Thing about being a Zen master is fear no longer controls you. Phil is not afraid to speak his mind. Not to say I agree or not with every word, but who cares!
After the cone of silence that was put over MSG I find him refreshingly arrogant! Thats NY attitude too!

When he said he might not be here to see a championship some of you took it as a money grab and he'd leave. Others saw it as "this will take longer and might be beyond my 5 years).
He is not afraid to do what is needed. Not afraid to make a trade, and not afraid to take blame. That don't mean he is perfect and won't make mistakes.

mreinman wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

mreinman wrote:

blkexec wrote:Live by the 3....die by the 3.

Phil isn't the first or the last person to believe in this philosophy.

This is a refreshing change from the MDA era (3 seconds or less)

if you live by the 2, you will definitely die by the two

I would rather my players take 22 foot 3's than 21 foot stupid jason smith shots

well yeah but I would rather them take a 15 footer than run to the corner and chuck

you should take a look at the percentage differences between a 15 footer and the 3.

you definitely want to take a 3 before a 15 footer.

what you really want is for the 3 ball to open up the lane so that you can attack the basket.

Not only that, the 3 from the corner is closer than other 3s and is the highest payoff shot after layups.

I would like to see the volatility numbers for corner threes. It seems an awful lot like feast or famine.

more feast or famine than the 15 footer?

However, having 3pt shooters are essential for court spacing, along with more room to operate, in which Phil Jackson just trolled and you are defending, and you have defended Dantoni while many teams now have adapted to that style of play because it could lead to easy penetrate, room to operate, and if not a WIDE OPEN 3pter

We do not have talents such as Shaq, Kobe, MJ/Pippen, or even Pau Gasol/Odom/Kukoc, so like some have stated here, it will lead to either the long mid range shot for a 2pter, or wide open 3pter
I would much rather have a wide open 3pt shot than a contested 2pt shot that is a long range shot...

The point in all these systems is to have a philosophy/system in place that leads to better anticipation and high % shots, for role players to stay engaged with the team, with the abilility to try to get a OFFENSIVE rebound

there are teams now that can put 4 to even 5 3pt shooters on the floor together and the league has changed from the traditional sense of 2 BIGS that do not have the ability to go out to defend a 3pt shot

mreinman wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

mreinman wrote:

blkexec wrote:Live by the 3....die by the 3.

Phil isn't the first or the last person to believe in this philosophy.

This is a refreshing change from the MDA era (3 seconds or less)

if you live by the 2, you will definitely die by the two

I would rather my players take 22 foot 3's than 21 foot stupid jason smith shots

well yeah but I would rather them take a 15 footer than run to the corner and chuck

you should take a look at the percentage differences between a 15 footer and the 3.

you definitely want to take a 3 before a 15 footer.

what you really want is for the 3 ball to open up the lane so that you can attack the basket.

Not only that, the 3 from the corner is closer than other 3s and is the highest payoff shot after layups.

I would like to see the volatility numbers for corner threes. It seems an awful lot like feast or famine.

more feast or famine than the 15 footer?

yup... because you don't just drift to a spot on the floor and chuck. Usually the rock has got to move inside and out in order to get off a 15 footer. I am sorry but I saw Woody's offense and I didn't like it

SupremeCommander wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

mreinman wrote:

blkexec wrote:Live by the 3....die by the 3.

Phil isn't the first or the last person to believe in this philosophy.

This is a refreshing change from the MDA era (3 seconds or less)

if you live by the 2, you will definitely die by the two

I would rather my players take 22 foot 3's than 21 foot stupid jason smith shots

well yeah but I would rather them take a 15 footer than run to the corner and chuck

you should take a look at the percentage differences between a 15 footer and the 3.

you definitely want to take a 3 before a 15 footer.

what you really want is for the 3 ball to open up the lane so that you can attack the basket.

Not only that, the 3 from the corner is closer than other 3s and is the highest payoff shot after layups.

I would like to see the volatility numbers for corner threes. It seems an awful lot like feast or famine.

more feast or famine than the 15 footer?

Exactly. I'd be surprised if there were many games where teams got more production out of their mid range jump shots than corner 3s. My guess is that that happens less than 10% of the time since the expected value is so much higher for corner 3s.

stop quoting me expected values and give me the volatility associated with the strategy

Bonn1997 wrote:In other news, this is how Phil Jackson still makes his phone calls:

My problem with this is that you can't call Phil out until proven wrong..Dude won 11 rings which to me means he is right..When teams that take an inordinate amount of threes win Championships, then you can talk..Right now your argument is empty...

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:In other news, this is how Phil Jackson still makes his phone calls:

My problem with this is that you can't call Phil out until proven wrong..Dude won 11 rings which to me means he is right..When teams that take an inordinate amount of threes win Championships, then you can talk..Right now your argument is empty...

The problem with all of this is that when it comes to Analytics you're always talking about Percentages but that is pure theory and not what actually happens when team A faces team B in a 7 game series. Teams still have to execute no matter what style they play. Teams aren't playing against Metrics they're playing another NBA team that can adjust and change things up and force a team to change what they want to do.

Phil knows how things can change in a playoff series and I think he takes the approach that everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth. How teams adjust is often the determining factor.

nixluva wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:In other news, this is how Phil Jackson still makes his phone calls:

My problem with this is that you can't call Phil out until proven wrong..Dude won 11 rings which to me means he is right..When teams that take an inordinate amount of threes win Championships, then you can talk..Right now your argument is empty...

The problem with all of this is that when it comes to Analytics you're always talking about Percentages but that is pure theory and not what actually happens when team A faces team B in a 7 game series. Teams still have to execute no matter what style they play. Teams aren't playing against Metrics they're playing another NBA team that can adjust and change things up and force a team to change what they want to do.

Phil knows how things can change in a playoff series and I think he takes the approach that everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth. How teams adjust is often the determining factor.

knickscity wrote:Phil needs to adjust his thinking before any talk of a 7 game series.

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:In other news, this is how Phil Jackson still makes his phone calls:

My problem with this is that you can't call Phil out until proven wrong..Dude won 11 rings which to me means he is right..When teams that take an inordinate amount of threes win Championships, then you can talk..Right now your argument is empty...

The picture was just a silly exaggeration. But where did I say inordinate number of 3s? Obviously if you can get layups and other shots near the rim, that's even better than 3s. The point is that the championship teams are not taking tons of mid range shots like our team does. You're right that Phil won a lot of rings as a coach. The phone in that picture was once an outstanding phone too.

I know the picture is an exaggeration...But an inordinate amount of threes is what Phil Jax is talking about...Spurs won taking 75% twos in 2014..Phil won it all in 2010 with being 4th in 3PA of all teams in the playoffs that year..The iPhone is proven to be a superior product the phone in the picture..Proof is in the pudding..Phil has 11 rings...MDA and his three ball heroes, zero...

Well Phil was laughing at teams that won triple the games his team did. When Phil won the most recent championship, the iPhone 3GS was just released. Hopefully he's been spending time upgrading his thinking, not just laughing at vastly superior teams. We'll find out with time.

knicks1248 wrote:obviously phil tweets ppl listen and read. If the doesn't realize the 3ball is the ultimate weapon in the NBA, god help us.

How is it the ultimate weapon when teams that shoot the most threes hasn't won a Chip??..I gotta ask, does winning Championships matter in this new world order of hoops??