StraightShot wrote:The plan has always been to run Phil's triangle offense. That's one reason he was hired. In addition, Phil has a kind of mystical zen-like ability to motivate people, and the organization is really counting on that kicking into high gear next year. Jim is completely on board with Phil's methods and Derek is just the guy to communicate these priorities to the players in a language they understand. I am very excited about next year.

How does the glue you are sniffing smell like?

mreinman wrote:

nixluva wrote:You guys are only looking at Melo as he is with not enough talent and players that don't fit the system. You have to imagine how he'd play with more quality players on the team with him. In that circumstance he's not going to be a selfish player. I'm not looking for Melo to be a PG. He simply needs to work in the flow of the offense which really isn't hard considering how he likes to play is pretty much set as an option in this system.

Also one HUGE aspect that you guys aren't thinking about is that when you have scrubs playing with a star they will defer to the detriment of the team, but good players who are more equal in talent will not defer as much and they will play the game the right way. Especially if you have guards who can make things happen with the ball. That dynamic is what was missing when Melo was playing. It won't be the case next year when Phil upgrades the talent on the roster.

how good of a team player was Melo with MDA?

nixluva wrote:You guys are only looking at Melo as he is with not enough talent and players that don't fit the system. You have to imagine how he'd play with more quality players on the team with him. In that circumstance he's not going to be a selfish player. I'm not looking for Melo to be a PG. He simply needs to work in the flow of the offense which really isn't hard considering how he likes to play is pretty much set as an option in this system.

Also one HUGE aspect that you guys aren't thinking about is that when you have scrubs playing with a star they will defer to the detriment of the team, but good players who are more equal in talent will not defer as much and they will play the game the right way. Especially if you have guards who can make things happen with the ball. That dynamic is what was missing when Melo was playing. It won't be the case next year when Phil upgrades the talent on the roster.

so if (a) he has enough talent around him he won't be selfish but (b) in the meantime he will always have lesser talent defer to him even when (c) we all know he doesn't make others around him better?

poor guy just can't win

This is what every team does to the knicks, it's such a easy offense to defend because by the 3rd qtr it becomes so predictable, you can defend it with your eyes close.

Thats why I kill fisher every time, because he stays with it no matter what, but every so often when he doesn't, we win the fckng game.

smackeddog wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:The Sixers put pressure on the triangle offense and the Knicks got flustered, committing 20 turnovers.

This is what every team does to the knicks, it's such a easy offense to defend because by the 3rd qtr it becomes so predictable, you can defend it with your eyes close.

Thats why I kill fisher every time, because he stays with it no matter what, but every so often when he doesn't, we win the fckng game.

Of course our players talent level has nothing to do with it.

Of course the level of talent matters, that's why the coach should adjust to his roster, how many times we have to go through this.

Let me dummy it down, If your system is run and gun, and your pg is Calderone, do you still trying and run or do you adjust to your starting PG?

There's no excuse for any coach in any sport to not have his team not playing hard team ball(majority of our loses since the trade have been blow outs) 99.9% of the time. You don't need talent to play hard, and fisher in his own words stated, he has hard time understanding why these guys have to be motivated at this level. A good coach plays the guys the work hard and practice hard, fisher plays his entire roster no matter what. That's not setting a good example.

Stop running the triangle until you can get the guys who can run it, focus on building these kids confidence.

smackeddog wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:The Sixers put pressure on the triangle offense and the Knicks got flustered, committing 20 turnovers.

This is what every team does to the knicks, it's such a easy offense to defend because by the 3rd qtr it becomes so predictable, you can defend it with your eyes close.

Thats why I kill fisher every time, because he stays with it no matter what, but every so often when he doesn't, we win the fckng game.

Of course our players talent level has nothing to do with it.

Of course the level of talent matters, that's why the coach should adjust to his roster, how many times we have to go through this.

Let me dummy it down, If your system is run and gun, and your pg is Calderone, do you still trying and run or do you adjust to your starting PG?

There's no excuse for any coach in any sport to not have his team not playing hard team ball(majority of our loses since the trade have been blow outs) 99.9% of the time. You don't need talent to play hard, and fisher in his own words stated, he has hard time understanding why these guys have to be motivated at this level. A good coach plays the guys the work hard and practice hard, fisher plays his entire roster no matter what. That's not setting a good example.

Stop running the triangle until you can get the guys who can run it, focus on building these kids confidence.

We keep running the triangle because we are trying to establish it. That's the priority this season, not winning. I don't get what's so hard to understand, unless you're one of those people who thinks we need to win as many games as possible and screw up our draft.

Yes and besides it's the lack of enough players who are able to create against pressure that is the limiting factor and not the Triangle. The more players we have who can create their own offense the better the team will be, but right now we don't have a lot of those kinds of players so of course the Triangle looks lame at times. That's a talent thing and not a scheme thing.

RonRon wrote:

nixluva wrote:

dk7th wrote:

nixluva wrote:You guys are only looking at Melo as he is with not enough talent and players that don't fit the system. You have to imagine how he'd play with more quality players on the team with him. In that circumstance he's not going to be a selfish player. I'm not looking for Melo to be a PG. He simply needs to work in the flow of the offense which really isn't hard considering how he likes to play is pretty much set as an option in this system.

Also one HUGE aspect that you guys aren't thinking about is that when you have scrubs playing with a star they will defer to the detriment of the team, but good players who are more equal in talent will not defer as much and they will play the game the right way. Especially if you have guards who can make things happen with the ball. That dynamic is what was missing when Melo was playing. It won't be the case next year when Phil upgrades the talent on the roster.

so if (a) he has enough talent around him he won't be selfish but (b) in the meantime he will always have lesser talent defer to him even when (c) we all know he doesn't make others around him better?

poor guy just can't win

a) The so called selfishness comes from wanting to win and if his teammates can't play, he'll feel he has to do more himself. Most star players have the exact same response in similar situations. With better players Melo will have more trust and that trust will be rewarded as opposed to watching guys miss easy shots or pass up open shots.

b) When you put good players on the team they'll take the shots they should and not pass up good scoring opportunities like Jose, Acy, Early, Prigs etc. It makes a huge difference and this offense leads to spreading the ball around and everyone touching the ball. You put good players in the same spots and they'll take advantage of the openings in this offense.

c) Melo doesn't have to directly "make others better". He's been part of a team that went to the WCF's and with the right players there's no reason we can't do that in NY. The real issue has been that these teams haven't been that good or healthy. You need both. It's foolishness to think that we can't win if we put a good team together. Melo is not our biggest problem. Building a quality team is the main problem. Melo will pass the ball and with better teammates they'll convert those passes to more scores. Still he's not paid to be a PG. He's paid to score. I'd be happy if he simply scores efficiently.

While for much of CA's career, it was true, I think watching him this year, he has tried to change these habits
I question if he does in fact have the ability to be a quality facilitator, leader, defender, but I think he has been trying where as in the earlier years he was unwilling to do so
Willingness and having the ability to do so are completely 2 different things and he has shown that he was willing to do whatever was needed this year without the talent to execute it this year....

In the end, I do not think we can build a contender with him being our #1 piece at this salary, though another team can utilize him correctly and be contenders like the Rockets

I would much rather have a player like Draymond Green be handed the keys with his leadership and defensive abilities, having an affect on the development of our future/young guys on our team moving forward
Green is everything that CA isn't while he has the abilities to defend multiple pieces....

nixluva wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:The Sixers put pressure on the triangle offense and the Knicks got flustered, committing 20 turnovers.

This is what every team does to the knicks, it's such a easy offense to defend because by the 3rd qtr it becomes so predictable, you can defend it with your eyes close.

Thats why I kill fisher every time, because he stays with it no matter what, but every so often when he doesn't, we win the fckng game.

Of course our players talent level has nothing to do with it.

Of course the level of talent matters, that's why the coach should adjust to his roster, how many times we have to go through this.

Let me dummy it down, If your system is run and gun, and your pg is Calderone, do you still trying and run or do you adjust to your starting PG?

There's no excuse for any coach in any sport to not have his team not playing hard team ball(majority of our loses since the trade have been blow outs) 99.9% of the time. You don't need talent to play hard, and fisher in his own words stated, he has hard time understanding why these guys have to be motivated at this level. A good coach plays the guys the work hard and practice hard, fisher plays his entire roster no matter what. That's not setting a good example.

Stop running the triangle until you can get the guys who can run it, focus on building these kids confidence.

We keep running the triangle because we are trying to establish it. That's the priority this season, not winning. I don't get what's so hard to understand, unless you're one of those people who thinks we need to win as many games as possible and screw up our draft.

Yes and besides it's the lack of enough players who are able to create against pressure that is the limiting factor and not the Triangle. The more players we have who can create their own offense the better the team will be, but right now we don't have a lot of those kinds of players so of course the Triangle looks lame at times. That's a talent thing and not a scheme thing.

Most teams don't run the triangle because of it's complexity - not because they and their players can't implement it, but because most coaches don't have the luxury of implementing an offense that can often take their players two full seasons to learn.

Still, a lot of sets found in the triangle are "borrowed" by coaches at every level.

Conceptually, the triangle actually quite simple - all players on the strong side orient themselves into a triangular formation. These players can then pass, post, shoot, or even dribble-drive for profit:

The complexity comes from:

the myriad methods players can use to initiate the triangle
the variety of options players have from any point on the floor - each player on the floor must a) know what they're supposed to do and b) read the rest of the team to make sure that everyone's on the same page

When it works, it works incredibly well...but so do a lot of other offensive systems. As great as the triangle is, any system can result in wins with the right coaching and personnel.

Speaking of the right personnel, that's another challenge with the triangle. To be optimally effective, you need big men who are great at passing, a variety of post players, and a team full of shooters. If you look at the Lakers squads that run the triangle in the modern era, they had above-average post players in Shaq and Gasol, above-average shooters at nearly every position, and excellent passers in Kobe, Fisher, Gasol, Shaq, etc.

Finally, some people say that the triangle died at the NBA level when Tex Winter (it's inventor) became too old to teach it. While I think this is pessimistic , Winter advised Phil Jackson on triangle implementation for nearly his entire career, and Winter was the undisputed triangle expert.

Suffice to say, most teams don't run the triangle because it takes time to learn it, and time is one thing most pro coaches don't have. If a coach doesn't wrack up easy wins because the players are still working thru the offense, he's in danger of getting fired.

Some additional reading:

Great review of the triangle's fundamentals: Triangle Offense, Coach's Clipboard Playbook

A solid article about the triangle back when SI and CNN were doing decent work: Tex Winter's famed triangle offense is out of favor in NBA

Written 3 Jan, 2014. 4,185 views. Asked to answer by Matt Brenner.
Upvote25
Downvote
Comment
More Answers Below. Related Questions
Why don't NBA offenses attempt double screens/picks more often?
How has Phil Jackson been able to successfully run the Triangle Offense for so many years?
2012-13 NBA Season: How would the Lakers have been different this year if Phil Jackson was their coach?
William Petroff
William Petroff
14 upvotes by Marc Bodnick, Jonathan Brill, Jason Lancaster, (more)
For starters:
As Dave Hogg and Jonathan Brill have already mentioned, it's not like the Triangle Offense took a bunch of schlubs and made them into a championship-caliber team; each one of Phil Jackson's teams were buoyed by two (eventual) Hall-of-Famers, surrounded with a host of quality role-players. So, we don't really know how much of it is the "system" and how much it is the players in the system. If the Atlanta Hawks go out and run the triangle and absolutely destroy everyone in the league, then maybe this becomes a different discussion, but I don't really see that happening.
The triangle is hard for players. It's an incredibly hard system to run because, most of the time, it relies on a player's ability to read the defense and react to it. This can leave a team trying to run the offense incredibly susceptible to failure if they don't have good five-man units that can run the thing. It's also predicated on a lot of off-ball movement and timing, which, given the way the game is played at the lower levels, are skill-sets that many players don't really develop to the degree they need to in order to effectively run the system.
Being a coach at the elite level is a challenging business and a position that always comes with its fair share of critics (of both the educated and uneducated variety). As such, coaches often choose the (perceived) "safe" path, meaning that the league is rife with mimicry. Part of the reason that nobody runs the triangle is because nobody runs the triangle; if someone did and it didn't work, then the coach is often "stupid" for pursuing a "bad strategy", whereas a coach can deflect some of that criticism when losing while utilizing a conventional approach. It's also a business where, by the time you reach that level, you're typically very ingrained in a particular way of doing things. Mike D'antoni runs a free-flowing, offensive-centric system because that's who he is and that's what he's developed over the years; after doing something for so long, a lot of times you don't really know how to do something else.
It's also a hard system to coach. Not in the sense that it's a difficult system to teach-- though I suspect it is --as much as it's a hard system for a coach to get used to using given how little control over the system is maintained on the sidelines during a game. The coach can't always be calling plays in from the sideline (since there really aren't many), so a coach cedes some level of control that he might otherwise have to his players and not being in control isn't always a pleasant prospect for a lot of coaches.

Dave Hogg, Sportswriter for more than 20 years
25 upvotes by Jonathan Brill, Sella Rafaeli, Aaron Ellis, (more)
Because the triangle offense isn't particularly revolutionary on its own. It is an offensive system that maximizes the contributions of a star wing (Michael Jordan or Kobe Bryant), especially when they can play off another All-Star player (Scottie Pippen, Shaquille O'Neal or Pau Gasol). If you don't have two superstars, one of whom happens to be one of the greatest pure srers in NBA history, it's just another offense.

Written 3 Jan, 2014. 1,467 views. Asked to answer by Matt Brenner.
Upvote25
Downvote
Comment
Matt Johnson
Matt Johnson, Analyst, Project Runner, & Senior Mod... (more)
9 upvotes by Marc Bodnick, Jonathan Brill, Quora User, (more)
One note I'll add to the good answers you already see here is that it depends on the brains of the players in a way more offenses don't. Now to be clear, by that I don't actually mean "complexity".

Ask a player like Ron Artest who never seemed to get the scheme even after years, and sure he'll talk about it like it's complexity is insane:

“See, I can’t really understand the Triangle [offense],” he admits. “There’s 1,000 plays in the Triangle. It’s such a challenge. I get so frustrated about it, I have to call my psychiatrist. So I just stay in my one spot in the corner. If I leave my spot, I get yelled at. Phil’s gonna say, ‘What are you doing over there?!?’ So I just don’t move.”

Ron Artest doesn’t really get the triangle offense — or how to be vegan

But that's impossible to square with what you see when you watch Pau Gasol join the team. With Gasol it was like he already knew the offense without being taught anything. I don't care who you are, if the scheme has a lot of plays, it will take you a while to look that comfortable.

So how is it that the Artest can never learn it, but for Gasol it's actually easier than a typical scheme?

It's because the scheme operates more like a set of guiding preferences. Players have to read and react, and in this league full of insane bodies, there are a lot of players who can't do that.

Additionally, if you have one brilliant playmaker on the team, it would be a waste to use the Triangle. Why take the thinking away from your best thinker?

So, the obvious time to try to use something like the Triangle is when you've got a team full of really smart players but not floor general of outlier brilliance. It's not really a thing you can count on happening.

Of course this makes one ask the question:

Well then why did it work so well for Phil?

First and foremost because he had great talent to work with, which would have looked great no matter what (and when he didn't have that talent, it didn't look great).

I don't mean to demean Phil's coaching because I think he did a great job on a number of levels, but it's a huge mistake to think "11 rings can't be a coincidence".

Jackson wasn't seen as the greatest genius in the game when he was in Chicago. He was a solid coach with great talent to work with, and by the time he was done then, he had the kind of clout that only comes from winning titles.

Jackson was the right coach for the Lakers in no small part because he was someone who could come in and bend Shaq & Kobe's ears. Were he a new coach at the time - even if he behaved identically - it wouldn't have worked the same way at all.

What about the notion that it was the Triangle that made Jordan play "the right way"? Mythology. The best thing about the Jackson Bulls offense was its rebounding, which had very little to do with how Jordan changed his game to play in the Triangle, and everything to do with acquiring rebounding talent and letting them focus on that while the guys on the perimeter focused on the actual attack.

Of course one shouldn't take that to imply that Jackson was attempting to force some rigid system on his players and misguidedly attributing all his success to this system. With "the Triangle" Jordan became less ball dominant while not less impactful and Pippen was given more room to blossom, and also with "the Triangle" he molded a scheme that worked superbly around Shaq, and as mentioned with "the Triangle" Pau Gasol sometimes looks like an artist out there. It's not that it's not real, it's just that not some rigid object. It's a guiding principle whose focus can be adjusted.

Written 3 Jan, 2014. 863 views.
Upvote9
Downvote
Comment1
Jonathan Brill
Jonathan Brill, Writer Relations at Quora
10 upvotes by Sella Rafaeli, Justin Benson, Matt Brenner, (more)
Its not clear the triangle offense is that great. Its certainly flexible and given the talent Phil and his staff had to work with, he made great use of it. But we'll never know if another more standard offense wouldn't have been just as good a fit for two of the best players in NBA history and their very strong supporting casts. If anything, the triangle seemed to cause huge problems for the talent the Lakers had to work with in their years with Pau and Bynum.

Part of the problem is that looking at the championship teams only isn't necessarily a great indicator of the best offense. If you really wanted to look at offense, you'd want to control for the coach and the talent and measure points scored across all games during a season. When you think about how close the Spurs came to beating the Heat in the 2013 championship, you probably wouldn't want to draw many conclusive distinctions from the Heat's come from behind surprising victory.

Written 3 Jan, 2014. 697 views. Asked to answer by Matt Brenner.
Upvote10
Downvote
Comment
Ryan Struck
Ryan Struck
2 upvotes by Jonathan Brill and Matt Brenner.
I think people miss what the beauty of the Triangle Offense creates, before you even begin to run the many OPTIONS (not plays)

With the Ball on the WING, player in the POST, player in the CORNER for the sideline TRIANGLE. Player at the Point, creates another TRIANGLE between the WING, POST & POINT. In these 4 positions, all defenders are in DENIAL of their man, and therefore the WING with the ball, is able to see where to go with the Ball - All players are ONE pass away to receive the ball.

The fifth player, is in the most important position - The WEAK WING/POST (He is holding space on the weakside). In the WEAKSIDE POST, his defender potentially could play HELP defense, however if he plays HELP, this creates an easy passing lane when the WEAKSIDE POST flashes to the STRONG ELBOW. If his defender plays him tight and goes to the WING, this creates more driving lanes, as he should be in HELP when his player is on the WING. In the WEAKSIDE POST, this creates the 3rd TRIANGLE, between the STRONGSIDE & WEAKSIDE POST players and the player at the POINT.

With every player One on One with their man, the ball is passed to the OPEN man. Depending on where that pass goes, determines the actions of the players.

For example I teach an OPTION, where the Ball goes into the Post. Now the CORNER speed cuts and clears to opposite corner, WING goes over POST & screens WEAK POST. The TRIANGLE can be reset on the other side and another set of options are presented, depending upon where the next pass goes.

OPTIONS for the Cut from CORNER & WING, they could Split cut, WING goes low, CORNER goes over and he becomes the screener. WING could set what Tex Winter calls a 'Rebound Screen' (Down screen) CORNER goes over, WING rolls. What ever option the players choose, depends on how the Defense plays them on that possession.

The beauty about those cuts I've just explained. As soon as the ball hits the POST, how many defenders do you think will turn the head and look at the ball. When that defender does, he is beat on a cut.

Remember the Pistons double teaming Jordan, in the TRIANGLE you can't double team, you get punished.

Currently I teach the TRIANGLE offense to Under 11's, 13's, 15's, 17's & Seniors. As I have been with my Under 13's for a few years now, and have taught them how to read the defense, they are starting to put the pieces of the Offense together.

Written 7 Jan. 228 views.
Upvote2
Downvote
Comment
Quora User
Quora User, We don't know what the internet is fo... (more)
6 upvotes by Jonathan Brill, Marc Bodnick, Inigo Sarmiento, (more)
Defense wins championships. One offense is as good as another, as long as it gets the ball in the hands of your best players. The fact that Jordan, Pippen, James, Wade, and Bryant were/are all NBA defensive players matters more than their offense ever did.

Nix you can't run this system without the right talent and coach, and it's been documented to death. Which is why it baffles the hell out of me as to why are we trying to force it on a bunch of weak ass talent. Players don't want to think that hard when playing a game, and if the avg player take 2 yrs to learn it, whats going to happen next yr, and why did phil trade his best players after 2 months because they couldn't get it.

So fisher is going to look like a bad coach if he doesn't have top tier talent..

knickscity wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:The Sixers put pressure on the triangle offense and the Knicks got flustered, committing 20 turnovers.

This is what every team does to the knicks, it's such a easy offense to defend because by the 3rd qtr it becomes so predictable, you can defend it with your eyes close.

Thats why I kill fisher every time, because he stays with it no matter what, but every so often when he doesn't, we win the fckng game.

Of course our players talent level has nothing to do with it.

Of course the level of talent matters, that's why the coach should adjust to his roster, how many times we have to go through this.

Let me dummy it down, If your system is run and gun, and your pg is Calderone, do you still trying and run or do you adjust to your starting PG?

There's no excuse for any coach in any sport to not have his team not playing hard team ball(majority of our loses since the trade have been blow outs) 99.9% of the time. You don't need talent to play hard, and fisher in his own words stated, he has hard time understanding why these guys have to be motivated at this level. A good coach plays the guys the work hard and practice hard, fisher plays his entire roster no matter what. That's not setting a good example.

Stop running the triangle until you can get the guys who can run it, focus on building these kids confidence.

We keep running the triangle because we are trying to establish it. That's the priority this season, not winning. I don't get what's so hard to understand, unless you're one of those people who thinks we need to win as many games as possible and screw up our draft.

Yes and besides it's the lack of enough players who are able to create against pressure that is the limiting factor and not the Triangle. The more players we have who can create their own offense the better the team will be, but right now we don't have a lot of those kinds of players so of course the Triangle looks lame at times. That's a talent thing and not a scheme thing.

Most teams don't run the triangle because of it's complexity - not because they and their players can't implement it, but because most coaches don't have the luxury of implementing an offense that can often take their players two full seasons to learn.

Still, a lot of sets found in the triangle are "borrowed" by coaches at every level.

Conceptually, the triangle actually quite simple - all players on the strong side orient themselves into a triangular formation. These players can then pass, post, shoot, or even dribble-drive for profit:

The complexity comes from:

the myriad methods players can use to initiate the triangle
the variety of options players have from any point on the floor - each player on the floor must a) know what they're supposed to do and b) read the rest of the team to make sure that everyone's on the same page

When it works, it works incredibly well...but so do a lot of other offensive systems. As great as the triangle is, any system can result in wins with the right coaching and personnel.

Speaking of the right personnel, that's another challenge with the triangle. To be optimally effective, you need big men who are great at passing, a variety of post players, and a team full of shooters. If you look at the Lakers squads that run the triangle in the modern era, they had above-average post players in Shaq and Gasol, above-average shooters at nearly every position, and excellent passers in Kobe, Fisher, Gasol, Shaq, etc.

Finally, some people say that the triangle died at the NBA level when Tex Winter (it's inventor) became too old to teach it. While I think this is pessimistic , Winter advised Phil Jackson on triangle implementation for nearly his entire career, and Winter was the undisputed triangle expert.

Suffice to say, most teams don't run the triangle because it takes time to learn it, and time is one thing most pro coaches don't have. If a coach doesn't wrack up easy wins because the players are still working thru the offense, he's in danger of getting fired.

Some additional reading:

Great review of the triangle's fundamentals: Triangle Offense, Coach's Clipboard Playbook

A solid article about the triangle back when SI and CNN were doing decent work: Tex Winter's famed triangle offense is out of favor in NBA

Written 3 Jan, 2014. 4,185 views. Asked to answer by Matt Brenner.
Upvote25
Downvote
Comment
More Answers Below. Related Questions
Why don't NBA offenses attempt double screens/picks more often?
How has Phil Jackson been able to successfully run the Triangle Offense for so many years?
2012-13 NBA Season: How would the Lakers have been different this year if Phil Jackson was their coach?
William Petroff
William Petroff
14 upvotes by Marc Bodnick, Jonathan Brill, Jason Lancaster, (more)
For starters:
As Dave Hogg and Jonathan Brill have already mentioned, it's not like the Triangle Offense took a bunch of schlubs and made them into a championship-caliber team; each one of Phil Jackson's teams were buoyed by two (eventual) Hall-of-Famers, surrounded with a host of quality role-players. So, we don't really know how much of it is the "system" and how much it is the players in the system. If the Atlanta Hawks go out and run the triangle and absolutely destroy everyone in the league, then maybe this becomes a different discussion, but I don't really see that happening.
The triangle is hard for players. It's an incredibly hard system to run because, most of the time, it relies on a player's ability to read the defense and react to it. This can leave a team trying to run the offense incredibly susceptible to failure if they don't have good five-man units that can run the thing. It's also predicated on a lot of off-ball movement and timing, which, given the way the game is played at the lower levels, are skill-sets that many players don't really develop to the degree they need to in order to effectively run the system.
Being a coach at the elite level is a challenging business and a position that always comes with its fair share of critics (of both the educated and uneducated variety). As such, coaches often choose the (perceived) "safe" path, meaning that the league is rife with mimicry. Part of the reason that nobody runs the triangle is because nobody runs the triangle; if someone did and it didn't work, then the coach is often "stupid" for pursuing a "bad strategy", whereas a coach can deflect some of that criticism when losing while utilizing a conventional approach. It's also a business where, by the time you reach that level, you're typically very ingrained in a particular way of doing things. Mike D'antoni runs a free-flowing, offensive-centric system because that's who he is and that's what he's developed over the years; after doing something for so long, a lot of times you don't really know how to do something else.
It's also a hard system to coach. Not in the sense that it's a difficult system to teach-- though I suspect it is --as much as it's a hard system for a coach to get used to using given how little control over the system is maintained on the sidelines during a game. The coach can't always be calling plays in from the sideline (since there really aren't many), so a coach cedes some level of control that he might otherwise have to his players and not being in control isn't always a pleasant prospect for a lot of coaches.

Dave Hogg, Sportswriter for more than 20 years
25 upvotes by Jonathan Brill, Sella Rafaeli, Aaron Ellis, (more)
Because the triangle offense isn't particularly revolutionary on its own. It is an offensive system that maximizes the contributions of a star wing (Michael Jordan or Kobe Bryant), especially when they can play off another All-Star player (Scottie Pippen, Shaquille O'Neal or Pau Gasol). If you don't have two superstars, one of whom happens to be one of the greatest pure srers in NBA history, it's just another offense.

Written 3 Jan, 2014. 1,467 views. Asked to answer by Matt Brenner.
Upvote25
Downvote
Comment
Matt Johnson
Matt Johnson, Analyst, Project Runner, & Senior Mod... (more)
9 upvotes by Marc Bodnick, Jonathan Brill, Quora User, (more)
One note I'll add to the good answers you already see here is that it depends on the brains of the players in a way more offenses don't. Now to be clear, by that I don't actually mean "complexity".

Ask a player like Ron Artest who never seemed to get the scheme even after years, and sure he'll talk about it like it's complexity is insane:

“See, I can’t really understand the Triangle [offense],” he admits. “There’s 1,000 plays in the Triangle. It’s such a challenge. I get so frustrated about it, I have to call my psychiatrist. So I just stay in my one spot in the corner. If I leave my spot, I get yelled at. Phil’s gonna say, ‘What are you doing over there?!?’ So I just don’t move.”

Ron Artest doesn’t really get the triangle offense — or how to be vegan

But that's impossible to square with what you see when you watch Pau Gasol join the team. With Gasol it was like he already knew the offense without being taught anything. I don't care who you are, if the scheme has a lot of plays, it will take you a while to look that comfortable.

So how is it that the Artest can never learn it, but for Gasol it's actually easier than a typical scheme?

It's because the scheme operates more like a set of guiding preferences. Players have to read and react, and in this league full of insane bodies, there are a lot of players who can't do that.

Additionally, if you have one brilliant playmaker on the team, it would be a waste to use the Triangle. Why take the thinking away from your best thinker?

So, the obvious time to try to use something like the Triangle is when you've got a team full of really smart players but not floor general of outlier brilliance. It's not really a thing you can count on happening.

Of course this makes one ask the question:

Well then why did it work so well for Phil?

First and foremost because he had great talent to work with, which would have looked great no matter what (and when he didn't have that talent, it didn't look great).

I don't mean to demean Phil's coaching because I think he did a great job on a number of levels, but it's a huge mistake to think "11 rings can't be a coincidence".

Jackson wasn't seen as the greatest genius in the game when he was in Chicago. He was a solid coach with great talent to work with, and by the time he was done then, he had the kind of clout that only comes from winning titles.

Jackson was the right coach for the Lakers in no small part because he was someone who could come in and bend Shaq & Kobe's ears. Were he a new coach at the time - even if he behaved identically - it wouldn't have worked the same way at all.

What about the notion that it was the Triangle that made Jordan play "the right way"? Mythology. The best thing about the Jackson Bulls offense was its rebounding, which had very little to do with how Jordan changed his game to play in the Triangle, and everything to do with acquiring rebounding talent and letting them focus on that while the guys on the perimeter focused on the actual attack.

Of course one shouldn't take that to imply that Jackson was attempting to force some rigid system on his players and misguidedly attributing all his success to this system. With "the Triangle" Jordan became less ball dominant while not less impactful and Pippen was given more room to blossom, and also with "the Triangle" he molded a scheme that worked superbly around Shaq, and as mentioned with "the Triangle" Pau Gasol sometimes looks like an artist out there. It's not that it's not real, it's just that not some rigid object. It's a guiding principle whose focus can be adjusted.

Written 3 Jan, 2014. 863 views.
Upvote9
Downvote
Comment1
Jonathan Brill
Jonathan Brill, Writer Relations at Quora
10 upvotes by Sella Rafaeli, Justin Benson, Matt Brenner, (more)
Its not clear the triangle offense is that great. Its certainly flexible and given the talent Phil and his staff had to work with, he made great use of it. But we'll never know if another more standard offense wouldn't have been just as good a fit for two of the best players in NBA history and their very strong supporting casts. If anything, the triangle seemed to cause huge problems for the talent the Lakers had to work with in their years with Pau and Bynum.

Part of the problem is that looking at the championship teams only isn't necessarily a great indicator of the best offense. If you really wanted to look at offense, you'd want to control for the coach and the talent and measure points scored across all games during a season. When you think about how close the Spurs came to beating the Heat in the 2013 championship, you probably wouldn't want to draw many conclusive distinctions from the Heat's come from behind surprising victory.

Written 3 Jan, 2014. 697 views. Asked to answer by Matt Brenner.
Upvote10
Downvote
Comment
Ryan Struck
Ryan Struck
2 upvotes by Jonathan Brill and Matt Brenner.
I think people miss what the beauty of the Triangle Offense creates, before you even begin to run the many OPTIONS (not plays)

With the Ball on the WING, player in the POST, player in the CORNER for the sideline TRIANGLE. Player at the Point, creates another TRIANGLE between the WING, POST & POINT. In these 4 positions, all defenders are in DENIAL of their man, and therefore the WING with the ball, is able to see where to go with the Ball - All players are ONE pass away to receive the ball.

The fifth player, is in the most important position - The WEAK WING/POST (He is holding space on the weakside). In the WEAKSIDE POST, his defender potentially could play HELP defense, however if he plays HELP, this creates an easy passing lane when the WEAKSIDE POST flashes to the STRONG ELBOW. If his defender plays him tight and goes to the WING, this creates more driving lanes, as he should be in HELP when his player is on the WING. In the WEAKSIDE POST, this creates the 3rd TRIANGLE, between the STRONGSIDE & WEAKSIDE POST players and the player at the POINT.

With every player One on One with their man, the ball is passed to the OPEN man. Depending on where that pass goes, determines the actions of the players.

For example I teach an OPTION, where the Ball goes into the Post. Now the CORNER speed cuts and clears to opposite corner, WING goes over POST & screens WEAK POST. The TRIANGLE can be reset on the other side and another set of options are presented, depending upon where the next pass goes.

OPTIONS for the Cut from CORNER & WING, they could Split cut, WING goes low, CORNER goes over and he becomes the screener. WING could set what Tex Winter calls a 'Rebound Screen' (Down screen) CORNER goes over, WING rolls. What ever option the players choose, depends on how the Defense plays them on that possession.

The beauty about those cuts I've just explained. As soon as the ball hits the POST, how many defenders do you think will turn the head and look at the ball. When that defender does, he is beat on a cut.

Remember the Pistons double teaming Jordan, in the TRIANGLE you can't double team, you get punished.

Currently I teach the TRIANGLE offense to Under 11's, 13's, 15's, 17's & Seniors. As I have been with my Under 13's for a few years now, and have taught them how to read the defense, they are starting to put the pieces of the Offense together.

Written 7 Jan. 228 views.
Upvote2
Downvote
Comment
Quora User
Quora User, We don't know what the internet is fo... (more)
6 upvotes by Jonathan Brill, Marc Bodnick, Inigo Sarmiento, (more)
Defense wins championships. One offense is as good as another, as long as it gets the ball in the hands of your best players. The fact that Jordan, Pippen, James, Wade, and Bryant were/are all NBA defensive players matters more than their offense ever did.

Nix you can't run this system without the right talent and coach, and it's been documented to death. Which is why it baffles the hell out of me as to why are we trying to force it on a bunch of weak ass talent. Players don't want to think that hard when playing a game, and if the avg player take 2 yrs to learn it, whats going to happen next yr, and why did phil trade his best players after 2 months because they couldn't get it.

So fisher is going to look like a bad coach if he doesn't have top tier talent..

It's being implemented because thats all Fisher knows. At this point I dont think think Phil is triangle married considering some of the trade targets he was reportedly looking at.

Fisher was in the NBA 17 yrs, 5 in which he played in the TRIANGLE, I find it hard to believe that's all he knows, but since the system doesn't involve almost no play calling, he was put here as a puppet. Even when phil coach, he had the luxury of having the best players in the history of the game, he very rarely bark orders, and rarely call timeouts when teams would go on a run against them. I mostly saw phil whistle orders and point.