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.

Do you see JR Smith still playing for this team (or any team) right now? No. Because he is a stupid moron. Shump is a terrific defender, but not too bright on the other end. Those guys (et al) are gone. Why? Because simpletons are not going to learn the nuances of the Triangle.

But Phil went and got us some high IQ players. And he does NOT expect them to run the Triangle like Kobe/Shaq or MJ/Bulls did by next season. He is building a team to win in a few years, to cultivate an attitude of winning and the skill sets to thrive in the SYSTEM.

So get off your drama-queen-infused high horse and try to understand what Phil is doing (and by extension what Nix is talking about).

Moonangie 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.

Do you see JR Smith still playing for this team (or any team) right now? No. Because he is a stupid moron. Shump is a terrific defender, but not too bright on the other end. Those guys (et al) are gone. Why? Because simpletons are not going to learn the nuances of the Triangle.

But Phil went and got us some high IQ players. And he does NOT expect them to run the Triangle like Kobe/Shaq or MJ/Bulls did by next season. He is building a team to win in a few years, to cultivate an attitude of winning and the skill sets to thrive in the SYSTEM.

So get off your drama-queen-infused high horse and try to understand what Phil is doing (and by extension what Nix is talking about).

These are the offensive principles that Tex and Phil believed in and always look to teach.

Seven Principles of the Sound Offense

An effective offense, to my way of thinking, features the following dimensions.

1. Penetration. Players must penetrate the defense, and the best way to do this is the fast break, because basketball is a full-court game,
from baseline to baseline.

2. Spacing. I am a fanatic about how players distribute themselves on the offensive end of the court. They must space themselves in a way that
makes it most difficult to defend, trap, and help. Players must align a certain number of feet apart. In high school, I’d recommend 12 to 15 feet
spacing, in college, 15 to18 feet, and in the NBA, 15 to 20 feet. Proper spacing not only exposes individual defensive players’ vulnerabilities,
but also ensures that every time the defense tries to trap, an offensive player will be open.

3. Ball and player movements. Players must move, and must move the ball, with a purpose. Effective off-the-ball activity is much more important
than most fans and players think because they’re so used to watching only the movement of the ball and the player in possession of it. But there
is only one ball and there are five players, meaning most players will have the ball in their hands 20 percent or less of the time the team is in
possession of the ball.

4. Options for the ball handler. The more options a smart player has to attack a defender, the more successful that offensive player will be. When
teammates are all moving to positions to free themselves (or another teammate with a pick), the ball handler’s choices are vastly increased.

5. Offensive rebounding and defensive balance. On all shots we take, players must go strong for the rebound while retaining court balance and
awareness to prevent the opponent’s fast break.

6. Versatile positioning. The offense must offer to any player the chance to fill any spot on the court, independent of the player’s role. All
positions should be interchangeable.

7. Use individual talents. It only makes sense for an offense to allow a team to take advantage of the skill sets of its best players. This doesn’t
preclude the focus on team play that is emphasized in the six other principles, but it does acknowledge that some individuals have certain types and
degrees of talent, and an offense should accentuate those assets. Michael Jordan taught me this.

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.

The Triangle isn't the only system that uses the philosophies that are listed above
However, choosing to run an OFFENSE without the players to execute it was the result of last years team
Not taking to account that we had low IQ players with players looking for extensions that didn't have the abilities to initiate the system through the POST and capable of facilitating
While with many poor defenders, it was a horrible idea to start our season with the roster we had

No matter how you spin it, Phil Jackson quit ON EVERY TEAM he has won a ring with

1- 1st time with Bulls/Jordan's final game as a Bull

2- Came back 2years later on The Lakers with the MOST DOMINANT player in Shaq and another HOF talent with skills similar to Jordan then left again, once after Shaq was traded despite still have Kobe,

3- As they rebuilt/collected assets and made a trade for Gasol, came back with Kobe/Bynum/Gasol/Odom, and the final time when Odom/Gasol/MWP were declining, when he felt they were going to have players that were no longer able to contribute in a high level, 3 times, making his 11 rings very misleading

Until he had DOMINANT players and versatile skilled players, he chose to walk away rather than sticking with the roster, a reason why Poppavich >>> than Phil Jackson in my opinion
He changed philosophies and developed talents on his roster and changed the philosophy of his system with his roster and how the league evolved

He did win MANY RINGS but he manipulated his STATS and %, unlike Poppavich who stayed on The Spurs and made adjustments/development of their roster/system along the way...
Phil Jackson's achievements are not even close to Poppavich's because of those reasons
However, NixLuva, pays too much credit to THE TRIANGLE with those % despite the obvious reasons
Coach K, recently said the same thing about Phil Jackson and The Triangle, he won because he had ALL STAR TALENT, HOF players, not because of Tex Winter's system

http://www.complex.com/sports/2015/07/mike-krzyzewski-says-phil-jackson-offense-only-effective-because-michael-jordan-kobe-bryant

Mike Krzyzewski Says Phil Jackson's Offense Was Only Effective Because of Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant: "The Triangle Didn't Win Crap!"

We don't like to kick Knicks fans while they're down (no, really, guys!), but it's getting increasingly difficult not to at this point. Their team just drafted a guy that none of them actually wanted. Their star player is getting criticized by everyone from Instagram users to female tennis players. Their team president Phil Jackson hasn't been able to make any splashy signings today. And according to legendary Duke head coach Mike Krzyzewski, Jackson's heralded triangle offense isn't going to work in New York City unless the Knicks are able to land a player like Michael Jordan or Kobe Bryant (which could be a problem!).

The New York Times ran a super long feature story on the triangle recently. It's worth a read if you're still confused as to why the triangle has worked so well over the years. But in the story, Coach K was asked why he never tried to implement the triangle, and he said that it's because the triangle isn't necessarily all it's cracked up to be.

"The triangle didn't win crap!" he told the NYT. "Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant! Whatever offense I run, that offense didn't do it. Winning means you had the caliber of players capable of winning a championship."

Coach K then went on to say that he has "nothing against the triangle." But he also said that while it's a solid offense, "it's a lot better if Jordan loves it or Kobe loves it."

Oh, and as if that wasn't depressing enough for all the Knicks fans out there, he also stated the obvious. "The triangle's not working in New York, by the way," he said.

Welp. Apparently, Coach K is not above kicking Knicks fans while they're down. Sorry, guys.

Send all complaints, compliments, and tips to sportstips@complex.com.

[via New York Times]

H1AND1 wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:How many titles did Kobe and Jordan win playing different systems and for different coaches?

How many titles did other stars win in their early 20's? Kobe/Shaq/Jordan all happened to be around 27-30+ when they won their chips with Phil, as is the case with most stars who tend to become better well rounded players as they age into their prime. How much was right place right time and how much was directly related to Phil and the Triangle will always be debateable. But the fact remains that the triangle has literally ONLY had success when a generational type talent has been the centerpiece.

CrushAlot wrote:

H1AND1 wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:How many titles did Kobe and Jordan win playing different systems and for different coaches?

How many titles did other stars win in their early 20's? Kobe/Shaq/Jordan all happened to be around 27-30+ when they won their chips with Phil, as is the case with most stars who tend to become better well rounded players as they age into their prime. How much was right place right time and how much was directly related to Phil and the Triangle will always be debateable. But the fact remains that the triangle has literally ONLY had success when a generational type talent has been the centerpiece.

The only title team that I can think of that didn't have a generational type talent is the Pistons. Are there others?

Well, as you said most teams who win have a star or two. My point was the age of said star. Its not often that _young_ stars win. They generally win their chips when they are in their late 20's or early 30's and beyond. My point was Phil took over the Bulls when Jordan was entering this age period and Shaq with the Lakers. Then he won with Kobe/Gasol at their respective primes.

Moonangie wrote:

H1AND1 wrote:

Moonangie 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.

Do you see JR Smith still playing for this team (or any team) right now? No. Because he is a stupid moron. Shump is a terrific defender, but not too bright on the other end. Those guys (et al) are gone. Why? Because simpletons are not going to learn the nuances of the Triangle.

But Phil went and got us some high IQ players. And he does NOT expect them to run the Triangle like Kobe/Shaq or MJ/Bulls did by next season. He is building a team to win in a few years, to cultivate an attitude of winning and the skill sets to thrive in the SYSTEM.

So get off your drama-queen-infused high horse and try to understand what Phil is doing (and by extension what Nix is talking about).

Because "understanding what Phil is doing" and me not having high hopes for what he is doing personally are one in the same? Those two ideas are interchangeable or the first begets the second? How about you try not to get pissed off at someone for having a different opinion and/or having the temerity to question the job of a guy who is IN MY OPINION too much of a ideologue with the triangle. Will it work? Can it work? SURE, of course it can. I HOPE it works and the Knicks kick ass.

Isnt this a Knicks discussion board? Attacking someone for having an opinion is pretty wild. Im not some crazy Melo Hate stalker or a constant whiner. Im simply someone who has serious doubts about the triangle and Phil Jackson's legacy beyond a guy who while clearly talented also stepped in **** and had some of the greatest ballers of all time validate his offensive ideal. Sorry, bro, if you can't handle that.

I'm not attacking you at all. But your posts keep harping on how the Knicks are too limited to play the Triangle, and I just don't see it that way. The issue was the players, not the system. Yes, I am sold on the Triangle. It seems like a motion-offense built around the idea of reacting to the defense to get the best shot for an open man...basically a read-and-react system. That requires players with more brain cells than the "athletes" we had on this team (read: JR Smith, et al).

Phil is getting the right kind of players now, on affordable deals, to have a team that can succeed. He's not finished and won't be for some years. But he's steering the ship. New Yorkers are so impatient and always want to win "now". Well, that has been tried for a couple of decades without success. This is a better approach and regardless of the age of the offensive "system", it is proven to work with the right sort of players. Melo is this sort of player. His deficiencies are on the defensive end of the court.

Well actually I wasn't trying to harp on it, Nix made a condescending post in reply to me implying that I didn't have the mental capacity to understand this or that and that got me a bit riled so sorry if I was over sensitive. It's just basketball this is just a message board. Right? Whatever I'm over it.

So back to the triangle. I really hope you are right. I've always tended to lean more towards believing that the success of the triangle had more to do with Phils jacksons propensity to step in shhit with his personnel than the superiority of the offenses X's and O's itself. I guess now that the Knicks are Phil's to build and try to prove to the doubters out there that the offense is more than just Jordan and Shaq and Kobe will find out. I'm also a bit suspect of the idea that Phil is using the Knicks as a real life diorama in an attempt to show the basketball world he was right. But I'll set those feeling aside until more time as passed and we see what he actually does. I'm willing to give him more time before I make a
Judgement on him and his work here. It's only been a year.

One thing I'm sure we can agree on as Knicks fans first is that I HOPE to high heavens that it works and we as a team kick m0ther****ing ***! I and surely a fan of the smaller signings Phil has made this offseason and positively DELIGHTED that he didn't offer Monroe a max or cowtow to him just because it would save face. IMO Monroe is NOT a max player on a rebuilding team. Ok for a contender or a team with pieces in place like the Bucks, sure overpaying a bit for him makes way more sense. I was positive we would promise Monroe all the money in the MSG coffers in a desperate bid to score
This offseason. I'm very happy we simply went ahead with smaller signings for players that are moveable on short term contracts in an attempt to build an actual team and not the usual Knicks cobbling together a bunch of overpriced disgruntled vets or former stars with suspect knees.

Ok Derrick Williams was a reach but at least he is under 25 and has tremendous upside. He might not pan out but there is an actual reward to go along with the risk. Unlike a typical Knicks move like say acquiring Steve Francis for Ariza.

nixluva wrote:I pay a lot of attention to offenses. When we had MDA I bought a book of the plays he ran and his philosophy on the game. When I commented on it I was very clear on what I was taking about. I got Tex Winters play book and I pay particular attention to all the videos breaking down the offense and listen to everything that Phil has said about his philosophy as well. I read a lot. So when someone argues with me about those subjects and by their comments it's clear to me that they aren't that well versed on the offense it gets frustrating and that's when arguments happen.

Arguments happen when you tell people that they have some form of brain damage because they dont agree with you. Posters including myself have been telling you for years that its condescending and insulting. If you didnt begin a post by insulting a poster's ability to think, you wouldnt have to deal with posters pushing back.

nixluva wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

nixluva wrote:I pay a lot of attention to offenses. When we had MDA I bought a book of the plays he ran and his philosophy on the game. When I commented on it I was very clear on what I was taking about. I got Tex Winters play book and I pay particular attention to all the videos breaking down the offense and listen to everything that Phil has said about his philosophy as well. I read a lot. So when someone argues with me about those subjects and by their comments it's clear to me that they aren't that well versed on the offense it gets frustrating and that's when arguments happen.

Arguments happen when you tell people that they have some form of brain damage because they dont agree with you. Posters including myself have been telling you for years that its condescending and insulting. If you didnt begin a post by insulting a poster's ability to think, you wouldnt have to deal with posters pushing back.

I don't go out of my way to attack people. There are FAR more people attacking me than me posting anything attacking others. Still let's get back to the issue at hand. In this thread go back and look at the conversation and you'll see that I didn't attack anyone initially. I made my statements but didn't call you a name. H1AND1 make a snarky comment and after Crush responded I responded with a snarky comment but did not address anyone by name.

When I post I post facts. Most of my posts aren't just opinion but usually i'm posting stats or a sourced description of something to do with basketball. I like any human can go overboard from time to time in my response but most of the time I stick to the facts. Just go thru my posts in this thread and you'll that is the case.

Cant even acknowledge that you do this Nix. Just dont state or imply that a person is somehow mentally deficient because they dont agree with you and Im sure some of the grief you get from other posters will disappear. The choice is yours.

GustavBahler wrote:

nixluva wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

nixluva wrote:I pay a lot of attention to offenses. When we had MDA I bought a book of the plays he ran and his philosophy on the game. When I commented on it I was very clear on what I was taking about. I got Tex Winters play book and I pay particular attention to all the videos breaking down the offense and listen to everything that Phil has said about his philosophy as well. I read a lot. So when someone argues with me about those subjects and by their comments it's clear to me that they aren't that well versed on the offense it gets frustrating and that's when arguments happen.

Arguments happen when you tell people that they have some form of brain damage because they dont agree with you. Posters including myself have been telling you for years that its condescending and insulting. If you didnt begin a post by insulting a poster's ability to think, you wouldnt have to deal with posters pushing back.

I don't go out of my way to attack people. There are FAR more people attacking me than me posting anything attacking others. Still let's get back to the issue at hand. In this thread go back and look at the conversation and you'll see that I didn't attack anyone initially. I made my statements but didn't call you a name. H1AND1 make a snarky comment and after Crush responded I responded with a snarky comment but did not address anyone by name.

When I post I post facts. Most of my posts aren't just opinion but usually i'm posting stats or a sourced description of something to do with basketball. I like any human can go overboard from time to time in my response but most of the time I stick to the facts. Just go thru my posts in this thread and you'll that is the case.

Cant even acknowledge that you do this Nix. Just dont state or imply that a person is somehow mentally deficient because they dont agree with you and Im sure some of the grief you get from other posters will disappear. The choice is yours.

My post was in response to a snarky post and I didn't start it. I suggest that you re-read this thread if you think that I just came out attacking people. I stated facts and then H1AND1 posted a snarky post and I responded with a snarky post. You took offense to one of my posts which could just have been a misunderstanding but regardless I posted facts to support my statements. MOST of my posts in this forum are not directed at anyone in particular. I'm not the only person that gets into heated discussion on this forum. I'm just the most popular target, which is fine with me. I'm a big boy and can defend myself quite well. Whenever you want to debate the facts on a subject i'm happy to oblige.

nixluva wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

nixluva wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

nixluva wrote:I pay a lot of attention to offenses. When we had MDA I bought a book of the plays he ran and his philosophy on the game. When I commented on it I was very clear on what I was taking about. I got Tex Winters play book and I pay particular attention to all the videos breaking down the offense and listen to everything that Phil has said about his philosophy as well. I read a lot. So when someone argues with me about those subjects and by their comments it's clear to me that they aren't that well versed on the offense it gets frustrating and that's when arguments happen.

Arguments happen when you tell people that they have some form of brain damage because they dont agree with you. Posters including myself have been telling you for years that its condescending and insulting. If you didnt begin a post by insulting a poster's ability to think, you wouldnt have to deal with posters pushing back.

I don't go out of my way to attack people. There are FAR more people attacking me than me posting anything attacking others. Still let's get back to the issue at hand. In this thread go back and look at the conversation and you'll see that I didn't attack anyone initially. I made my statements but didn't call you a name. H1AND1 make a snarky comment and after Crush responded I responded with a snarky comment but did not address anyone by name.

When I post I post facts. Most of my posts aren't just opinion but usually i'm posting stats or a sourced description of something to do with basketball. I like any human can go overboard from time to time in my response but most of the time I stick to the facts. Just go thru my posts in this thread and you'll that is the case.

Cant even acknowledge that you do this Nix. Just dont state or imply that a person is somehow mentally deficient because they dont agree with you and Im sure some of the grief you get from other posters will disappear. The choice is yours.

My post was in response to a snarky post and I didn't start it. I suggest that you re-read this thread if you think that I just came out attacking people. I stated facts and then H1AND1 posted a snarky post and I responded with a snarky post. You took offense to one of my posts which could just have been a misunderstanding but regardless I posted facts to support my statements. MOST of my posts in this forum are not directed at anyone in particular. I'm not the only person that gets into heated discussion on this forum. I'm just the most popular target, which is fine with me. I'm a big boy and can defend myself quite well. Whenever you want to debate the facts on a subject i'm happy to oblige.

dk7th n tkf would beg to differ lol.
in any case, you guys are in the same boat... all extremes. just on opposite ends of the spectrum.