holfresh wrote:

nixluva wrote:

holfresh wrote:

nixluva wrote:

holfresh wrote:

nixluva wrote:

holfresh wrote:

foosballnick wrote:

holfresh wrote:

nixluva wrote:

holfresh wrote:

nixluva wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Vmart wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Vmart wrote:

holfresh wrote:You guys are creaming over the idea of adding multiple dudes that was part of a 10-36 "D League" team..I don't get it..

D-league isn't about wins and losses but more about player development.

Well if you are bring up 3 guys that is on a 10-36 team, why would the results be any different in the NBA where winning matters..

They have a lot of shuffling with players. For instance Galloway gets called up he is their best player. Once he gets called up the team is left with a spot open. Same thing in baseball winning is important in the minors but players shuffle up and Down from minors and majors. Winning is secondary to player development.

At some point it has to be about winning..Young players don't win..I'm not willing to watch D Leageurs develop over the next five years to see who pans out..Philly and Minny have immensely more talented young players and are losing..Its not fun to watch..

Really??? This is the way you look at a team finally embracing player development? The very thing that winning franchises have used to help support their winning ways. I really don't understand the take you have here. We have a bunch of Rookies and 2nd year guys who we need to develop and it's not really about the W/L column when it comes to them. We're going to be addressing the top tier talent on this team this summer. But that doesn't mean it's not important to establish a developmental regime for the franchise. That's what this is all about. We'll be looking for players to upgrade the D League team as well as the Big team. We need a LOT of players in order to do that. Think about how many good players it will take to have a winning D League and Pro Team. You need to get with the program cuz I don't think you understand what's going on here.

Who are these teams that are now winning because of D Leaguers?..The difference between our 54 win team and the 37 win team was a vet bench...Seems like eons ago..

You miss the point entirely. It's about building sustainability. You can have your vet team that allows you to win games, but you should also be bringing along players in your system that you can plug in when needed. It's a cost effective way of forging sustainability. That's what the Spurs do and what the Knicks are now looking to establish as well. We don't want one good year followed by losing.

No, you are missing some the point..You are trying to build with fringe NBA players, hoping to catch lightening in a bottle..You were talking about bringing back 9 guys from this current team in other threads..When you are talking 5/6 of these guys at the end of the bench..We will be losing plenty...

The Spurs added one guy that played in the D League, Danny Green..And I don't know if he came directly from the D League..Hardly a reason to view it as the holy grail..

Are you suggesting that the Knicks are only going to build only with d league talent? it seems much more apparent that they are using the d-league guys to supplement their high first round pick as well as any free agents they bring in over the next several seasons.the 54 win team was not a sustainable model for building a franchise. There was no cap space and too much reliance on old and inconsistent players. A rebuild is not a one-year process.

I actually think Phil is going the route of the 37 win team model..I think he will sign FAs that fits his system and have young players at the end of the bench...My issue is that it seems like we are banking on fringe/DLeaguers to be these bench players...He says he wants to have continuity...Having 5/6 Dleaguers/fringe NBA players that we are hoping to develop isn't a good thing in my opinion...

If over the course of the next two years he is able to put together a good starting 5..I hope he will look to vet players with maybe one or two young players to make up his bench..My point about the 54 win team is that the supporting role were mostly vet players..

Still missing the damned point. It's not just about next year. SUSTAINABILITY. This isn't about one years roster, but establishing a franchise that can win year after year. This team rebuild is a process and we can't get it all done in one off season. It's not about just what this team will be next season. That's the entire point of establishing a farm system of young players that you're developing for the long term. That's what we're talking about when we say we want to emulate the Spurs. They have a present day component and a future component to the franchise.

U didn't even read anything I wrote..Phil is 70, he has two years at most to show something..Dolan and his stock holders won't stand for 14k viewers for an MSG Knick broadcast much longer..

I did read what you wrote and that's why i'm saying you miss the point. It's not about how old Phil is or how long he'll be here. His job is to build a foundation for this franchise that will set this franchise up for success for years after he's gone. Yes he wants to win next year, but there's more to this than that. You're view is short sighted and lacking any sense of understanding what is actually going on here.

This isn't about next year alone. The moves Phil is making aren't just to look good next year. Phil wants to leave this franchise in the best shape possible to be successful going forward. That's going to include some vets for now and a lot of young prospects in the D League and with the big team that are being properly developed. They want the D League team to be a better feeder system for the Big team. It will take a lot in order to establish a farm system and that process is already starting. That's why we have so many young prospects and there will be more added so that the D League team has better talent too. It's going to be a comprehensive approach to the entire franchise.

U still didn't read what I wrote..I never said anything about next year yet you wrote 3 paragraphs on the premise of me saying it's about next year..

[b]You are quite clearly inferring that it's about next year.[/b] You just wrote that "Phil is 70" and "has two years at most to show something"! By saying that you think he has to show something next year or at the least the following year. Those are your words. You're the one suggesting a short time frame. You brought up Dolan and the Knicks Stock Holders not standing for 14K viewers much longer. All of which suggests that you think it's all about next year or at the most the following year.

You're previous posts are anti D League for some reason. You quite clearly aren't getting the point of what Phil is trying to do. He's not trying to build a team off of D Leaguers. He's trying to stock the cupboards with prospects and he will have to start with the D League and build that up in addition to using the Draft and Free Agency to look for as much talent as he can find. We have a lack of talent from the D League up to the NBA team.

holfresh wrote:My issue is that it seems like we are banking on fringe/DLeaguers to be these bench players...He says he wants to have continuity...Having 5/6 Dleaguers/fringe NBA players that we are hoping to develop isn't a good thing in my opinion...

There's a certain limit to how much can be done with the cap we will have. By necessity Phil has to find alternative ways of building this roster. We can't fill it with quality Free agents from top to bottom. It's only logical that Phil is going to look at lower cost options if he can find some D League level players who can contribute. It's all part of the process. Still it's not about building with Fringe players. It's about identifying hidden gems and developing them into solid contributors. That is a more accurate description of what he's trying to do.

Why do I even write these words if you are going to tell me what I'm actually inferring...

If over the course of the next two years he is able to put together a good starting 5..I hope he will look to vet players with maybe one or two young players to make up his bench.

While I may have typed the next two years, I actually meant next year...Got it..

send closk

SupremeCommander wrote:

holfresh wrote:

nixluva wrote:

holfresh wrote:

nixluva wrote:

holfresh wrote:

nixluva wrote:

holfresh wrote:

foosballnick wrote:

holfresh wrote:

nixluva wrote:

holfresh wrote:

nixluva wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Vmart wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Vmart wrote:

holfresh wrote:You guys are creaming over the idea of adding multiple dudes that was part of a 10-36 "D League" team..I don't get it..

D-league isn't about wins and losses but more about player development.

Well if you are bring up 3 guys that is on a 10-36 team, why would the results be any different in the NBA where winning matters..

They have a lot of shuffling with players. For instance Galloway gets called up he is their best player. Once he gets called up the team is left with a spot open. Same thing in baseball winning is important in the minors but players shuffle up and Down from minors and majors. Winning is secondary to player development.

At some point it has to be about winning..Young players don't win..I'm not willing to watch D Leageurs develop over the next five years to see who pans out..Philly and Minny have immensely more talented young players and are losing..Its not fun to watch..

Really??? This is the way you look at a team finally embracing player development? The very thing that winning franchises have used to help support their winning ways. I really don't understand the take you have here. We have a bunch of Rookies and 2nd year guys who we need to develop and it's not really about the W/L column when it comes to them. We're going to be addressing the top tier talent on this team this summer. But that doesn't mean it's not important to establish a developmental regime for the franchise. That's what this is all about. We'll be looking for players to upgrade the D League team as well as the Big team. We need a LOT of players in order to do that. Think about how many good players it will take to have a winning D League and Pro Team. You need to get with the program cuz I don't think you understand what's going on here.

Who are these teams that are now winning because of D Leaguers?..The difference between our 54 win team and the 37 win team was a vet bench...Seems like eons ago..

You miss the point entirely. It's about building sustainability. You can have your vet team that allows you to win games, but you should also be bringing along players in your system that you can plug in when needed. It's a cost effective way of forging sustainability. That's what the Spurs do and what the Knicks are now looking to establish as well. We don't want one good year followed by losing.

No, you are missing some the point..You are trying to build with fringe NBA players, hoping to catch lightening in a bottle..You were talking about bringing back 9 guys from this current team in other threads..When you are talking 5/6 of these guys at the end of the bench..We will be losing plenty...

The Spurs added one guy that played in the D League, Danny Green..And I don't know if he came directly from the D League..Hardly a reason to view it as the holy grail..

Are you suggesting that the Knicks are only going to build only with d league talent? it seems much more apparent that they are using the d-league guys to supplement their high first round pick as well as any free agents they bring in over the next several seasons.the 54 win team was not a sustainable model for building a franchise. There was no cap space and too much reliance on old and inconsistent players. A rebuild is not a one-year process.

I actually think Phil is going the route of the 37 win team model..I think he will sign FAs that fits his system and have young players at the end of the bench...My issue is that it seems like we are banking on fringe/DLeaguers to be these bench players...He says he wants to have continuity...Having 5/6 Dleaguers/fringe NBA players that we are hoping to develop isn't a good thing in my opinion...

If over the course of the next two years he is able to put together a good starting 5..I hope he will look to vet players with maybe one or two young players to make up his bench..My point about the 54 win team is that the supporting role were mostly vet players..

Still missing the damned point. It's not just about next year. SUSTAINABILITY. This isn't about one years roster, but establishing a franchise that can win year after year. This team rebuild is a process and we can't get it all done in one off season. It's not about just what this team will be next season. That's the entire point of establishing a farm system of young players that you're developing for the long term. That's what we're talking about when we say we want to emulate the Spurs. They have a present day component and a future component to the franchise.

U didn't even read anything I wrote..Phil is 70, he has two years at most to show something..Dolan and his stock holders won't stand for 14k viewers for an MSG Knick broadcast much longer..

I did read what you wrote and that's why i'm saying you miss the point. It's not about how old Phil is or how long he'll be here. His job is to build a foundation for this franchise that will set this franchise up for success for years after he's gone. Yes he wants to win next year, but there's more to this than that. You're view is short sighted and lacking any sense of understanding what is actually going on here.

This isn't about next year alone. The moves Phil is making aren't just to look good next year. Phil wants to leave this franchise in the best shape possible to be successful going forward. That's going to include some vets for now and a lot of young prospects in the D League and with the big team that are being properly developed. They want the D League team to be a better feeder system for the Big team. It will take a lot in order to establish a farm system and that process is already starting. That's why we have so many young prospects and there will be more added so that the D League team has better talent too. It's going to be a comprehensive approach to the entire franchise.

U still didn't read what I wrote..I never said anything about next year yet you wrote 3 paragraphs on the premise of me saying it's about next year..

[b]You are quite clearly inferring that it's about next year.[/b] You just wrote that "Phil is 70" and "has two years at most to show something"! By saying that you think he has to show something next year or at the least the following year. Those are your words. You're the one suggesting a short time frame. You brought up Dolan and the Knicks Stock Holders not standing for 14K viewers much longer. All of which suggests that you think it's all about next year or at the most the following year.

You're previous posts are anti D League for some reason. You quite clearly aren't getting the point of what Phil is trying to do. He's not trying to build a team off of D Leaguers. He's trying to stock the cupboards with prospects and he will have to start with the D League and build that up in addition to using the Draft and Free Agency to look for as much talent as he can find. We have a lack of talent from the D League up to the NBA team.

holfresh wrote:My issue is that it seems like we are banking on fringe/DLeaguers to be these bench players...He says he wants to have continuity...Having 5/6 Dleaguers/fringe NBA players that we are hoping to develop isn't a good thing in my opinion...

There's a certain limit to how much can be done with the cap we will have. By necessity Phil has to find alternative ways of building this roster. We can't fill it with quality Free agents from top to bottom. It's only logical that Phil is going to look at lower cost options if he can find some D League level players who can contribute. It's all part of the process. Still it's not about building with Fringe players. It's about identifying hidden gems and developing them into solid contributors. That is a more accurate description of what he's trying to do.

Why do I even write these words if you are going to tell me what I'm actually inferring...

If over the course of the next two years he is able to put together a good starting 5..I hope he will look to vet players with maybe one or two young players to make up his bench.

While I may have typed the next two years, I actually meant next year...Got it..

send closk

LOL.. those were the days bro!

mreinman wrote:

nixluva wrote:

mreinman wrote:

nixluva wrote:

mreinman wrote:

nixluva wrote:Technically any of our rookies that come back next year will be VETS. 2 Years from now they'll be even more experienced. There's nothing wrong with having some young players in your development program between the D League and the Pro team. Some of the guys that people are bringing up as Free Agent targets are not long time vets but young vets. Guys like Kris Middleton, Cory Joseph, Brandon Knight, Enis Kanter or Muscala. Phil is trying to build up the quality of young prospects in our system from the D League up thru the Pro team and that's going to take a lot of young players. This is the only way to start to establish a pipeline of good young players who can be brought up already familiar with our system and immersed in our culture. It's a long term approach.

Nix, why do you think that the knicks take so many long mid range shots (and lead the league)? Do you think that this will change with better players or is it part of the system and the system allows players to take these shots?

Houston would cut a player if they take these shots unless there is a really good excuse.

SA does not take these shots either (even though Parker and Duncan or holdover mid range players who can hit them).

Cleveland and Atlanta stay away from these as well.

Jason smith and bargs camp here and its okay for them to just keep chucking mid range shots ... I don't get it. So old school.

You're basing too much on what the team looks like with these particular players. It will look different with different players. If they bring in a Danny Green i'm pretty sure he'll be looking to take 3's rather than step in and take 2's. Schved, THJ and Ledo have no problem with taking 3's, but they have to be efficient. Minus Melo at SF we don't have a lot of 3pt shooting except for Early who was hurt a lot as well. We don't have a reliable stretch 4 either. These things more than anything are the reason for the lack of 3pt shots.

One of the big issues is getting penetration either via a real low post player or from a guard or SF. We don't get enough plays at the basket because many of the guys we have aren't capable. Now when we had Schved you saw more penetration and 3's. It's not really just the offense because you can get whatever shots you want in this offense. You have to have the talent tho. IMO some of the best offense is being able to draw fouls. The more our players can draw fouls the better.

This offense is very flexible but it really starts with better defense which would allow more fast break opportunities. The very 1st part of the offense is to push the ball and look for early offense. I expect the team to get out and run more next year than they have this year. The Triangle itself is so that you have some actions to get into when the defense is set. You're not supposed to slow it down for no reason.

Phil:

Finally, I want the offense to flow from rebound to fast break, to quick offense, to a system of offense.

so why did he get Jason Smith? All he can do is take terrible long range shots.

Why has philly decided that even though they are bad, they will not take these terrible shots?

Why is Jason smith even set up there on every play?

We will see next year but there are no more excuses if we lead the league in this category again.

You're basically answering your question when you ask why is Jason Smith taking those shots. He's not much different than Bargs in that he has been a very good career midrange shooter. If your offense is going to have some shots taken from that area then you better be good at it. The mistake tho is to assume that when we have better players that we will continue to get MOST of our shots in those areas.

The missing ingredient right now is the low post big who can help to space the floor, pass out of the post and score in close to the basket. Then you also need a PG and wings who can shoot from 3. The midrange shooting big is only a small part of the overall scheme in a properly built team but on our team we simply have a big hole were our low post big should be. Remember that this team is a torn down version of what it's supposed to be. Don't base anything off what you see this year.

Now you just have to imagine for example a lineup of Towns, Monroe, Melo, Danny Green & Schved. You've got threats on the perimeter behind the 3pt line and two low post threats, with Towns also able to step into the midrange spot to take a jumper or drive. Since both Towns and Monroe are good passing bigs that helps the shooters to get those spot up 3's or fake and drive on scrambling defenders. You also have the Pinch post 2 man game on the weak side opposite the strong side triangle.

The real difference of this style is that it allows you to play with 2 bigs and not be stagnant or crowded due to the spacing and constant movement of the wings.

its a difference in philosophy ...

while phil went out and got a player like jason smith who in NOT a good (long) mid range shooter to come in and take 40 percent of his shots from there, and Philly who stinks took these stupid shots out of their offense.

Then I watch teams in the D-League who have nobody and since they have nobody they do not chuck up a ridiculous number of long 2's.

This is a lame excuse.

Phil is running an old school offense that better change fast if he is gonna compete in this league.

I think you really are missing the point of what is happening here. It's not about the system being inadequate. It's the talent. The system will look different depending on the talent you have running it. By focusing on Jason Smith and the players we have this season you are making a huge mistake in how you're assessing the value of this offense. To keep harping on what it looks like this year under a less than optimal roster, is a problem.

Things will look different depending on the talent you have. If you have a big man who is dominant in the post that would change what is featured. If you have more 3pt shooters that will also impact what is featured and the same is true if you have players who can slash and attack the basket. Now if you remove those things then you end up with a very limited version of the offense.

It's clear that Phil intends to build a much better roster with player who have more skills and talent. Stop basing everything off of this year's roster. Also Phil has always tweaked the offense over the decades. It will continue to be tweaked going forward. Regardless, the real important factor is increasing the talent level on the roster. It's not about the Triangle. It's about the players first.

holfresh wrote:

foosballnick wrote:

holfresh wrote:
I actually think Phil is going the route of the 37 win team model..I think he will sign FAs that fits his system and have young players at the end of the bench...My issue is that it seems like we are banking on fringe/DLeaguers to be these bench players...He says he wants to have continuity...Having 5/6 Dleaguers/fringe NBA players that we are hoping to develop isn't a good thing in my opinion...

If over the course of the next two years he is able to put together a good starting 5..I hope he will look to vet players with maybe one or two young players to make up his bench..My point about the 54 win team is that the supporting role were mostly vet players..

Not sure how this makes sense. The 37 win team model was a core of 3 highly paid overpriced older players. 1 of whom (Amare) was chronically injured when he was signed and played sparingly. A second player (Tyson) was in and out of the lineup due to various ailments/sickness and was malcontent with the situation. The rest of the lineup consisted of an inconsistently bad PG (Felton) who had off the court legal issues and a SG with a lot of talent but who was a major flake on and off the court. The reserves were a combination of Draft pick reaches who had not worked out for the Knicks (Shump & THJ), veteran risks (Kenyon, Prigs, Bargs, Udrih), and a couple of younger guys (Murry, Aldrich, Tyler). The Head Coach had no clear system of play. This model was based on an unsustainable model from the previous season. The 54 win team was more successful due mainly to better production from Chandler, JR and Felton with the added leadership from Kidd. The rest of the bench veterans were not that successful due to injury (Camby for example). Both of these teams had no cap space.

Phil's rebuild model seems to be based on identifying a new core of 3/4 players. Consisting of 1 highly paid veteran (Melo) a 1 High Draft pick (TBD) and several FAs (TBD). The young guys he is evaluating now would seemingly be for inexpensive and cap friendly reserve type roles. The new model seems to be based on better cap usage and younger players for the longer term. Of course until we know more of his offseason moves, it is all just speculation.

The term model refers to the type of team consisting of vet players..Not the exact players and contract situation...Why so literal???

If someone is rebuilding in the San Antonio model, they aren't trying to get Tim Duncan and Tony Parker...

It may well end up that Phil adds 2 to 3 Free Agents to the roster and along with our draft pick that could form a major portion of our top 6 rotation. I don't get the idea that Phil is looking to build a top heavy roster. He sounds like he's looking for a little more depth than that. He can't build a really deep vet team with the limitations of the cap, so to some degree I get your point. I think Phil will look for good young vets who can grow with the roster. I think it's obvious that he's building a younger team overall but not necessarily a team so young that it can't win.

nixluva wrote:

holfresh wrote:

foosballnick wrote:

holfresh wrote:
I actually think Phil is going the route of the 37 win team model..I think he will sign FAs that fits his system and have young players at the end of the bench...My issue is that it seems like we are banking on fringe/DLeaguers to be these bench players...He says he wants to have continuity...Having 5/6 Dleaguers/fringe NBA players that we are hoping to develop isn't a good thing in my opinion...

If over the course of the next two years he is able to put together a good starting 5..I hope he will look to vet players with maybe one or two young players to make up his bench..My point about the 54 win team is that the supporting role were mostly vet players..

Not sure how this makes sense. The 37 win team model was a core of 3 highly paid overpriced older players. 1 of whom (Amare) was chronically injured when he was signed and played sparingly. A second player (Tyson) was in and out of the lineup due to various ailments/sickness and was malcontent with the situation. The rest of the lineup consisted of an inconsistently bad PG (Felton) who had off the court legal issues and a SG with a lot of talent but who was a major flake on and off the court. The reserves were a combination of Draft pick reaches who had not worked out for the Knicks (Shump & THJ), veteran risks (Kenyon, Prigs, Bargs, Udrih), and a couple of younger guys (Murry, Aldrich, Tyler). The Head Coach had no clear system of play. This model was based on an unsustainable model from the previous season. The 54 win team was more successful due mainly to better production from Chandler, JR and Felton with the added leadership from Kidd. The rest of the bench veterans were not that successful due to injury (Camby for example). Both of these teams had no cap space.

Phil's rebuild model seems to be based on identifying a new core of 3/4 players. Consisting of 1 highly paid veteran (Melo) a 1 High Draft pick (TBD) and several FAs (TBD). The young guys he is evaluating now would seemingly be for inexpensive and cap friendly reserve type roles. The new model seems to be based on better cap usage and younger players for the longer term. Of course until we know more of his offseason moves, it is all just speculation.

The term model refers to the type of team consisting of vet players..Not the exact players and contract situation...Why so literal???

If someone is rebuilding in the San Antonio model, they aren't trying to get Tim Duncan and Tony Parker...

It may well end up that Phil adds 2 to 3 Free Agents to the roster and along with our draft pick that could form a major portion of our top 6 rotation. I don't get the idea that Phil is looking to build a top heavy roster. He sounds like he's looking for a little more depth than that. He can't build a really deep vet team with the limitations of the cap, so to some degree I get your point. I think Phil will look for good young vets who can grow with the roster. I think it's obvious that he's building a younger team overall but not necessarily a team so young that it can't win.

I think that we can agree that if Melo does not buy in (again), phil is fukked.

Every thing I read about it, written by guys much smarter than we are think that it is outdated and not suitable for todays game.

I have yet too see an article praising it. Don't you find that strange? Or is it a bit of blind love?

And I know ... modified version shmodified version but too many of the shots look unmodified to me and are the shots that all the articles kill the triangle for.

You try to answer many triangle questions with "pinch post" talk but these synonyms are meaningless to many of us. All I see is inefficient shot selection which you seem to always find excuses for.

Again, if Daryl Morey had our team, do you think that he would be leading the league in long 2 attempts? Of course not. He would still be at the bottom (or close to it) of the league in these attempts.

And no. Melo has not bought in. You can post clip after clip but I have watched every minute of his play this year and he still refuses to pass once he gets it in the post.

Next year, phils biggest test will once again be Melo. If he buys in like he did this year. Phil is fukked.

knickscity wrote:There's obvious reason why teams dont run the triangle in it's native form....it takes awhile to learn and no guarantee players will learn it. Some of the best in the game have admitted they couldnt figure it out. Fisher can afford to run it, the team wont be winning anything no time soon and expectation will never be of a win now mode.

and like shaq says, you need 2 superstars for it to be successful.

2 superstars can make any offense successful.

Its not a stupid offense ... the princeton offense is not stupid either ... its just not necessarily up to date with todays game and smarter metrics.

EwingsGlass wrote:

mreinman wrote:I don't have a mental block about the triangle ... I think that you actually do

Every thing I read about it, written by guys much smarter than we are think that it is outdated and not suitable for todays game.

I have yet too see an article praising it. Don't you find that strange? Or is it a bit of blind love?

And I know ... modified version shmodified version but too many of the shots look unmodified to me and are the shots that all the articles kill the triangle for.

You try to answer many triangle questions with "pinch post" talk but these synonyms are meaningless to many of us. All I see is inefficient shot selection which you seem to always find excuses for.

Again, if Daryl Morey had our team, do you think that he would be leading the league in long 2 attempts? Of course not. He would still be at the bottom (or close to it) of the league in these attempts.

And no. Melo has not bought in. You can post clip after clip but I have watched every minute of his play this year and he still refuses to pass once he gets it in the post.

Next year, phils biggest test will once again be Melo. If he buys in like he did this year. Phil is fukked.

That's a pretty bad argument that other writers criticize the Triangle as outdated so it must be outdated. Characterizing the Triangle system by virtue of a tanked season isn't really a fair analysis either. At the end of the day, defense wins ball games, offensive systems need to overwork the defense. Any system that has a guard that can break down the defense and draw fouls will be effective. Any system that relies on contested long shots will be ineffective. The concept of system basketball really points to the players having a cognizance of what occurs on the court and being able to react to changes in the defense without resetting the offense (and the defense).

The Triangle attempts to force the defense to shift through spacing and to have 5 players that know how to react to any defensive shift. With a strong pivot, the defense will collapse on the post leaving an open shot within two moves. Its more of a dynamic model than a set of fixed plays. A thinking man's offense.

So, if with the current squad, they are running it as fixed plays only, it is missing the key component of reacting to the defensive shifts. You do not need strong PG as much as 5 players with BBIQ. A broken play results in a long two, but the hope is that the broken play results in the ball in the hands of your ISO player (Jordan, Kobe) who can make something from nothing more often than not. Without a Jordan, Kobe or Melo (still has to earn it!) on the floor, bad shots come from bad players.

The concept of Melo buying in or not buying in is silly. He alone would not validate or invalidate the system. 5 smart players can operate it, the question is whether Melo is smart enough to work within the system. I hope he is. Its not buying in, its cognition.

Nice post.

I don't use the argument of writers being against it as an end all. It is interesting though and if you read some of them, they are quite insightful.

The Triangle is a system (I am sure) and it takes smart players and time to learn. It does not mean that it capitalizes and all the advancement that has been made in the NBA (unless you buy into the notion that Phil will run a modified version).

The Triangle has also not been proven to win without super super super stars. And yes Gasol played like a super super star too.

I must disagree about Melo. He certainly can invalidate the system as Kobe often did. And I am sure that Phil is steaming just as he did when he tried to trade kobe numerous times since he broke the system so often.

One of the main arguments about the triangle is the ROI on the shots that it creates.

I also believe that blaming the talent is bit of a cop out.

mreinman wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

mreinman wrote:I don't have a mental block about the triangle ... I think that you actually do

Every thing I read about it, written by guys much smarter than we are think that it is outdated and not suitable for todays game.

I have yet too see an article praising it. Don't you find that strange? Or is it a bit of blind love?

And I know ... modified version shmodified version but too many of the shots look unmodified to me and are the shots that all the articles kill the triangle for.

You try to answer many triangle questions with "pinch post" talk but these synonyms are meaningless to many of us. All I see is inefficient shot selection which you seem to always find excuses for.

Again, if Daryl Morey had our team, do you think that he would be leading the league in long 2 attempts? Of course not. He would still be at the bottom (or close to it) of the league in these attempts.

And no. Melo has not bought in. You can post clip after clip but I have watched every minute of his play this year and he still refuses to pass once he gets it in the post.

Next year, phils biggest test will once again be Melo. If he buys in like he did this year. Phil is fukked.

That's a pretty bad argument that other writers criticize the Triangle as outdated so it must be outdated. Characterizing the Triangle system by virtue of a tanked season isn't really a fair analysis either. At the end of the day, defense wins ball games, offensive systems need to overwork the defense. Any system that has a guard that can break down the defense and draw fouls will be effective. Any system that relies on contested long shots will be ineffective. The concept of system basketball really points to the players having a cognizance of what occurs on the court and being able to react to changes in the defense without resetting the offense (and the defense).

The Triangle attempts to force the defense to shift through spacing and to have 5 players that know how to react to any defensive shift. With a strong pivot, the defense will collapse on the post leaving an open shot within two moves. Its more of a dynamic model than a set of fixed plays. A thinking man's offense.

So, if with the current squad, they are running it as fixed plays only, it is missing the key component of reacting to the defensive shifts. You do not need strong PG as much as 5 players with BBIQ. A broken play results in a long two, but the hope is that the broken play results in the ball in the hands of your ISO player (Jordan, Kobe) who can make something from nothing more often than not. Without a Jordan, Kobe or Melo (still has to earn it!) on the floor, bad shots come from bad players.

The concept of Melo buying in or not buying in is silly. He alone would not validate or invalidate the system. 5 smart players can operate it, the question is whether Melo is smart enough to work within the system. I hope he is. Its not buying in, its cognition.

Nice post.

I don't use the argument of writers being against it as an end all. It is interesting though and if you read some of them, they are quite insightful.

The Triangle is a system (I am sure) and it takes smart players and time to learn. It does not mean that it capitalizes and all the advancement that has been made in the NBA (unless you buy into the notion that Phil will run a modified version).

The Triangle has also not been proven to win without super super super stars. And yes Gasol played like a super super star too.

I must disagree about Melo. He certainly can invalidate the system as Kobe often did. And I am sure that Phil is steaming just as he did when he tried to trade kobe numerous times since he broke the system so often.

One of the main arguments about the triangle is the ROI on the shots that it creates.

I also believe that blaming the talent is bit of a cop out.