mreinman wrote:

nixluva wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Nalod wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Nalod wrote:Has a new Era been established? Even if GS wins it all, does that mean they become the beacon of light to strive for? Thus, draft a sharp shooter over a potential domanent big?
Phil says no. Is The triangle antiquated?

every but phil thinks that it is but heck phil has the bling

Who is everyone??? Posters? Thibs? Pop? Larry?

find me a reputable article that praises it.

try googling "triangle offense + antiquated" maybe you can add "inefficient" you will get a lot of hits.

Phil's offenses were pretty good over his last decade of coaching. Only once was his offense outside of the top 10. His offense was never the best but he won a lot over that decade.

1999-00 67-15, Won NBA Finals (4-2) versus Indiana Pacers     Off Rtg: 107.3 (5th of 29) ▪ Def Rtg: 98.2  (1st of 29)
2000-01 56-26, Won NBA Finals (4-1) versus Philadelphia 76ers Off Rtg: 108.4 (2nd of 29) ▪ Def Rtg: 104.8 (21st of 29)
2001-02 58-24, Won NBA Finals (4-0) versus New Jersey Nets    Off Rtg: 109.4 (2nd of 29) ▪ Def Rtg: 101.7 (7th of 29)
2002-03 50-32, Lost NBA WCS   (2-4) versus San Antonio Spurs  Off Rtg: 107.2 (4th of 29) ▪ Def Rtg: 104.7 (19th of 29)
2003-04 56-26, Lost NBA Finals(1-4) versus Detroit Pistons    Off Rtg: 105.5 (6th of 29) ▪ Def Rtg: 101.3 (8th of 29)
2005-06 45-37, Lost NBA WC Rd. 1(3-4) versus Phoenix Suns     Off Rtg: 108.4 (8th of 30) ▪ Def Rtg: 105.7 (15th of 30)
2006-07 42-40, Lost NBA WC Rd. 1(1-4) versus Phoenix Suns     Off Rtg: 108.6 (7th of 30) ▪ Def Rtg: 108.6 (24th of 30) 
2007-08 57-25, Lost NBA Finals(2-4) versus Boston Celtics     Off Rtg: 113.0 (3rd of 30) ▪ Def Rtg: 105.5 (5th of 30) 
2008-09 65-17, Won NBA Finals (4-1) versus Orlando Magic      Off Rtg: 112.8 (3rd of 30) ▪ Def Rtg: 104.7 (6th of 30) 
2009-10 57-25, Won NBA Finals (4-3) versus Boston Celtics     Off Rtg: 108.8 (11th of 30)▪ Def Rtg: 103.7 (4th of 30)
2010-11 57-25, Lost NBA WCS   (0-4) versus Dallas Mavericks   Off Rtg: 111.0 (6th of 30) ▪ Def Rtg: 104.3 (6th of 30)

we all now that he can be ok with the groups of supermans ... we have no idea if he would coach the knicks crap better than mike woodson would or if he has a clue when building a team.

I know he got/found us shved and jason stiff ... oh and early and thanny

Lets see if he can get a jordan and sign a prime pau (who was one of the most efficient players I've see).

Oh yeah ... shaqqy was a bit efficient too.

Why are you talking like you think Phil doesn't know what a good player looks like? Let's stop this BULL ISH based on his limited options this season. You all know damned well that this summer and next is when he'd have much better options for bringing in talent. This is just the most frustrating thing to keep arguing over. If you think anyone could have as many great players for 2 decades and not know what real talent is then there's no sense even trying to talk to you. You really think that all of us can figure out who's good or not and somehow Phil won't be able to recognize it? None of his staff using all the metrics, film, scouting visits and workouts will be able to inform Phil about the best possible talent for what he wants on the roster?

Yeah he just coached all those great players but he knows nothing about what makes players great or why his teams won. He just rolled the F'n ball out there and said go get em boys. The Players just figured out on their own how to run the Triangle and how to defend at the highest levels. Phil just hung out and never paid attention to what his GM's did in building the teams and he never had any input.

Papabear wrote:Papabear Says

Is 3 point shooting destroying the whole picture of the game? I think so.

the old school guys definitely hate it. Prolly because they can't shoot the three.

mreinman wrote:

nixluva wrote:

mreinman wrote:

nixluva wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Nalod wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Nalod wrote:Has a new Era been established? Even if GS wins it all, does that mean they become the beacon of light to strive for? Thus, draft a sharp shooter over a potential domanent big?
Phil says no. Is The triangle antiquated?

every but phil thinks that it is but heck phil has the bling

Who is everyone??? Posters? Thibs? Pop? Larry?

find me a reputable article that praises it.

try googling "triangle offense + antiquated" maybe you can add "inefficient" you will get a lot of hits.

Phil's offenses were pretty good over his last decade of coaching. Only once was his offense outside of the top 10. His offense was never the best but he won a lot over that decade.

1999-00 67-15, Won NBA Finals (4-2) versus Indiana Pacers     Off Rtg: 107.3 (5th of 29) ▪ Def Rtg: 98.2  (1st of 29)
2000-01 56-26, Won NBA Finals (4-1) versus Philadelphia 76ers Off Rtg: 108.4 (2nd of 29) ▪ Def Rtg: 104.8 (21st of 29)
2001-02 58-24, Won NBA Finals (4-0) versus New Jersey Nets    Off Rtg: 109.4 (2nd of 29) ▪ Def Rtg: 101.7 (7th of 29)
2002-03 50-32, Lost NBA WCS   (2-4) versus San Antonio Spurs  Off Rtg: 107.2 (4th of 29) ▪ Def Rtg: 104.7 (19th of 29)
2003-04 56-26, Lost NBA Finals(1-4) versus Detroit Pistons    Off Rtg: 105.5 (6th of 29) ▪ Def Rtg: 101.3 (8th of 29)
2005-06 45-37, Lost NBA WC Rd. 1(3-4) versus Phoenix Suns     Off Rtg: 108.4 (8th of 30) ▪ Def Rtg: 105.7 (15th of 30)
2006-07 42-40, Lost NBA WC Rd. 1(1-4) versus Phoenix Suns     Off Rtg: 108.6 (7th of 30) ▪ Def Rtg: 108.6 (24th of 30) 
2007-08 57-25, Lost NBA Finals(2-4) versus Boston Celtics     Off Rtg: 113.0 (3rd of 30) ▪ Def Rtg: 105.5 (5th of 30) 
2008-09 65-17, Won NBA Finals (4-1) versus Orlando Magic      Off Rtg: 112.8 (3rd of 30) ▪ Def Rtg: 104.7 (6th of 30) 
2009-10 57-25, Won NBA Finals (4-3) versus Boston Celtics     Off Rtg: 108.8 (11th of 30)▪ Def Rtg: 103.7 (4th of 30)
2010-11 57-25, Lost NBA WCS   (0-4) versus Dallas Mavericks   Off Rtg: 111.0 (6th of 30) ▪ Def Rtg: 104.3 (6th of 30)

we all now that he can be ok with the groups of supermans ... we have no idea if he would coach the knicks crap better than mike woodson would or if he has a clue when building a team.

I know he got/found us shved and jason stiff ... oh and early and thanny

Lets see if he can get a jordan and sign a prime pau (who was one of the most efficient players I've see).

Oh yeah ... shaqqy was a bit efficient too.

Come on man! You know damn well that if he gets a top 1 or 2 pick he's gonna get a big man he wants and he'll have all kinds of options from there to find 3 more starters in Free Agency or trade. If he gets pick 3 or 4, he's gonna likely get a really talented big Guard. There's a good chance one of those scenarios plays out.

Why are you talking like you think Phil doesn't know what a good player looks like? Let's stop this BULL ISH based on his limited options this season. You all know damned well that this summer and next is when he'd have much better options for bringing in talent. This is just the most frustrating thing to keep arguing over. If you think anyone could have as many great players for 2 decades and not know what real talent is then there's no sense even trying to talk to you. You really think that all of us can figure out who's good or not and somehow Phil won't be able to recognize it? None of his staff using all the metrics, film, scouting visits and workouts will be able to inform Phil about the best possible talent for what he wants on the roster?

Yeah he just coached all those great players but he knows nothing about what makes players great or why his teams won. He just rolled the F'n ball out there and said go get em boys. The Players just figured out on their own how to run the Triangle and how to defend at the highest levels. Phil just hung out and never paid attention to what his GM's did in building the teams and he never had any input.

I think that Jordan knows more about basketball, personnel and the triangle, maybe he should be our GM?

oh wait ... he is not really a good GM.

I would want jordan (the younger version) to play on my team though as I would want Jackson (the younger version to be my coach).

This post wasn't funny or relevant. No one would agree with you that Jordan knows more about basketball, personnel or the Triangle. Phil had to convince Jordan that the Triangle would help him win. Phil is the one who convinced Krause to trade Oakley for Cartwright. There are many more player moves that Phil was responsible for on his title teams. He was never just a bystander on those teams.

mreinman wrote:the point is that you should stop talking about phil as if he was/is a great GM.

He was a great coach and that doesnt make him a great GM

and please lets not forget that the guy is barely with the team

Find any post where I've said Phil is a great GM!!! I've never even said he's a good GM! Go and find a post. I'll give you all year to find me saying that. There's a wide gulf between competant and great!!! My main point has been that this summer is going to be his best shot to revamp the team and I've said the same thing over and over.

knickscity wrote:Phil hasnt even been proven to be competent. Sure he'll get a shot to make the team better, we'll see if he does. Until then you can only hope. All the titles dont translate to anything in the office, makes no sense trying to use them as if they mean anything in this new role.

It does matter because he was actually taking part in the process of deciding on personnel. He's been learning about what works all these years. Phil was never just satisfied with only coaching. Phil always had an interest in how teams are constructed. It was not just about strategy but also personnel. Just cuz you guys have challenged me on this I'm going to do research and post a thread just about this.

mreinman wrote:the point is that you should stop talking about phil as if he was/is a great GM.

He was a great coach and that doesnt make him a great GM

and please lets not forget that the guy is barely with the team

No one is saying he's a great GM- the argument is is too damn early to tell because he hasn't had anything to work with until now. Now he has a draft pick, cap space etc. Judging him either way after just one year and a one year $3mil exemption and a roster of largely untradeable, overpaid players, is beyond stupid.

smackeddog wrote:

mreinman wrote:the point is that you should stop talking about phil as if he was/is a great GM.

He was a great coach and that doesnt make him a great GM

and please lets not forget that the guy is barely with the team

No one is saying he's a great GM- the argument is is too damn early to tell because he hasn't had anything to work with until now. Now he has a draft pick, cap space etc. Judging him either way after just one year and a one year $3mil exemption and a roster of largely untradeable, overpaid players, is beyond stupid.

knickscity wrote:

nixluva wrote:

knickscity wrote:Phil hasnt even been proven to be competent. Sure he'll get a shot to make the team better, we'll see if he does. Until then you can only hope. All the titles dont translate to anything in the office, makes no sense trying to use them as if they mean anything in this new role.

It does matter because he was actually taking part in the process of deciding on personnel. He's been learning about what works all these years. Phil was never just satisfied with only coaching. Phil always had an interest in how teams are constructed. It was not just about strategy but also personnel. Just cuz you guys have challenged me on this I'm going to do research and post a thread just about this.

Phil didnt build the Bulls or the Lakers, he was an assistant with the Bulls and that team was already formed, the Lakers core was in place as well. Phil is an opportunist at best, those teams were on the verge of winning anyway.

Bulls had stagnated. Get real. Phil didn't build them, he made them better.
Totally ignorant to dismiss the guy with more coaching rings in the history of the NBA.

1. No coach wins without great players. Lots of coaches have lost with them.
2. Bulls had not reached finals. They did not win the first year phil was there.
3. Michael left and they won 55 games without him.
4. Kobe had not won yet. Look at the rest of the roster beyond Kobe and SHaq.

Phil knows winning. If you expected greatness in year one you were starphuching yourselves. While few could imagine just how bad this team got. A secure man recognizes the problem and strips it away.
This will likely take some time and I do believe phil might not be here in 4 years when the team can be contenders. He is here to build a culture. Takes time.

YOu might not like him, or believe that a winning culture can be born from a man who has 13 rings but don't dismiss the facts and call him an "opportunist at best".

Pop got Timmy, Pitino got fired.

Riley walked on to Laker team a year removed from a championship season. The Championship DNA was already there. Not with Bulls. They were stagnated by Detroit and Collins could not take them further.

knickscity wrote:

nixluva wrote:

knickscity wrote:Phil hasnt even been proven to be competent. Sure he'll get a shot to make the team better, we'll see if he does. Until then you can only hope. All the titles dont translate to anything in the office, makes no sense trying to use them as if they mean anything in this new role.

It does matter because he was actually taking part in the process of deciding on personnel. He's been learning about what works all these years. Phil was never just satisfied with only coaching. Phil always had an interest in how teams are constructed. It was not just about strategy but also personnel. Just cuz you guys have challenged me on this I'm going to do research and post a thread just about this.

Phil didnt build the Bulls or the Lakers, he was an assistant with the Bulls and that team was already formed, the Lakers core was in place as well. Phil is an opportunist at best, those teams were on the verge of winning anyway.

I may have issue with why Phil is here, his trades and his coaching choices, but you can't take what he has accomplished away from him...Dude is tops in his former profession..It's not a given that those teams he joined would have succeeded..Bulls were floundering before Phil and so were the Lakers..Phil is a great coach, period..As a GM, the jury is still out...