crzymdups wrote:Nixluva, didn't Fisher try to modify the Triangle and get fired because of that? He tried to add some pick and roll, which was actually successful, and he got fired. Rambis was elevated to install the "pure triangle". Their record was much worse with him, but hey at least the principals were pure.

I would have no problem with Phil if he was open to adapting or updating the Triangle. He's not. He's said this and proven this time and again.

I understood that to be a flat no.

martin wrote:

crzymdups wrote:Nixluva, didn't Fisher try to modify the Triangle and get fired because of that? He tried to add some pick and roll, which was actually successful, and he got fired. Rambis was elevated to install the "pure triangle". Their record was much worse with him, but hey at least the principals were pure.

I would have no problem with Phil if he was open to adapting or updating the Triangle. He's not. He's said this and proven this time and again.

I understood that to be a flat no.

you are just all in? You are not at all skeptical about this triangle agenda and the tiny coaching pool that it forces us into?

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:It is in the other Phil thread. I think it is great that Phil is getting involved in coaching. I am concerned that Jose is there and that Jose was mentioned specifically by Phil as one of 'their' favorite players. It seems to be mainly the back court guys.

I would rather have Denzel Valentine and Seth curry in that scrimage.

That's fantastic and you just did some really good brown nosing of Briggs' azz. lol

newyorker4ever wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

EnySpree wrote:This is a piece of shot article?

What is the intent here? Just more drama to sell clicks and newspapers

Have you ever heard of a team running a mini-camp less than a week after their season ended when they didn't make the playoffs? Seems newsworthy to me.

Also, it gives a pretty clear indication of which way Phil is leaning in the coaching search. Which is also newsworthy.

It still surprises me that any Knicks fan doesn't already know the way Phil is leaning in his coaching search.

It doesn't surprise me, but it does disappoint me. I'll be curious to see Melo's response. Though based on Phil's end of season comments, it seems like he's trying to force him out.

Que sera.

martin wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

martin wrote:

crzymdups wrote:Nixluva, didn't Fisher try to modify the Triangle and get fired because of that? He tried to add some pick and roll, which was actually successful, and he got fired. Rambis was elevated to install the "pure triangle". Their record was much worse with him, but hey at least the principals were pure.

I would have no problem with Phil if he was open to adapting or updating the Triangle. He's not. He's said this and proven this time and again.

I understood that to be a flat no.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/basketball/knicks/kurt-rambis-derek-fisher-gave-triangle-quickly-article-1.2593475

“We didn’t fully immerse ourselves into practicing (the triangle while Fisher was coach), developing it, learning how to work with it, going through the breakdown drills to execute it properly,” Rambis said. “We kind of skirted over things. So the real learning process of it didn’t have enough time to take place. We also didn’t allow the players the kind of time that it needs to allow them to get comfortable with it.”

...

Issues over Fisher’s triangle straying went as far back as Summer League of last year, according to sources, when Jackson took notice. Fisher then declared in training camp that too much emphasis on the system was a sabotaging factor during the 17-win disaster of last season, prompting him to adopt a different philosophy with more offensive freedom and fewer triangle lessons.

Rambis said Friday that hurt the team’s development. Asked about Fisher’s recent comments that teaching the triangle is too time-consuming, Rambis defended the precious system.

“First off, it’s not difficult. It’s like learning anything new. You have to open up your mind and be receptive to learning something new and that’s a huge part of it,” said Rambis, who owns a 9-17 record as interim coach. “And Phil and (triangle originator) Tex (Winter) have always felt it takes players a good year or so in terms of really understanding it and the nuances of it. Would I say it’s difficult? No. You just have to be receptive to learning it.”

...

Regarding the Knicks, Rambis explained Friday that Fisher deviated from the traditional two-guard set of the triangle. During that time, according to Jackson, Fisher resisted help from older assistants Rambis and Jim Cleamons.

“We were constantly wavering back-and-forth (between a two-guard set and a one-guard set in the triangle). So our players almost treat it like plays now instead of a real sequence of actions, a system that you work under,” said Rambis, who was Fisher’s lead assistant but hasn’t spoken to the 41-year-old since he was fired. “A coach has to do what he feels is right.”

There were a whole range of issues, your above reference points to one of them. It's not the only one.

Of course the Barnes incident was not pretty, but from everything we've heard from Phil and Rambis, it was about Fisher not running the Triangle enough and not talking to Phil about the Triangle enough. There were rumors as far back as the beginning of January that Fisher was not safe - from Zack Lowe specifically.

martin wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

martin wrote:

crzymdups wrote:Nixluva, didn't Fisher try to modify the Triangle and get fired because of that? He tried to add some pick and roll, which was actually successful, and he got fired. Rambis was elevated to install the "pure triangle". Their record was much worse with him, but hey at least the principals were pure.

I would have no problem with Phil if he was open to adapting or updating the Triangle. He's not. He's said this and proven this time and again.

I understood that to be a flat no.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/basketball/knicks/kurt-rambis-derek-fisher-gave-triangle-quickly-article-1.2593475

“We didn’t fully immerse ourselves into practicing (the triangle while Fisher was coach), developing it, learning how to work with it, going through the breakdown drills to execute it properly,” Rambis said. “We kind of skirted over things. So the real learning process of it didn’t have enough time to take place. We also didn’t allow the players the kind of time that it needs to allow them to get comfortable with it.”

...

Issues over Fisher’s triangle straying went as far back as Summer League of last year, according to sources, when Jackson took notice. Fisher then declared in training camp that too much emphasis on the system was a sabotaging factor during the 17-win disaster of last season, prompting him to adopt a different philosophy with more offensive freedom and fewer triangle lessons.

Rambis said Friday that hurt the team’s development. Asked about Fisher’s recent comments that teaching the triangle is too time-consuming, Rambis defended the precious system.

“First off, it’s not difficult. It’s like learning anything new. You have to open up your mind and be receptive to learning something new and that’s a huge part of it,” said Rambis, who owns a 9-17 record as interim coach. “And Phil and (triangle originator) Tex (Winter) have always felt it takes players a good year or so in terms of really understanding it and the nuances of it. Would I say it’s difficult? No. You just have to be receptive to learning it.”

...

Regarding the Knicks, Rambis explained Friday that Fisher deviated from the traditional two-guard set of the triangle. During that time, according to Jackson, Fisher resisted help from older assistants Rambis and Jim Cleamons.

“We were constantly wavering back-and-forth (between a two-guard set and a one-guard set in the triangle). So our players almost treat it like plays now instead of a real sequence of actions, a system that you work under,” said Rambis, who was Fisher’s lead assistant but hasn’t spoken to the 41-year-old since he was fired. “A coach has to do what he feels is right.”

There were a whole range of issues, your above reference points to one of them. It's not the only one.

the other one was the love triangle which you said was not going to be a distraction and you ridiculed me for saying that it would be. I would have bumped it but you locked it .... hmmmmmmmmmmmm .... payes to be the boss

newyorker4ever wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

EnySpree wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

EnySpree wrote:This is a piece of shot article?

What is the intent here? Just more drama to sell clicks and newspapers

Have you ever heard of a team running a mini-camp less than a week after their season ended when they didn't make the playoffs? Seems newsworthy to me.

Also, it gives a pretty clear indication of which way Phil is leaning in the coaching search. Which is also newsworthy.

I'm talking about the garbage stuff said in the article besides mentioning the mini camp.

The Triangle screwed us coming into the league with MJ and Phil and now it'll screw us as it leaves the league forever.

No one will ever run it again after Phil walks out the door at MSG.

So in that light, I thought the article was pretty fair.

I kinda agree with Eny cause it seems to me that the writer takes an article that's supposed to be about this mini camp but he really just uses it to go back to all the things Phil said in his exit presser which has already been talked about over and over and over again. This article had more about his exit presser then it did about this mini camp.

I mean, if you trust Phil, I can see this mini-camp as a decent thing. If you are skeptical of the job he's done and don't think his Triangle coaching tree is the best way forward, this is not good news.

Question - why is it only his former players that run the Triangle? Why hasn't some young Wiz kid somewhere picked it up and installed it in a college or something? Why can only Phil's former players teach it? And why was one of his former players - a starting point guard for at least three championship teams, Fisher, so quick to want to abandon it?

We have an article above with Fisher saying that he thought the Triangle was part of the problem in the 2014-5 season and he'd be looking to go away from it.

crzymdups wrote:

nixluva wrote:

EnySpree wrote:This is a piece of shot article?

What is the intent here? Just more drama to sell clicks and newspapers

Yeah cuz it's a bad thing having the greatest coach teach his players. SMH. This kind of thing can only help. I've never heard of a team doing this but I do remember Phil and Rambis doing seminars before. Perhaps this is allowed if it's not mandatory.

I thought you said the key was upgrading the backcourt?

What's the point of a two day seminar with mediocre guards?

Phil should be exploring ways to upgrade the roster. He's not the coach, he's the President. If he's gonna coach, he should coach.

He should be searching for a coach.

Instead he is running an ego workshop while the TWolves lock down Thibs. Wolves will have a better record than the Knicks next year.

If Phil's job is President of the team, I'm not sure I see how this helps anything. He's already settled on Rambis without having a single in person interview with another candidate.

Phil doesn't have that many candidates to interview that can run his triangle so he has plenty of time.

crzymdups wrote:

nyknickzingis wrote:So get upset with Phil when he sits back, accuse him of having his heart in LA, now get upset with him when he actively comes in and even coaches.

Jackson has done splendid with the Knicks longterm. In the present it's wishy washy. Can't really say it's good or that bad. He's had plenty of obstacles to work with.

All I want to see is the Knicks plan and progress for the longterm, which thus far Jackson has done accordingly. So tired of these "I'll win you a championship in 2 years" executives we've had. Phil's way is refreshing, even though the media hates it.

The present wishy washyness is my issue.

I don't know that we're set for the long term. We finally have some young pieces, which is nice. Hopefully Wroten can play. Hopefully Grant improves. Hopefully KP develops. Early seems like a bit of a bust, but I'm rooting for him. Not sure I see Langston as a long-term piece at this rate.

This summer will tell us a lot. Hiring Rambis is one thing, where does he go from there?

we have one young piece right now. Grant and wroten are scraps at this point. Philly has 10 grants and wroten's ...

2015-16
Rk	Team	                ORtg ▾	Pace
1	Golden State Warriors	115.18	99.3
2	Oklahoma City Thunder	113.76	96.7
3	Cleveland Cavaliers	111.80	93.3
4	Toronto Raptors	        111.11	92.9
5	San Antonio Spurs	111.04	95.8
08-09   Los Angeles Lakers      112.80  94.3
07-08   Los Angeles Lakers      113.00  95.6

Just forget about Warriors, who are an all time great offensive team with unique talent we won't be getting anytime soon. The rest of the league is a more realistic comparison. There is no statistical proof that the Triangle is limiting so much that you can't play efficient offense running it. The Triangle was tweaked over the course of decades Phil and Tex were together. It's always adjusted to take advantage of the unique talents of it's stars. Still you have to get the base offense down and run it right. Most importantly you still need players. We had one of the worst set of guards in the NBA. Not one was above average and most were below average. That is the main source of the problem with us running the Triangle at a high level.

nixluva wrote:I'm really tired of this meme from some fans and the Media keep pushing, that the Triangle is somehow not good enough to compete in today's game. There is no support for this idea based on facts. If you look at the best offensive teams this year and compare some of Phil's most recent Lakers teams you can see that they would be highly competitive even now. His teams were never the #1 rated offense but they still won titles:

2015-16
Rk	Team	                ORtg ▾	Pace
1	Golden State Warriors	115.18	99.3
2	Oklahoma City Thunder	113.76	96.7
3	Cleveland Cavaliers	111.80	93.3
4	Toronto Raptors	        111.11	92.9
5	San Antonio Spurs	111.04	95.8
08-09   Los Angeles Lakers      112.80  94.3
07-08   Los Angeles Lakers      113.00  95.6

Just forget about Warriors, who are an all time great offensive team with unique talent we won't be getting anytime soon. The rest of the league is a more realistic comparison. There is no statistical proof that the Triangle is limiting so much that you can't play efficient offense running it. The Triangle was tweaked over the course of decades Phil and Tex were together. It's always adjusted to take advantage of the unique talents of it's stars. Still you have to get the base offense down and run it right. Most importantly you still need players. We had one of the worst set of guards in the NBA. Not one was above average and most were below average. That is the main source of the problem with us running the Triangle at a high level.

you don't have to keep posting this. You have posted it as often as briggs mentions seth curry but obviously many don't agree. Does that mean that if you posted 100 more times we will be convinced? If that does not work will you start "WTFing" us and talking down to us?

That was a great team with a great coach. please tell who else has adopted this (whole) system and has been successful at it? Nobody? Why would so many of his pupils and players choose to not run it?