Amare Stoudemire:I've Never Been Taught How to Play Defense
After wednesday's practice Amare Stoudemire told reporters that he had never been taught how to play defense,until Mike Woodson became the Knicks head coach...Nobody in my career showed me how to defend...I think having a defensive coach for the 1st time in my career will help me....
Stoudemire has been a 4 time ALL NBA 2nd Team,1 Time ALL NBA 1st Team and Multiple All Star.....Besides the knock on him that he's not a dominant rebounder ,another 1 of his downfalls is his his lack of defense....All of the greats seem to learn around their 3rd season their strengths & weaknesses and seek out help to get better....
Amar'e: 'I've never been taught defense' http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/knicks/post/_/id/32396/amare-ive-never-...
He said the same thing 2 yrs ago. What did he learn in the meantime? Absolutely nothing. He's straight up lazy on that end of the floor. You shouldn't need to be taught to at least play with good effort.
He's been a shtty defender his entire 10 yr career. He could've gotten help earlier if he actually cared to.
^ exactly. He said the exact same thing to reports a couple of years ago. If he thought a little coaching was his problem instead of hard work he is way off.
I'm calling bullsh*t, he needs to just act like a man and admit that he is lazy and unattentive on D
What about those Terry Porter days?
Professor Sheed can give him lessons.
In all seriousness, it doesn't surprise me. If a player goes from Mike D'Antoni, Frank Johnson, and Alvin Gentry to Mike Woodson I would think his response is that he been taught how to defend too. Now, if only Mike Woodson learned to run a higher functioning offense...
I've was never taught how to play defense either. I still try hard and contain most people just on that. It isn't easy to play defense but if you just try, you should be at least average. There is no excuse for him to play as long as he has and still be as horrendous on defense as he is.
In defense of Amar'e though he has been coached by Mike Antoni and Alvin Gentry all his career pretty much, so it's not like that's helped him. He is really is just atrocious on the defensive end and will be the rest of his career.
Why is everyone on Amare's butt? He is not known as a defensive player and he never said he was. He can come over and get helpside blocks sometimes. His career isn't over, give him a chance to get healthy and compete with this winning team with this group of guys around him. He's a hell of an offensive player and that will always be his strength. He can still improve defensively. Kobe doesnt give effort on defense anymore at all. When has Dirk ever been known to play any defense? His defense has always hurt the Mavs, but so what, they need his offense. I think Amare has always played like the guy his team wants him to be. Look at where he's played and who he's played for and with. People talk as if Amare gives up 30pts a game to the player he's guarding. He's averaged 1.4 blks for his career, along with 8.7rpg. From the way people criticize him you would think he was a worse rebounder and defensive player than Brook Lopez. The guy is a bonafide star in the league and the Knicks need him.
It isn't about blocked shots. It is about positioning, rotating, and helping. When he says he has never been taught how to play defense, he isn't talking about raising his arms and jumping. He is now on a team where he cannot get away with not being in the right spot, and has to learn. There is nothing more to it.
I agree with you 100%! He now has to learn. Now Everybody should get off his back and give him a chance to learn. Why continue to drill him about how bad he's been in the past. He's on a new team now with better guys around him and better leadership. He'll learn
A) He said the same thing in 2010. He credited Alvin Gentry with being the first person to teach him defense so this excuse has been used.
B) He is lying. No player makes it to the NBA and at age 30 learns defensive concepts. I believe his first coach in the NBA was either Scott Skiles or Frank Johnson. They teach defense; especially Scott Skiles.
It does not say a lot for his basketball IQ that he has been around this long and played this much basketball and he has failed to pick up any defensive habits from the coaches he has had. Just by learning an offensive system you learn defensive principles because when teaching offense you often discuss how defenses will try and take away things the offense is trying to do.
So I am not buying his excuse and no one else should either.
Siggy I was watching when this happened last night and immediately got upset. I know it clearly looks like it's Amare fault right here but actually it's not. If that coach was going to get on anyone about that play it'll be Steve Novak. Everyone else on the play did their job. Novak was just caught not moving his feet. I'm a post player, they teach us to do what Amare did. If your teammate goes under the screen, the post player should hedge hard and run back to his own man who has rolled. In this case Novak went over the screen. Therefore Amare should sag off and show until Novak gets over. Novak was clearly over the screen but he didnt play defense. Amare had done his job and was running back to his man, because thats what they tell us. Call out the screen, show, then turnaround and sprint back to your man to stop a lob and to fight for rebounding position. Amare is not a very good defender but he did his job here. Anybody else (well most) in Novak's position right there wouldve got in front of that guy. Everyone else are in the right position. James White left his man and stayed home in the paint to allow Amare the chance to get back to Diaw, then he recovered back to his guy. These the things i've been taught on every level of basketball, High School, College, and Professional. Hell we even went over in AAU and we rarely practiced. That was just my input on it. However I still know the world views it as Amare's back was turned, he plays no defense. I guess when you earn that reputation, its just there with ya.
One of the most basic concepts of defense is seeing seeing ball and man. He was definitely at fault here. Why the heck would he turn his back on the ball-handler? The big man is supposed to open up and show harder, the weak side will hold the roller allowing Amare to recover. Novak is not without fault here, he should've attacked the screen at a better angle, but Amare is supposed to hold the ball-handler just enough for Novak to recover. That's called being on a string. It's simple help and recover. As for him sprinting back, he sprinted back only to be in a position to be blocked out. WTF?
The criticisms are warranted. Amare is not only clueless on that end, but he plays with poor effort as well.