Last time I checked basketball is played on 2 sides of the court

dk7th wrote:he has a good midrange shot. maybe someone with easy access to shot charts-- you know the green and red ones of the court-- can back me up on this.

F500ONE wrote:Not to sound like a clashing cymbal here but

What system offense coach Phil would have hired where it leads to posting videos of players not being successful in it

Would it have been/////

Princeton-Pick N Roll Offense,

Dribble Weave-Motion Offense,

Spread Offense-SSOL Offense,

ISO Offense-Inside Out Offense,

1 Four Flat-Down Hill Attack Offense

I'm curious to know why more teams don't run triangle offense as a main staple.

I feel it has it's major benefits, at the same time I don't see it as a cure all

Not for the players we currently have

Lots of questions. For one thing let's just understand that Phil wanted a system that promoted Team Oriented BB. He was shown the Triangle by Tex Winter and he really liked it. One of the things that he likes is the floor balance. It's hard to defend because of the constant ball and player movement and spacing. Still like any system you still need talent for it to be effective. Talent is always the 1st and most important need to build a winning team. After that you need players to trust one another, work as a unit and share the ball.

The benefit for the players on this team is that it doesn't require solo creativity, tho that helps of course. For the most part the system creates the scoring opportunities by virtue of the motion and ball movement. We have shooters. In fact some of them perform better on catch and shoot, which this system creates a lot of. If you want to know the main difference I see with the triangle is that there are RULES that players have to learn for how to react to what the defense does. Those rules help to make the offense more effective even against good defense. The key is the team learning to share the ball and trust each other. The more they do that the more effective they'll be. This is the biggest thing that Fish and Phil will be teaching the players.

Let's also not forget that Phil has made some changes. Adding Jose was no small thing. Now sure he's not a great defender, but that didn't stop the Mavs from winning games and pushing the World Champ Spurs to 7 games!!! They weren't a great defensive team. IN fact they were bad defensively. The Mavs were 22nd in Defensive Rating. Still they won 49 games. It is possible to win games even if you don't have a top 10 defense. If the Knicks can manage to play at least decent defense and get to around the 15th best defense then I think they'll win a lot of games. That's a lot to improve but that's the task Fish has in front of him. Phil believes that his offense helps lead to better defense with more efficient offense and better floor balance.

“The triangle offense is one of the best offenses to run,” he said at the team’s training center April 3, “because it’s balance, and because players can play defense out of an offense like that. So instead of having stretched players who are standing in corners and have to recover, you have guys who are in balance, and there’s an opportunity to defend from your offense. That’s how the game connects.”

My question to you or anyone else is don't you agree that the Triangle is a better way to play than what we've been doing? Tired of watching players not know what to do, bunching up and getting in the way? No passing, cutting, screens or catch and shoot in rhythm. This will totally change the way this team functions. It's beautiful BB and leads to smarter players who are engaged all game. Everyone touches the ball and has to stay active and involved.

nixluva wrote:

F500ONE wrote:Not to sound like a clashing cymbal here but

What system offense coach Phil would have hired where it leads to posting videos of players not being successful in it

Would it have been/////

Princeton-Pick N Roll Offense,

Dribble Weave-Motion Offense,

Spread Offense-SSOL Offense,

ISO Offense-Inside Out Offense,

1 Four Flat-Down Hill Attack Offense

I'm curious to know why more teams don't run triangle offense as a main staple.

I feel it has it's major benefits, at the same time I don't see it as a cure all

Not for the players we currently have

Lots of questions. For one thing let's just understand that Phil wanted a system that promoted Team Oriented BB. He was shown the Triangle by Tex Winter and he really liked it. One of the things that he likes is the floor balance. It's hard to defend because of the constant ball and player movement and spacing. Still like any system you still need talent for it to be effective. Talent is always the 1st and most important need to build a winning team. After that you need players to trust one another, work as a unit and share the ball.

The benefit for the players on this team is that it doesn't require solo creativity, tho that helps of course. For the most part the system creates the scoring opportunities by virtue of the motion and ball movement. We have shooters. In fact some of them perform better on catch and shoot, which this system creates a lot of. If you want to know the main difference I see with the triangle is that there are RULES that players have to learn for how to react to what the defense does. Those rules help to make the offense more effective even against good defense. The key is the team learning to share the ball and trust each other. The more they do that the more effective they'll be. This is the biggest thing that Fish and Phil will be teaching the players.

Let's also not forget that Phil has made some changes. Adding Jose was no small thing. Now sure he's not a great defender, but that didn't stop the Mavs from winning games and pushing the World Champ Spurs to 7 games!!! They weren't a great defensive team. IN fact they were bad defensively. The Mavs were 22nd in Defensive Rating. Still they won 49 games. It is possible to win games even if you don't have a top 10 defense. If the Knicks can manage to play at least decent defense and get to around the 15th best defense then I think they'll win a lot of games. That's a lot to improve but that's the task Fish has in front of him. Phil believes that his offense helps lead to better defense with more efficient offense and better floor balance.

“The triangle offense is one of the best offenses to run,” he said at the team’s training center April 3, “because it’s balance, and because players can play defense out of an offense like that. So instead of having stretched players who are standing in corners and have to recover, you have guys who are in balance, and there’s an opportunity to defend from your offense. That’s how the game connects.”

My question to you or anyone else is don't you agree that the Triangle is a better way to play than what we've been doing? Tired of watching players not know what to do, bunching up and getting in the way? No passing, cutting, screens or catch and shoot in rhythm. This will totally change the way this team functions. It's beautiful BB and leads to smarter players who are engaged all game. Everyone touches the ball and has to stay active and involved.

Agree on the Triangle offense creating proper spacing and player-ball movement

Agree it's a system creating many opportunities for players on the court

Disagree of how important the point guard is in this system.

Phil has never produced an All-Star point guard from this system

Disagree on overselling Jose Calderon

Dallas won 50-60gms with guys like young Devin Harris, J.J. Barea, Delonte West, playing point

None noted as defensive stalwarts

On pace to win the same with Darren Collison had Dirk not been injured 2 seasons ago

We'll probably discover this to be the case again when Dallas wins close to 50gms with Felton playing point

Bonn1997 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

VCoug wrote:

dk7th wrote:he has a good midrange shot. maybe someone with easy access to shot charts-- you know the green and red ones of the court-- can back me up on this.

Here you go:

You can get these at http://stats.nba.com/

I'M BACK BITCHES

OK what I will say about the shot chart is that if you notice where most of his green zones are, it's EXACTLY in the spots that he'll be put in the Triangle in plays like the Pinch Post...

I heard that Phil is going to have every player stand only in spots they've never missed from!

REALLY??? What you're saying is that you know more about BB than Phil Jackson!!! I point out that Bargs is more efficient from the VERY SPOTS he'll end up in playing in the Triangle and you can't see that truth in that. If you spend more time learning what the Triangle is about perhaps you'd know that the offense does in fact put players in the best spots on a more consistent basis. The motion of the plays actually lead to scoring opps as opposed to that crap we ran last year where plays often didn't lead to anything as players would be going East and West and not towards the basket. There was very little off ball motion or cutting. This offense has all kinds of motion and leads to direct scoring opps. I don't know what you're really complaining about.

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.

We'll see. I think a new system and a quarter will get you a gumball.
You're talking about samples of about 10 made shots from those regions. How seriously do you expect me to take that anyway?

Here it comes... WTF? 10 made shotes from those regions? All you're saying is that I was right and we should've gotten Bargs the ball in those sports more often. I haven't really changed my view of Bargs. I've been saying the same thing. Bargs has been a top PnP scorer for years. He didn't just do it once and then stop being that guy. Woody simply ignored the facts about his players strengths. That was an utter failure on his part and his PG.

As for the system making a difference I think just watching the team last year it was crystal clear this team needed some kind of change to bring about more ball and player movement and this system places an emphasis on that. In addition you don't need a ball dominant PG in order for it to work, which has been an issue for this team in the past. Overall the players we have should fit into this system quite well. Their strengths fit into the needs for this system. We have athletic guys who can catch and shoot and as long as they're put in that situation they should be comfortable and play efficiently. It's up to the coaching and time to learn the system. Teaching guys to 1st run the play and get the ball moving and the defense chasing. It will lead to great shots. I believe they will love playing this way once they get the hang of it. The Kids already do.

As for

F500ONE wrote:Agree on the Triangle offense creating proper spacing and player-ball movement
Agree it's a system creating many opportunities for players on the court

Disagree of how important the point guard is in this system.
Phil has never produced an All-Star point guard from this system

Disagree on overselling Jose Calderon
Dallas won 50-60gms with guys like young Devin Harris, J.J. Barea, Delonte West, playing point

None noted as defensive stalwarts

On pace to win the same with Darren Collison had Dirk not been injured 2 seasons ago
We'll probably discover this to be the case again when Dallas wins close to 50gms with Felton playing point

You must not have read many of my posts cuz clearly the point i've made over and over is that the Triangle doesn't stress a ball dominant PG. Still a PG like Jose is great cuz he's excellent in PnR and he's an excellent shooter both of which are used in the Triangle depending on what the defense does. This team isn't built to be a great defensive team, still they have to find a way to do a decent job on that end. My point wasn't to suggest that Jose was the reason the Mavs won 50, but rather that even with his poor defense they still won 50 and took the Spurs to 7 games. Unlike the Mavs we do have a guard who can defend on the perimeter so if needed we can put a defensive unit out there on the floor. The Mavs had Jose and Ellis who aren't good defenders at all.

F500ONE wrote:Dallas had Dirk, I think we need to remove the comparison from discussion.

Mav fans are probably cherry picking the 54 Knick win team and Felton's 2010-2011 performance

As a means to suggest they'll challenge for contention this year

I mentioned all those other throw away guards hoping you'd get the POINT.

We are missing battle tested vets such as Marion and Carter who have played in many high stakes games

Conclusion of the matter you haven't posted any Mavs defensive videos

And paired them with Triangle Defensive footage of Phil coached teams

Maybe you're not as knowledgeable with this part of the game or have a lower appreciation for it

HERE'S THE MAIN POINT. FELTON COULDN'T SCORE, COULDN'T RUN A TEAM AND WAS A POOR LEADER. ON TOP OF THAT HE SUCKED DEFENSIVELY. NOW JOSE ISN'T A DEFENDER BUT HE'S ABLE TO DO ALL THE OTHER THINGS FELTON CAN'T.

I'm just pointing to some reasons for optimism. It's not a guarantee of success. It's just a clear argument for why things should work better this year than last. I've been listing the factors. Better fitting roster. Better balance. Better system. Better coach IMO, since I don't think Woody was any good at all.

By the way I LOVE defense. Was a defensive player with good lateral quickness. I fully understand the defensive side of the ball. At 49 I still have some quickness, just no stamina.