big man 10 million a year.