knicks1248 wrote:

nixluva wrote:While not being the dominant part of the offense Phil's Lakers did use PnR and variations of the play.

Why are you showing Kobe and shaq PNR,

Your talking about two veteran first ballot hall of famers who can improvise at the drop of a hat, and knew the ins and outs of the triangle, not to mention being coach by TEX (pioneer of the triangle)WINTERS, AND PHIL( Big chief triangle) JACKSON.

You want to compare them to derek fisher, kurt rambis and a couple of prospects, you have to crawl before you walk, then run.

We ran the slowest offense in the league because we were thinking to much, let me get in the right spot,should i cut now, am i to selfish if i take a quick shot...I mean it was very little reaction, and just over thinking.

You have to simplify it, and take advantage of players skill set a lot more than what you would do if you had a kobe, shaq, MJ.

We don't have players on that level

This is why when Shved came on board he looked so much better than the guards we had who couldn't run a PnR, Give n Go and get to the rim rather than settle for a mid range jumper.

GustavBahler wrote:

nixluva wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

nixluva wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

TPercy wrote:

PhilinLA wrote:Some of the Triangle is just offset pick and rolls, from the corners instead of from the top of the circle. You're either picking and rolling or picking and cutting on every play.

Yeah, sad part is, instead of of going to the rim, the person pulls up for a 15-20 footer. Sad.

Fisher said that he wasnt going to be married to the Triangle next season. I dont mind it as an ingredient in the offense, just dont want it to be the only ingredient.

You're talking about an entire offense and not just a play. PnR isn't an offense. There's a heck of a lot more to the Triangle that people aren't really respecting. It was just 2010-11 where Phil's last Lakers team was just as efficient at this year's GS Warriors.

2014-15 Warriors - Off Rtg: 111.6 (2nd of 30)
2010-11 Lakers   - Off Rtg: 111.0 (6th of 30)

There's NOTHING wrong with the Triangle. We needed an upgrade in talent and talent that fit what we do. It may not all happen this year but eventually the team will master running the system. The Triangle was really the least of the team's problems.

The offense isn't just about tons of mid range shots. That's one of the problems of judging the offense off last season. It was more about the flaws of the players. Shved came in and understood what to do and had the ability to get to the basket and run PnR in the offense. It's all there but you have to have players with the talent and inclination to get to the basket or shoot the open 3, give n go, cut an slash to the basket etc. This is a tried and tested offense and it has a lot of flexibility.

Not cool Nix. I commented on the Triangle as a system, said I didnt mind it in the mix. No fun conversing with you when you get messianic about the Triangle, SSOL, Michael Bolton.

I can't figure out what you were actually saying. You made it sound like you were saying you didn't mind it as an ingredient in the offense, which I took to mean that you didn't mind seeing the Triangle as and ingredient but not the only ingredient. How did you mean what you wrote? The Triangle is THE system and PnR is just a small action within a larger system. There's so much to the Triangle as a system that I don't think Fish will move away from it but rather just tweak it as Phil did and as Fish did last year. There's been a lot of tweaking of the Triangle offense over the years. It's not a stagnant offense. Now some teams have included some Triangle Actions in their own offense but don't run the Triangle SYSTEM as a whole.

To repeat, even has Phil said that the triangle doesnt always work. Phil acknowledges that sometimes you need other options. Im basically agreeing with Phil and you're telling me Im wrong. To summarize, I want to see the players have the flexibilty to move beyond the Triangle at times if they want, even though we dont have multiple first ballot HOfers on the roster.

Phil was talking about late in the shot clock when you want to get the ball to your star players who can create something out of nothing. This isn't about players just breaking the offense whenever they want to. Besides there is tons of room for creativity within the flow of the offense. Anytime they run the offense and there is an opening to score or get to the basket then they should. They just don't want players to constantly break the offense which is designed to get players easy open looks. There are designed One on One actions in the offense as well as plays that clear the way for guards and forwards to get to the basket.

It's not about having HOF'ers or not. It's not about not having freedom or flexibility to move beyond the Triangle. The system is flexible enough that there's room for creativity as opposed to the robotic way that many of our players responded lsat year. Shved came in and showed that you don't have to play the system that way. That's the mental approach we need from these new players also.

GustavBahler wrote:

nixluva wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

nixluva wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

nixluva wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

TPercy wrote:

PhilinLA wrote:Some of the Triangle is just offset pick and rolls, from the corners instead of from the top of the circle. You're either picking and rolling or picking and cutting on every play.

Yeah, sad part is, instead of of going to the rim, the person pulls up for a 15-20 footer. Sad.

Fisher said that he wasnt going to be married to the Triangle next season. I dont mind it as an ingredient in the offense, just dont want it to be the only ingredient.

You're talking about an entire offense and not just a play. PnR isn't an offense. There's a heck of a lot more to the Triangle that people aren't really respecting. It was just 2010-11 where Phil's last Lakers team was just as efficient at this year's GS Warriors.

2014-15 Warriors - Off Rtg: 111.6 (2nd of 30)
2010-11 Lakers   - Off Rtg: 111.0 (6th of 30)

There's NOTHING wrong with the Triangle. We needed an upgrade in talent and talent that fit what we do. It may not all happen this year but eventually the team will master running the system. The Triangle was really the least of the team's problems.

The offense isn't just about tons of mid range shots. That's one of the problems of judging the offense off last season. It was more about the flaws of the players. Shved came in and understood what to do and had the ability to get to the basket and run PnR in the offense. It's all there but you have to have players with the talent and inclination to get to the basket or shoot the open 3, give n go, cut an slash to the basket etc. This is a tried and tested offense and it has a lot of flexibility.

Not cool Nix. I commented on the Triangle as a system, said I didnt mind it in the mix. No fun conversing with you when you get messianic about the Triangle, SSOL, Michael Bolton.

I can't figure out what you were actually saying. You made it sound like you were saying you didn't mind it as an ingredient in the offense, which I took to mean that you didn't mind seeing the Triangle as and ingredient but not the only ingredient. How did you mean what you wrote? The Triangle is THE system and PnR is just a small action within a larger system. There's so much to the Triangle as a system that I don't think Fish will move away from it but rather just tweak it as Phil did and as Fish did last year. There's been a lot of tweaking of the Triangle offense over the years. It's not a stagnant offense. Now some teams have included some Triangle Actions in their own offense but don't run the Triangle SYSTEM as a whole.

To repeat, even has Phil said that the triangle doesnt always work. Phil acknowledges that sometimes you need other options. Im basically agreeing with Phil and you're telling me Im wrong. To summarize, I want to see the players have the flexibilty to move beyond the Triangle at times if they want, even though we dont have multiple first ballot HOfers on the roster.

Phil was talking about late in the shot clock when you want to get the ball to your star players who can create something out of nothing. This isn't about players just breaking the offense whenever they want to. Besides there is tons of room for creativity within the flow of the offense. Anytime they run the offense and there is an opening to score or get to the basket then they should. They just don't want players to constantly break the offense which is designed to get players easy open looks. There are designed One on One actions in the offense as well as plays that clear the way for guards and forwards to get to the basket.

It's not about having HOF'ers or not. It's not about not having freedom or flexibility to move beyond the Triangle. The system is flexible enough that there's room for creativity as opposed to the robotic way that many of our players responded lsat year. Shved came in and showed that you don't have to play the system that way. That's the mental approach we need from these new players also.

Watched plenty of games over the years where someone brought up the ball and lobbed it to Jordan/Kobe/Shaq/Pippen and they went one on one early in the clock, Phil gave them that lattitude to change the plan. I want to see this team given the same lattitude and not kept on a short leash because they arent as offensively gifted as some of the HOFers that have been on some of Phil's old teams.

Finally, I want the offense to flow from rebound to fast break, to quick offense, to a system of offense. The defenses in the NBA are so good because the players are so big, quick, and well coached. Add the pressure that the 24-second clock rule applies to the offense to find a good shot, and the defense gets even better.

The triangle offense has proven most effective, even against such obstacles, when players commit to and execute the system. The offense hinges on players attending to minute details in executing not just plays but also the fundamentals underlying the plays. Once players have mastered the individual techniques required of their roles, we then integrate those individuals into a team. Once this is done, the foundation for a good offense is solidly in place. The team can then go on the court with the confidence and poise so essential to success.

This method of play is as old as basketball. The triangle set is adjustable to the personnel, but such adaptations can be made without altering the essence of the offense. The only necessary adjustment from one season to the next involves tailoring the series of options based on each individual’s talents.

nixluva wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

TPercy wrote:

PhilinLA wrote:Some of the Triangle is just offset pick and rolls, from the corners instead of from the top of the circle. You're either picking and rolling or picking and cutting on every play.

Yeah, sad part is, instead of of going to the rim, the person pulls up for a 15-20 footer. Sad.

Fisher said that he wasnt going to be married to the Triangle next season. I dont mind it as an ingredient in the offense, just dont want it to be the only ingredient.

You're talking about an entire offense and not just a play. PnR isn't an offense. There's a heck of a lot more to the Triangle that people aren't really respecting. It was just 2010-11 where Phil's last Lakers team was just as efficient at this year's GS Warriors.

2014-15 Warriors - Off Rtg: 111.6 (2nd of 30)
2010-11 Lakers   - Off Rtg: 111.0 (6th of 30)

There's NOTHING wrong with the Triangle. We needed an upgrade in talent and talent that fit what we do. It may not all happen this year but eventually the team will master running the system. The Triangle was really the least of the team's problems.

The offense isn't just about tons of mid range shots. That's one of the problems of judging the offense off last season. It was more about the flaws of the players. Shved came in and understood what to do and had the ability to get to the basket and run PnR in the offense. It's all there but you have to have players with the talent and inclination to get to the basket or shoot the open 3, give n go, cut an slash to the basket etc. This is a tried and tested offense and it has a lot of flexibility.

Because in the history of basketball there have been so many teams that have run the triangle successfully not counting the Jordan Bulls and the Shaq/Kobe led Lakers.

Yes, with all the other teams who have implemented the triangle to great success it was simply just a matter of all the guys taking a little while to get on the same page and also going out and getting guys who "fit" the tenets of the offense.

So yeah, just going back and looking at the history of the triangle it will surely 100% work out fine with this Knicks team. They just gotta do some Learning and practicing and voila they'll be running the triangle to perfection and baffling all comers with the offense. You're so right Nix it really is that simple I can't imagine why anyone on this board is skeptical of the triangle after it's been used time and time again by so many NBA teams and coaches to great success.

CrushAlot wrote:

H1AND1 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

TPercy wrote:

PhilinLA wrote:Some of the Triangle is just offset pick and rolls, from the corners instead of from the top of the circle. You're either picking and rolling or picking and cutting on every play.

Yeah, sad part is, instead of of going to the rim, the person pulls up for a 15-20 footer. Sad.

Fisher said that he wasnt going to be married to the Triangle next season. I dont mind it as an ingredient in the offense, just dont want it to be the only ingredient.

You're talking about an entire offense and not just a play. PnR isn't an offense. There's a heck of a lot more to the Triangle that people aren't really respecting. It was just 2010-11 where Phil's last Lakers team was just as efficient at this year's GS Warriors.

2014-15 Warriors - Off Rtg: 111.6 (2nd of 30)
2010-11 Lakers   - Off Rtg: 111.0 (6th of 30)

There's NOTHING wrong with the Triangle. We needed an upgrade in talent and talent that fit what we do. It may not all happen this year but eventually the team will master running the system. The Triangle was really the least of the team's problems.

The offense isn't just about tons of mid range shots. That's one of the problems of judging the offense off last season. It was more about the flaws of the players. Shved came in and understood what to do and had the ability to get to the basket and run PnR in the offense. It's all there but you have to have players with the talent and inclination to get to the basket or shoot the open 3, give n go, cut an slash to the basket etc. This is a tried and tested offense and it has a lot of flexibility.

Because in the history of basketball there have been so many teams that have run the triangle successfully not counting the Jordan Bulls and the Shaq/Kobe led Lakers.

Yes, with all the other teams who have implemented the triangle to great success it was simply just a matter of all the guys taking a little while to get on the same page and also going out and getting guys who "fit" the tenets of the offense.

So yeah, just going back and looking at the history of the triangle it will surely 100% work out fine with this Knicks team. They just gotta do some Learning and practicing and voila they'll be running the triangle to perfection and baffling all comers with the offense. You're so right Nix it really is that simple I can't imagine why anyone on this board is skeptical of the triangle after it's been used time and time again by so many NBA teams and coaches to great success.

Thought the only other team to implement it was the TWolves with Rambis. Did Cleamons try to implement it also? I don't think there has ever been top down support where it failed. If two out of four teams that implemented it won eleven of the last 25 championships it seems like it might be worth a try.

Here in NY he's in complete control of the roster so YEAH he can bring in Triangle friendly talent. Players that fit this style of ball. We all see the type of players he's picking are very similar to players he's had before. Not specifically a Kobe, MJ or Shaq but players with less talent perhaps but similar skills that would make them a great fit for this style of ball. All the role players and top rotation players Phil had he's replicating a lot of that here for good reason. Players have to have certain skills in order to occupy specific roles in the offense.

For example he has looked for big guards who have combo guard talent. That's what works best in this style of ball. You have to have a big that can post. He doesn't have to be Olajuwon in order for it to work, but he needs to be able to hold low position and score inside at an efficient level. That sets up the basic Strong side Triangle and overloads that part of the floor with leaves tons of space on the weak side for a two man game in the Pinch post. We knew exactly what Phil was looking for because the roles are so clearly defined.

nixluva wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

H1AND1 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

TPercy wrote:

PhilinLA wrote:Some of the Triangle is just offset pick and rolls, from the corners instead of from the top of the circle. You're either picking and rolling or picking and cutting on every play.

Yeah, sad part is, instead of of going to the rim, the person pulls up for a 15-20 footer. Sad.

Fisher said that he wasnt going to be married to the Triangle next season. I dont mind it as an ingredient in the offense, just dont want it to be the only ingredient.

You're talking about an entire offense and not just a play. PnR isn't an offense. There's a heck of a lot more to the Triangle that people aren't really respecting. It was just 2010-11 where Phil's last Lakers team was just as efficient at this year's GS Warriors.

2014-15 Warriors - Off Rtg: 111.6 (2nd of 30)
2010-11 Lakers   - Off Rtg: 111.0 (6th of 30)

There's NOTHING wrong with the Triangle. We needed an upgrade in talent and talent that fit what we do. It may not all happen this year but eventually the team will master running the system. The Triangle was really the least of the team's problems.

The offense isn't just about tons of mid range shots. That's one of the problems of judging the offense off last season. It was more about the flaws of the players. Shved came in and understood what to do and had the ability to get to the basket and run PnR in the offense. It's all there but you have to have players with the talent and inclination to get to the basket or shoot the open 3, give n go, cut an slash to the basket etc. This is a tried and tested offense and it has a lot of flexibility.

Because in the history of basketball there have been so many teams that have run the triangle successfully not counting the Jordan Bulls and the Shaq/Kobe led Lakers.

Yes, with all the other teams who have implemented the triangle to great success it was simply just a matter of all the guys taking a little while to get on the same page and also going out and getting guys who "fit" the tenets of the offense.

So yeah, just going back and looking at the history of the triangle it will surely 100% work out fine with this Knicks team. They just gotta do some Learning and practicing and voila they'll be running the triangle to perfection and baffling all comers with the offense. You're so right Nix it really is that simple I can't imagine why anyone on this board is skeptical of the triangle after it's been used time and time again by so many NBA teams and coaches to great success.

Thought the only other team to implement it was the TWolves with Rambis. Did Cleamons try to implement it also? I don't think there has ever been top down support where it failed. If two out of four teams that implemented it won eleven of the last 25 championships it seems like it might be worth a try.

It's OK Crush I fully expect the snark from guys that haven't really thought deeply about what Phil has done over the years. Phil was very involved in players that were brought in over the years he was coaching teams. It's not like he only coached just the players that were there when he got there. He actively asked for certain players when he was with the Bulls in particular he wanted Bill Cartwright and he was right. Phil brought players with him to the Lakers that he new could function in the system. It's just that people don't really dig deep enough to notice what Phil did with those teams. There was more to it than just the start players.

Here in NY he's in complete control of the roster so YEAH he can bring in Triangle friendly talent. Players that fit this style of ball. We all see the type of players he's picking are very similar to players he's had before. Not specifically a Kobe, MJ or Shaq but players with less talent perhaps but similar skills that would make them a great fit for this style of ball. All the role players and top rotation players Phil had he's replicating a lot of that here for good reason. Players have to have certain skills in order to occupy specific roles in the offense.

For example he has looked for big guards who have combo guard talent. That's what works best in this style of ball. You have to have a big that can post. He doesn't have to be Olajuwon in order for it to work, but he needs to be able to hold low position and score inside at an efficient level. That sets up the basic Strong side Triangle and overloads that part of the floor with leaves tons of space on the weak side for a two man game in the Pinch post. We knew exactly what Phil was looking for because the roles are so clearly defined.

Bill Cartwright was on the Bulls before Phil got there..Maybe he uses Zen to make trades years before he is actually hired..

nixluva wrote:

holfresh wrote:

nixluva wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

H1AND1 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

TPercy wrote:

PhilinLA wrote:Some of the Triangle is just offset pick and rolls, from the corners instead of from the top of the circle. You're either picking and rolling or picking and cutting on every play.

Yeah, sad part is, instead of of going to the rim, the person pulls up for a 15-20 footer. Sad.

Fisher said that he wasnt going to be married to the Triangle next season. I dont mind it as an ingredient in the offense, just dont want it to be the only ingredient.

You're talking about an entire offense and not just a play. PnR isn't an offense. There's a heck of a lot more to the Triangle that people aren't really respecting. It was just 2010-11 where Phil's last Lakers team was just as efficient at this year's GS Warriors.

2014-15 Warriors - Off Rtg: 111.6 (2nd of 30)
2010-11 Lakers   - Off Rtg: 111.0 (6th of 30)

There's NOTHING wrong with the Triangle. We needed an upgrade in talent and talent that fit what we do. It may not all happen this year but eventually the team will master running the system. The Triangle was really the least of the team's problems.

The offense isn't just about tons of mid range shots. That's one of the problems of judging the offense off last season. It was more about the flaws of the players. Shved came in and understood what to do and had the ability to get to the basket and run PnR in the offense. It's all there but you have to have players with the talent and inclination to get to the basket or shoot the open 3, give n go, cut an slash to the basket etc. This is a tried and tested offense and it has a lot of flexibility.

Because in the history of basketball there have been so many teams that have run the triangle successfully not counting the Jordan Bulls and the Shaq/Kobe led Lakers.

Yes, with all the other teams who have implemented the triangle to great success it was simply just a matter of all the guys taking a little while to get on the same page and also going out and getting guys who "fit" the tenets of the offense.

So yeah, just going back and looking at the history of the triangle it will surely 100% work out fine with this Knicks team. They just gotta do some Learning and practicing and voila they'll be running the triangle to perfection and baffling all comers with the offense. You're so right Nix it really is that simple I can't imagine why anyone on this board is skeptical of the triangle after it's been used time and time again by so many NBA teams and coaches to great success.

Thought the only other team to implement it was the TWolves with Rambis. Did Cleamons try to implement it also? I don't think there has ever been top down support where it failed. If two out of four teams that implemented it won eleven of the last 25 championships it seems like it might be worth a try.

It's OK Crush I fully expect the snark from guys that haven't really thought deeply about what Phil has done over the years. Phil was very involved in players that were brought in over the years he was coaching teams. It's not like he only coached just the players that were there when he got there. He actively asked for certain players when he was with the Bulls in particular he wanted Bill Cartwright and he was right. Phil brought players with him to the Lakers that he new could function in the system. It's just that people don't really dig deep enough to notice what Phil did with those teams. There was more to it than just the start players.

Here in NY he's in complete control of the roster so YEAH he can bring in Triangle friendly talent. Players that fit this style of ball. We all see the type of players he's picking are very similar to players he's had before. Not specifically a Kobe, MJ or Shaq but players with less talent perhaps but similar skills that would make them a great fit for this style of ball. All the role players and top rotation players Phil had he's replicating a lot of that here for good reason. Players have to have certain skills in order to occupy specific roles in the offense.

For example he has looked for big guards who have combo guard talent. That's what works best in this style of ball. You have to have a big that can post. He doesn't have to be Olajuwon in order for it to work, but he needs to be able to hold low position and score inside at an efficient level. That sets up the basic Strong side Triangle and overloads that part of the floor with leaves tons of space on the weak side for a two man game in the Pinch post. We knew exactly what Phil was looking for because the roles are so clearly defined.

Bill Cartwright was on the Bulls before Phil got there..Maybe he uses Zen to make trades years before he is actually hired..

When Jackson was Bulls coach he lobbied constantly for the Bulls to trade Charles Oakley for Bill Cartwright. General manager Jerry Krause was much against it because he’d drafted Oakley. Jordan was bitterly opposed because Oakley was his physical protector against the cheap shot Detroit tactics and Oakley was his closest friend. But with Doug Collins’ support the Bulls made the trade — Krause deserves the credit for doing so as he didn’t have to as the final voice — and Jordan would later admit he didn’t know if the Bulls could have won without Cartwright to hold off the top East centers then, like Patrick Ewing, Brad Daugherty, James Edwards and Robert Parish.

In the Bulls’ second threepeat, it was Jackson who lobbied everyone for Dennis Rodman. Krause had said Rodman should never be a Bull. But Jackson had persuaded everyone the need to, as he then said, “fetch the ball” was vital to success.

http://www.nba.com/bulls/news/phil-jackson-and-new-york.html

Cartwright was on the Bulls at the start of '88 season..Jackson started coaching in '89..So factually speaking, the article is wrong in saying when Jackson coached the Bulls he lobbied to trade for Cartwright..

Believe none of what you hear and half of what you see..Poe..I've seen Ben Franklin quoted for this as well..But doesn't that in itself make it apropo..

holfresh wrote:

nixluva wrote:

holfresh wrote:

nixluva wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

H1AND1 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

TPercy wrote:

PhilinLA wrote:Some of the Triangle is just offset pick and rolls, from the corners instead of from the top of the circle. You're either picking and rolling or picking and cutting on every play.

Yeah, sad part is, instead of of going to the rim, the person pulls up for a 15-20 footer. Sad.

Fisher said that he wasnt going to be married to the Triangle next season. I dont mind it as an ingredient in the offense, just dont want it to be the only ingredient.

You're talking about an entire offense and not just a play. PnR isn't an offense. There's a heck of a lot more to the Triangle that people aren't really respecting. It was just 2010-11 where Phil's last Lakers team was just as efficient at this year's GS Warriors.

2014-15 Warriors - Off Rtg: 111.6 (2nd of 30)
2010-11 Lakers   - Off Rtg: 111.0 (6th of 30)

There's NOTHING wrong with the Triangle. We needed an upgrade in talent and talent that fit what we do. It may not all happen this year but eventually the team will master running the system. The Triangle was really the least of the team's problems.

The offense isn't just about tons of mid range shots. That's one of the problems of judging the offense off last season. It was more about the flaws of the players. Shved came in and understood what to do and had the ability to get to the basket and run PnR in the offense. It's all there but you have to have players with the talent and inclination to get to the basket or shoot the open 3, give n go, cut an slash to the basket etc. This is a tried and tested offense and it has a lot of flexibility.

Because in the history of basketball there have been so many teams that have run the triangle successfully not counting the Jordan Bulls and the Shaq/Kobe led Lakers.

Yes, with all the other teams who have implemented the triangle to great success it was simply just a matter of all the guys taking a little while to get on the same page and also going out and getting guys who "fit" the tenets of the offense.

So yeah, just going back and looking at the history of the triangle it will surely 100% work out fine with this Knicks team. They just gotta do some Learning and practicing and voila they'll be running the triangle to perfection and baffling all comers with the offense. You're so right Nix it really is that simple I can't imagine why anyone on this board is skeptical of the triangle after it's been used time and time again by so many NBA teams and coaches to great success.

Thought the only other team to implement it was the TWolves with Rambis. Did Cleamons try to implement it also? I don't think there has ever been top down support where it failed. If two out of four teams that implemented it won eleven of the last 25 championships it seems like it might be worth a try.

It's OK Crush I fully expect the snark from guys that haven't really thought deeply about what Phil has done over the years. Phil was very involved in players that were brought in over the years he was coaching teams. It's not like he only coached just the players that were there when he got there. He actively asked for certain players when he was with the Bulls in particular he wanted Bill Cartwright and he was right. Phil brought players with him to the Lakers that he new could function in the system. It's just that people don't really dig deep enough to notice what Phil did with those teams. There was more to it than just the start players.

Here in NY he's in complete control of the roster so YEAH he can bring in Triangle friendly talent. Players that fit this style of ball. We all see the type of players he's picking are very similar to players he's had before. Not specifically a Kobe, MJ or Shaq but players with less talent perhaps but similar skills that would make them a great fit for this style of ball. All the role players and top rotation players Phil had he's replicating a lot of that here for good reason. Players have to have certain skills in order to occupy specific roles in the offense.

For example he has looked for big guards who have combo guard talent. That's what works best in this style of ball. You have to have a big that can post. He doesn't have to be Olajuwon in order for it to work, but he needs to be able to hold low position and score inside at an efficient level. That sets up the basic Strong side Triangle and overloads that part of the floor with leaves tons of space on the weak side for a two man game in the Pinch post. We knew exactly what Phil was looking for because the roles are so clearly defined.

Bill Cartwright was on the Bulls before Phil got there..Maybe he uses Zen to make trades years before he is actually hired..

When Jackson was Bulls coach he lobbied constantly for the Bulls to trade Charles Oakley for Bill Cartwright. General manager Jerry Krause was much against it because he’d drafted Oakley. Jordan was bitterly opposed because Oakley was his physical protector against the cheap shot Detroit tactics and Oakley was his closest friend. But with Doug Collins’ support the Bulls made the trade — Krause deserves the credit for doing so as he didn’t have to as the final voice — and Jordan would later admit he didn’t know if the Bulls could have won without Cartwright to hold off the top East centers then, like Patrick Ewing, Brad Daugherty, James Edwards and Robert Parish.

In the Bulls’ second threepeat, it was Jackson who lobbied everyone for Dennis Rodman. Krause had said Rodman should never be a Bull. But Jackson had persuaded everyone the need to, as he then said, “fetch the ball” was vital to success.

http://www.nba.com/bulls/news/phil-jackson-and-new-york.html

Cartwright was on the Bulls at the start of '88 season..Jackson started coaching in '89..So factually speaking, the article is wrong in saying when Jackson coached the Bulls he lobbied to trade for Cartwright..

Believe none of what you hear and half of what you see..Poe..I've seen Ben Franklin quoted for this as well..But doesn't that in itself make it apropo..

When Krause embarked on a 1985 plan to build a cast around Michael Jordan, one of his first calls was to Jackson, who was coaching in the basketball bushes, the Continental Basketball Association, in Albany.

A scout at heart (in basketball and baseball), Krause asked Jackson — whom he had followed as a player at North Dakota and throughout his years with the Knicks — if there was anyone in the C.B.A. who might be of use to him.

“He sent me detailed reports, well written, really comprehensive, and I thought, O.K., let’s just store this away in the back of my mind,” Krause said.

In 1987, Krause called again. The Bulls had another coach, Doug Collins, who had an opening on his staff. “Be presentable this time, wear a suit,” Krause told Jackson, despite his own reluctance or inability as a short, rounded man to look the part of the well-groomed jock.

Krause had a feeling about Jackson. He thought his size would be an asset in relating to players, loved how he revered his old Knicks coach, Red Holzman, and cultivated relationships with the Bulls’ veteran assistants, Johnny Bach and especially Winter.

In 1989, he replaced Collins with Jackson, who installed Winter’s beloved triangle, emphasizing body and ball movement and putting a skeptical Jordan in better positions on the floor to shoot.

So Reinsdorf told Krause to give it a try. He traded away used veterans like Orlando Woolridge and Juwann Oldham and got draft picks, one of which he eventually used to take Pippen. He picked up unwanted free agents like John Paxson, fought it bitterly, but finally took the suggestion of Doug Collins and Phil Jackson to get Bill Cartwright to play the big Eastern centers, like Patrick Ewing and James Edwards.

Even inheriting Michael Jordan when Jackson became Bulls coach in 1989, Jackson had lobbied vigorously the year before for the trade of Charles Oakley for Bill Cartwright. And Jackson famously employed the "three headed monster" center group in the 1996-1998 titles and always was calling for adding big men, like Brian Bison (Brian Williams) Dele.

"Just because he's never been an executive before doesn't mean he can't do that. He's wanted to do it for a while now, and I know he can do it ... so long as he has the necessary pieces in place."

Jackson debunked the pervading thought that he did not have a hand in personnel decisions during his coaching career, naming deals he made, including trading Charles Oakley to New York in exchange for Bill Cartwright.

In the Bulls’ second threepeat, it was Jackson who lobbied everyone for Dennis Rodman. Krause had said Rodman should never be a Bull. But Jackson had persuaded everyone the need to, as he then said, “fetch the ball” was vital to success.

Jackson’s philosophies were the same as everyone else’s. There are no secret formulas. It’s hiring the personnel to do so and knowing who that is. Jackson didn’t always have Shaq. His three-headed Bulls’ monsters were centers basically not starting anywhere else. His perimeter guys in Los Angeles also were role players, like Derek Fisher, Rick Fox, Brian Shaw. The point was to bring in players who could fill out a team with certain skills. It’s not just using them as a coach; Jackson always recommended the kinds of players he’d like. If he didn’t, you’d have seen a lot more rookies on those teams.

Sure, the Bulls had Jordan and Scottie Pippen, and the Lakers had Kobe and Shaq and then Kobe and Pau. But his teams were always able to add role players who were crucial to success in big moments. And Jackson was involved in those processes.

holfresh wrote:I think it's interesting that a couple of articles are bending over backwards to credit Phil Jackson with decisions while he coached..Well Doug Collins seems to be making the same suggestion to trade for Cartwright and gets no credit even while he was coaching the Bulls at the time and when the trade happened..Phil couldn't have pulled the trade off as one of your article suggested because he wasn't in the organization...

Two articles you posted has nothing to do with the Cartwright trade...

Phil would later bring some of his former players to LA with him. Phil even made a habit of scouting other rosters thinking about how other teams players could fit into the Triangle. This makes sense since few understood the Triangle as well as Tex and Phil. Certainly his GM's weren't as well versed in the system. Phil would tweak the system based on additions to the roster or certain skills he found a player had that could be exploited. The one thing Phil never did was scout college level players. He wasn't interested in that part of the process. He wasn't a fan of rookies as a coach. Now as a President he has a different role. He has to not only build for winning right now but for the future. He's still going to rely more on his scouts when it comes to College kids.