Malcolm wrote:

Knicks1969 wrote:Kill me if you want, but that is your prerogative. However, I am here to announce that since December 29, 2015, the date Charley Rosen reported how poorly the triangle system was being used, fisher made a huge improvement by settling on a 9 men rotation; which has also improved our overall output on the floor.

In the attached article, Rosen clearly identified bad picks, poor player movement, too much over dribbling, and not enough back door cuts as areas where the Knicks were lacking. Since that article was published, the Knicks have been performing at a higher level. I know Nalod and others newyork4ever will try to bash me for this threat, but I don't care.

I hope what we've seen lately from Fisher is not an aberration; it is sad that Rosen/Phil had to talk about the ineptitude for a 9 men Rotation to have finally been set, but I am happy he is no longer using the Yoyo rotation

http://nypost.com/2015/12/29/some-knicks-blame-preacher-derek-fisher-for-offenses-failure/

Maybe yes . . . maybe no.

I mean really: could be true . . . or not.

Let's just wait and see what Phil says about it in 2 years in his book "The Twelfth Ring" . . .

Twelfth ring???? I would become the biggest Fisher fan in the world::))

The starters have remained the same and thus needed to play better at the start of games and that most likely didn't have much to do with the rotation. Not holding the ball too long, setting hard picks and cutting hard isn't about rotation. This is about each individual player executing properly and giving better effort. The shorter rotation helps of course cuz your best players are on the floor more of the time, but players have to give max effort and execute at a higher level regardless of rotation. When players do that then the rotation doesn't need to be extended.

Knicks1969 wrote:Kill me if you want, but that is your prerogative. However, I am here to announce that since December 29, 2015, the date Charley Rosen reported how poorly the triangle system was being used, fisher made a huge improvement by settling on a 9 men rotation; which has also improved our overall output on the floor.

In the attached article, Rosen clearly identified bad picks, poor player movement, too much over dribbling, and not enough back door cuts as areas where the Knicks were lacking. Since that article was published, the Knicks have been performing at a higher level. I know Nalod and others newyork4ever will try to bash me for this threat, but I don't care.

I hope what we've seen lately from Fisher is not an aberration; it is sad that Rosen/Phil had to talk about the ineptitude for a 9 men Rotation to have finally been set, but I am happy he is no longer using the Yoyo rotation

http://nypost.com/2015/12/29/some-knicks-blame-preacher-derek-fisher-for-offenses-failure/

Don't want to kill you. Rather you stay alive to reveal what your point is?

Knickoftime wrote:Don't want to kill you. Rather you stay alive to reveal what your point is?

Isn't it obvious? Fisher learned everything he knows about the Triangle from that NY Post article. Not from playing in it for thirteen years and winning five rings. That article by Marc Berman and Charlie Rosen is what finally got the Triangle to sink in for Fisher.

Knickoftime wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:Don't want to kill you. Rather you stay alive to reveal what your point is?

Isn't it obvious? Fisher learned everything he knows about the Triangle from that NY Post article. Not from playing in it for thirteen years and winning five rings. That article by Marc Berman and Charlie Rosen is what finally got the Triangle to sink in for Fisher.

Okay... and?

...that was the end of my joke. There's no more joke.

nixluva wrote:IMO the rotation situation earlier in the season was mostly about Fish seeing what he had on this roster and having seen what most of the players could bring he was able to settle in on a core group and that was something he was eventually going to do, having nothing to do with the Rosen article. All the issues about back picks, player movement and holding the ball too long are a separate issue from the actual rotation.

The starters have remained the same and thus needed to play better at the start of games and that most likely didn't have much to do with the rotation. Not holding the ball too long, setting hard picks and cutting hard isn't about rotation. This is about each individual player executing properly and giving better effort. The shorter rotation helps of course cuz your best players are on the floor more of the time, but players have to give max effort and execute at a higher level regardless of rotation. When players do that then the rotation doesn't need to be extended.

Nix sometimes you just kill me, how come the entire NBA runs a tight rotation and you somehow you think it doesn't matter. Even though Fisher has stated he was actually playing guys so they

a) wouldn't feel left out
b)wouldn't get rusty
C)in some cases just for the hell of it.

Dude, we knew what work by looking at a stat sheet, let alone seeing these play everyday. 90 percent of fans had this exact rotation in mind back in september, with the exception of Lance and Seraphin switching roles. KP playing Center was also a no brainer, (like what ERA are we playing in again) it's like less than 5 bruising Centers in the NBA (if that many) WTF.

The things i complained about regarding Fisher (the rotation and the system) he has changed, and he's getting positive results.

knicks1248 wrote:

nixluva wrote:IMO the rotation situation earlier in the season was mostly about Fish seeing what he had on this roster and having seen what most of the players could bring he was able to settle in on a core group and that was something he was eventually going to do, having nothing to do with the Rosen article. All the issues about back picks, player movement and holding the ball too long are a separate issue from the actual rotation.

The starters have remained the same and thus needed to play better at the start of games and that most likely didn't have much to do with the rotation. Not holding the ball too long, setting hard picks and cutting hard isn't about rotation. This is about each individual player executing properly and giving better effort. The shorter rotation helps of course cuz your best players are on the floor more of the time, but players have to give max effort and execute at a higher level regardless of rotation. When players do that then the rotation doesn't need to be extended.

Nix sometimes you just kill me, how come the entire NBA runs a tight rotation and you somehow you think it doesn't matter. Even though Fisher has stated he was actually playing guys so they

a) wouldn't feel left out
b)wouldn't get rusty
C)in some cases just for the hell of it.

Dude, we knew what work by looking at a stat sheet, let alone seeing these play everyday. 90 percent of fans had this exact rotation in mind back in september, with the exception of Lance and Seraphin switching roles. KP playing Center was also a no brainer, (like what ERA are we playing in again) it's like less than 5 bruising Centers in the NBA (if that many) WTF.

The things i complained about regarding Fisher (the rotation and the system) he has changed, and he's getting positive results.

So here's the thing, I think you have asked and answered your own questions.

90 percent of fans had this exact rotation in mind back in september, with the exception of Lance and Seraphin switching roles.

This is both not a true statement and also revealing into why Fish and staff were fooling with the rotations, etc.

We KNOW that 90 percent or whatever number you want to guess at is absolutely false. Just dig through our forums and guys wanted to bench Rolo for KOQ, sit Jose for either Gallo/Grant, start DWill, etc. And that was just in the first couple of weeks. ALso, outside of teams that have been together for a long time, teams don't just go with 9 guys, they just don't.

Fish is a long time role player, so are the guys next to him. 36 rings and decades of playing and coaching EACH. The obvious statement is that all these guys KNOW that a set rotation and minutes, etc is the way to go, so why was it different? These guys are literally payed MILLIONS of dollars and they don't know the obvious? So obvious that we low-life fan-boys can figure it out? You think there is at least some iota of reasoning going on there? Perhaps.

So the question for me is why and what could be behind it?

You don't give guys a chance, you don't find out about Lance.

You don't give guys time to come back from injuries, you don't get Jose revved up.

You don't give guys some time to figure out his place in the offense, you don't get Rolo feeling a LOT more comfortable in the post.

You don't give KOQ, Seraphin at least a small, legit shot at playing time and they are angry bench dudes and angry lockerroom guys who will sulk some cause for all the effort they gave coach didn't play them and let them fail.

Did we forget that AA was hurt at the beginning of the year and needed time and that forced Sasha into god-awful minutes? And do you think Fish really wanted Sasha playing at all?

Did we forget that this is a new offense and it took a long time for guys to figure it out and for the staff to both give a chance and let fail/let succeed to see what guys would step up, what guys are fast/slow learners?

Did we forget that KP was oft hurt in the SL and got pushed around by midgets and was only limited to 20 minutes per so that he wouldn't overdue it (****ing good plan BTW, seems to have worked to perfection, notice how many of the other rookies have sat because of injury but not our skinny Euro dude).

You don't sit DWill and maybe he never gets the message that standing around and not boxing out and not playing defense is NOT OK.

Did you forget that there are 9 new guys on the team, 2 rookies, and several cast-offs that just took Spurs to last second shot?

OR you can just sit back and cling to the idea that possibly the greatest coach out there has zero clue in looking and finding his protegee and that that protegee has zero clue about anything until Rosen speaks up.

crzymdups wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:Don't want to kill you. Rather you stay alive to reveal what your point is?

Isn't it obvious? Fisher learned everything he knows about the Triangle from that NY Post article. Not from playing in it for thirteen years and winning five rings. That article by Marc Berman and Charlie Rosen is what finally got the Triangle to sink in for Fisher.