fwk00 wrote:

knickscity wrote:

fwk00 wrote:

knickscity wrote:The offense is n issue because the players are clearly having issues with it. Too many pros in the game have said so, and they know more about that ANYONE on this board. Rick Fox has said it, he's played in it on a PRO level. Does anyone here know more than him? How about Kobe?

Enough with that nonsense.

Now, the team needs a major injection of talent as well, but there's no guarantee that talent will get this offense. It's a vicious circle and this team really cannot afford to keep resetting the clock.

Phil is obviously not resetting clocks. He's being quite cautious in making moves because he expects mistakes on a newly formed team. What he's assembled is an interesting core group - its always a crap shoot as to injuries, temperament, and lady fortune. He's not done tinkering but he's not panicking so why are so many of the critics on the ledge?

IMO, its because there's zero understanding of the growth and maturation process for players and coaches. Win or lose this team has a long road to travel before they're legitimate contenders and the pundits know it. The "professional" cheap shots and Captain Obvious criticisms of the players and coaches is predictable and will continue until Phil gets his next ring.

Phil is gonna have to reset unless you think calderon will be here the entire time....thats one starter. What if Afflalo opts out? Thats two starters. The bench still needs work, primarily guards. I'm also of the opinion that an upgrade is needed at starting center.

As far the criticisms go, they should be there until the team at a minimum provides some winning basketball.

I think Calderon is on a bubble, not because he isn't wanted but because he may have some exchange value with a team that's serious about their tank. His situation is little different than Prigioni last year.

Early in the season, Calderon talked about being resigned to taking a lesser role than starting. He's an unexpected placeholder. My suspicion is that Phil envisioned Calderon as a Steve Kerr-like sharp-shooter from the bench who was pressed into broader [and a less effective role]. Jimmer is now being groomed as that Steve Kerr - instant offense clone.

Afflalo and Lopez WANT to be here - hard to imagine them choosing out although block-buster trades can move anyone. But both are playing sub-par ball lately.

KP will soon be the starting center [or dual PF/C] but that won't become awesome for a year or so.

So I'm having a hard time understanding a "reset". This is year one of a championship march - the troops are learning to march.

NYStateOfMind wrote:

nixluva wrote:Things get real easy for any coach when starters are playing well. There's less of a reason to extend the rotation when your top rotation players are giving you what you need. Basically most teams win with solid contributions from their top 6-7 players most nights. Your starters plus 1 to 2 more guys have to be fairly consistent. We haven't gotten that and it makes things a bit tougher. Today you got good play from the starters and no one got into any serious foul trouble, so there wasn't a need to put in an extra guy.

Today the offensive execution was better and they had a hot shooter and kept feeding him for a change. They have to find more consistency in what they were able to do today. They kept things moving and put pressure on the defense with more aggressive ball and player movement. They still very much ran the Triangle today despite what most think was going on. They just used more of the always available options rather than trying to force one predictable aspect of the side Triangle. The execution was simply better and they were more aggressive in working off the drag screens which makes people think they weren't running Triangle but it wasn't really anything new. They just did it better.

Maybe we haven't gotten that because he plays too many players in games with inconsistent minutes and roles. One game Williams is a major factor, next he is in the doghouse and plays 7 minutes. The game last night showed you play a smaller rotation, say 8 to 9 players. 5 starters and 3 to 4 replacements. I like always having a starter or 2 on the court, it is smart basketball. The rest of the bench is for garbage time or to cover injuries/foul trouble. It isn't rocket science. If a player fails in their consistent role, then replace them.

Do you guys understand that the reason he was able to only play 9 guys was because those 9 guys were actually making their shots and doing what was needed from them on defense?? Please tell me you do know why we only needed those 9 guys and you do understand that the reason he's been playing 12/13 guys or however many he played in other games was because nobody was making shots and weren't giving what was needed on defense?? It's really quite simple. If you have a 9 man rotation that's working and winning then he'll never have any need to play more but our players are so inconsistent that there will be times when he's gonna have to go deeper in the bench. I'm pretty sure it's this way with most if not all teams.

newyorker4ever wrote:

NYStateOfMind wrote:

nixluva wrote:Things get real easy for any coach when starters are playing well. There's less of a reason to extend the rotation when your top rotation players are giving you what you need. Basically most teams win with solid contributions from their top 6-7 players most nights. Your starters plus 1 to 2 more guys have to be fairly consistent. We haven't gotten that and it makes things a bit tougher. Today you got good play from the starters and no one got into any serious foul trouble, so there wasn't a need to put in an extra guy.

Today the offensive execution was better and they had a hot shooter and kept feeding him for a change. They have to find more consistency in what they were able to do today. They kept things moving and put pressure on the defense with more aggressive ball and player movement. They still very much ran the Triangle today despite what most think was going on. They just used more of the always available options rather than trying to force one predictable aspect of the side Triangle. The execution was simply better and they were more aggressive in working off the drag screens which makes people think they weren't running Triangle but it wasn't really anything new. They just did it better.

Maybe we haven't gotten that because he plays too many players in games with inconsistent minutes and roles. One game Williams is a major factor, next he is in the doghouse and plays 7 minutes. The game last night showed you play a smaller rotation, say 8 to 9 players. 5 starters and 3 to 4 replacements. I like always having a starter or 2 on the court, it is smart basketball. The rest of the bench is for garbage time or to cover injuries/foul trouble. It isn't rocket science. If a player fails in their consistent role, then replace them.

Do you guys understand that the reason he was able to only play 9 guys was because those 9 guys were actually making their shots and doing what was needed from them on defense?? Please tell me you do know why we only needed those 9 guys and you do understand that the reason he's been playing 12/13 guys or however many he played in other games was because nobody was making shots and weren't giving what was needed on defense?? It's really quite simple. If you have a 9 man rotation that's working and winning then he'll never have any need to play more but our players are so inconsistent that there will be times when he's gonna have to go deeper in the bench. I'm pretty sure it's this way with most if not all teams.

Dude, Fisher is a situational roach. He likes to throw things on the walls to see what will stick. In basketball, as you should know, for a team to be consistent, the rotation too must be consistent. If you are constantly changing the rotation, you will get inconsistent result; which is the state of our beloved team.

Williams, KO, and even young Grant can't provide consistent production because they are not getting consistent minutes. Playing them one day 5 minutes and 25 another day is simply asinine.

nixluva wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:fisher is a terrible coach at Xs n Os. have you guys noticed how EVERY SINGLE OFFENSIVE PLAY starts off with a pass from the wing to the center perimeter to the other wing followed by a feed to mid-range wing if possible?

TOO FREAKIN PREDICTABLE!!!

What do you really know about the X's and O's of this offense? The passes seem meaningless but that's the nature of the Triangle. It's a multiple pass offense, with off ball motion and it's up to the players to be more creative within the flow of the offense. It doesn't have to be so predictable but if you don't have guards that can shake it up then it will look pretty predictable. As for Fish and his X's and O's I think you guys are fooling yourselves if you really think he doesn't know basketball at a high level. IMO most of the guys who complain don't even know what they're looking at when it comes to the Triangle.

Most PnR based offenses aren't exactly complicated either. This team needs more aggressiveness at guard in order to make it less predictable. We don't get enough early offense and end up running way too much of the Half Court offense and being forced into taking poor shots. If the wings and guards aren't playing aggressively then you end up with the post ups and midrange stuff. This is not the fault of the offense.

If you have individual ability to create a shot then you can and should use it if there's nothing else or the opening is there. We don't have a lot of players with that kind of ability so this offense actually helps them to get shots with having to do as much. If you are moving and moving the ball you can get some great looks. Still ALL of the scoring opportunities can't come against the set defense. Pushing the ball and looking for easy scoring is still needed.

lets put it this way... i dont have to know everything about the offense to see how it develops with the knicks. its up to the coach to run unpredictable plays or demand players from phil that will help him run them.

now...what do you know about Xs n Os of this offense and how does that in any way matter to fisher's predictable "coaching"?

I'm not an expert on the Triangle but I know a lot more than most of the guys who complain about it. Just listening to the comments it's clear that this offense is still not understood by most. No matter how many times I explain the facts about the offense guys still repeat the same wrong assumptions about it. It seems people are ready to assume the worst because it's not a fast paced PnR spread offense. I have a feeling that if it was and we were still losing a few games then people would still be trashing the offense or Fish or whoever we had as coach.

This team has some talent but not overwhelming talent. There are some important areas of weakness and they also have some young players that are still developing. This puts even more pressure on the need to execute perfectly. If you really intend to teach them the finer points of the game then you have to stick with it. I do think they are learning even if they have their ups and downs. This is year one of this process of developing this team and it was never realistic to expect a perfectly smooth process. It's gonna be very interesting to see how the rest of the season plays out.

Keep tooting your horn...you and dk7th are on the same boat. So instead of tweaking the triangle and being less predictable with the personnel he has...and playing to their strengths.....he is forcing the triangle down their throats?

Jerian Grant case in point...first 2 shots against the Hawks...3 point shots...thinks...uhh not my strength...bump the triangle let me drive...even in a half court set...and gets results.
Do you think Fisher should reprimand him for that or reward him?
And what do you think he really did...answer the question...
The reason why we won yesterday is because we played the triangle only 50% of the time....remaining time PNR, drives to baskets and feeding the hot hand.

Knicks1969 wrote:

newyorker4ever wrote:

NYStateOfMind wrote:

nixluva wrote:Things get real easy for any coach when starters are playing well. There's less of a reason to extend the rotation when your top rotation players are giving you what you need. Basically most teams win with solid contributions from their top 6-7 players most nights. Your starters plus 1 to 2 more guys have to be fairly consistent. We haven't gotten that and it makes things a bit tougher. Today you got good play from the starters and no one got into any serious foul trouble, so there wasn't a need to put in an extra guy.

Today the offensive execution was better and they had a hot shooter and kept feeding him for a change. They have to find more consistency in what they were able to do today. They kept things moving and put pressure on the defense with more aggressive ball and player movement. They still very much ran the Triangle today despite what most think was going on. They just used more of the always available options rather than trying to force one predictable aspect of the side Triangle. The execution was simply better and they were more aggressive in working off the drag screens which makes people think they weren't running Triangle but it wasn't really anything new. They just did it better.

Maybe we haven't gotten that because he plays too many players in games with inconsistent minutes and roles. One game Williams is a major factor, next he is in the doghouse and plays 7 minutes. The game last night showed you play a smaller rotation, say 8 to 9 players. 5 starters and 3 to 4 replacements. I like always having a starter or 2 on the court, it is smart basketball. The rest of the bench is for garbage time or to cover injuries/foul trouble. It isn't rocket science. If a player fails in their consistent role, then replace them.

Do you guys understand that the reason he was able to only play 9 guys was because those 9 guys were actually making their shots and doing what was needed from them on defense?? Please tell me you do know why we only needed those 9 guys and you do understand that the reason he's been playing 12/13 guys or however many he played in other games was because nobody was making shots and weren't giving what was needed on defense?? It's really quite simple. If you have a 9 man rotation that's working and winning then he'll never have any need to play more but our players are so inconsistent that there will be times when he's gonna have to go deeper in the bench. I'm pretty sure it's this way with most if not all teams.

Dude, Fisher is a situational roach. He likes to throw things on the walls to see what will stick. In basketball, as you should know, for a team to be consistent, the rotation too must be consistent. If you are constantly changing the rotation, you will get inconsistent result; which is the state of our beloved team.

Williams, KO, and even young Grant can't provide consistent production because they are not getting consistent minutes. Playing them one day 5 minutes and 25 another day is simply asinine.

I agree that teams need consistency and players need consistent minutes but if they're not bringing anything good to the team while they're on the court then they can't consistently be out there. We have too many players that are really just bench players and i think Fisher is still trying to find the right guys to play together cause nobody on this team has been consistent yet to find out who plays well together.

newyorker4ever wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:fisher is a terrible coach at Xs n Os. have you guys noticed how EVERY SINGLE OFFENSIVE PLAY starts off with a pass from the wing to the center perimeter to the other wing followed by a feed to mid-range wing if possible?

TOO FREAKIN PREDICTABLE!!!

What do you really know about the X's and O's of this offense? The passes seem meaningless but that's the nature of the Triangle. It's a multiple pass offense, with off ball motion and it's up to the players to be more creative within the flow of the offense. It doesn't have to be so predictable but if you don't have guards that can shake it up then it will look pretty predictable. As for Fish and his X's and O's I think you guys are fooling yourselves if you really think he doesn't know basketball at a high level. IMO most of the guys who complain don't even know what they're looking at when it comes to the Triangle.

Most PnR based offenses aren't exactly complicated either. This team needs more aggressiveness at guard in order to make it less predictable. We don't get enough early offense and end up running way too much of the Half Court offense and being forced into taking poor shots. If the wings and guards aren't playing aggressively then you end up with the post ups and midrange stuff. This is not the fault of the offense.

If you have individual ability to create a shot then you can and should use it if there's nothing else or the opening is there. We don't have a lot of players with that kind of ability so this offense actually helps them to get shots with having to do as much. If you are moving and moving the ball you can get some great looks. Still ALL of the scoring opportunities can't come against the set defense. Pushing the ball and looking for easy scoring is still needed.

lets put it this way... i dont have to know everything about the offense to see how it develops with the knicks. its up to the coach to run unpredictable plays or demand players from phil that will help him run them.

now...what do you know about Xs n Os of this offense and how does that in any way matter to fisher's predictable "coaching"?

I'm not an expert on the Triangle but I know a lot more than most of the guys who complain about it. Just listening to the comments it's clear that this offense is still not understood by most. No matter how many times I explain the facts about the offense guys still repeat the same wrong assumptions about it. It seems people are ready to assume the worst because it's not a fast paced PnR spread offense. I have a feeling that if it was and we were still losing a few games then people would still be trashing the offense or Fish or whoever we had as coach.

This team has some talent but not overwhelming talent. There are some important areas of weakness and they also have some young players that are still developing. This puts even more pressure on the need to execute perfectly. If you really intend to teach them the finer points of the game then you have to stick with it. I do think they are learning even if they have their ups and downs. This is year one of this process of developing this team and it was never realistic to expect a perfectly smooth process. It's gonna be very interesting to see how the rest of the season plays out.

Keep tooting your horn...you and dk7th are on the same boat. So instead of tweaking the triangle and being less predictable with the personnel he has...and playing to their strengths.....he is forcing the triangle down their throats?

Jerian Grant case in point...first 2 shots against the Hawks...3 point shots...thinks...uhh not my strength...bump the triangle let me drive...even in a half court set...and gets results.
Do you think Fisher should reprimand him for that or reward him?
And what do you think he really did...answer the question...
The reason why we won yesterday is because we played the triangle only 50% of the time....remaining time PNR, drives to baskets and feeding the hot hand.

We played well because shots were going down. There's been plenty of games that we didn't play in the triangle the whole game and still lost but no matter what offense you're playing in if the shots aren't going down then you won't win.

my point exactly... if the game is close or tied in the last 4 mins...chances are fisher is not going to coach us to a win if there is no hot hand and by that i dont mean a complete inability to put the ball in the basket.

nixluva wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:fisher is a terrible coach at Xs n Os. have you guys noticed how EVERY SINGLE OFFENSIVE PLAY starts off with a pass from the wing to the center perimeter to the other wing followed by a feed to mid-range wing if possible?

TOO FREAKIN PREDICTABLE!!!

What do you really know about the X's and O's of this offense? The passes seem meaningless but that's the nature of the Triangle. It's a multiple pass offense, with off ball motion and it's up to the players to be more creative within the flow of the offense. It doesn't have to be so predictable but if you don't have guards that can shake it up then it will look pretty predictable. As for Fish and his X's and O's I think you guys are fooling yourselves if you really think he doesn't know basketball at a high level. IMO most of the guys who complain don't even know what they're looking at when it comes to the Triangle.

Most PnR based offenses aren't exactly complicated either. This team needs more aggressiveness at guard in order to make it less predictable. We don't get enough early offense and end up running way too much of the Half Court offense and being forced into taking poor shots. If the wings and guards aren't playing aggressively then you end up with the post ups and midrange stuff. This is not the fault of the offense.

If you have individual ability to create a shot then you can and should use it if there's nothing else or the opening is there. We don't have a lot of players with that kind of ability so this offense actually helps them to get shots with having to do as much. If you are moving and moving the ball you can get some great looks. Still ALL of the scoring opportunities can't come against the set defense. Pushing the ball and looking for easy scoring is still needed.

lets put it this way... i dont have to know everything about the offense to see how it develops with the knicks. its up to the coach to run unpredictable plays or demand players from phil that will help him run them.

now...what do you know about Xs n Os of this offense and how does that in any way matter to fisher's predictable "coaching"?

I'm not an expert on the Triangle but I know a lot more than most of the guys who complain about it. Just listening to the comments it's clear that this offense is still not understood by most. No matter how many times I explain the facts about the offense guys still repeat the same wrong assumptions about it. It seems people are ready to assume the worst because it's not a fast paced PnR spread offense. I have a feeling that if it was and we were still losing a few games then people would still be trashing the offense or Fish or whoever we had as coach.

This team has some talent but not overwhelming talent. There are some important areas of weakness and they also have some young players that are still developing. This puts even more pressure on the need to execute perfectly. If you really intend to teach them the finer points of the game then you have to stick with it. I do think they are learning even if they have their ups and downs. This is year one of this process of developing this team and it was never realistic to expect a perfectly smooth process. It's gonna be very interesting to see how the rest of the season plays out.

Keep tooting your horn...you and dk7th are on the same boat. So instead of tweaking the triangle and being less predictable with the personnel he has...and playing to their strengths.....he is forcing the triangle down their throats?

Jerian Grant case in point...first 2 shots against the Hawks...3 point shots...thinks...uhh not my strength...bump the triangle let me drive...even in a half court set...and gets results.
Do you think Fisher should reprimand him for that or reward him?
And what do you think he really did...answer the question...
The reason why we won yesterday is because we played the triangle only 50% of the time....remaining time PNR, drives to baskets and feeding the hot hand.

You are mistaken if you think they only played the Triangle Offense 50% of the time. 1st of all it's s SYSTEM and when they are in transition they are moving according to the way they were taught in this system. It's about filling lanes and after that certain spots on the floor. To you it looks like they aren't running the offense because you don't really know all of the offense!!! If you really did know the offense you would know that all of the things they did are actually In the offense.

Nix, might help clear things up with folks who keep debating you about the Triangle is to tell them what part of the offense you're seeing on the floor this season isn't part of the Triangle offense.

GustavBahler wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:fisher is a terrible coach at Xs n Os. have you guys noticed how EVERY SINGLE OFFENSIVE PLAY starts off with a pass from the wing to the center perimeter to the other wing followed by a feed to mid-range wing if possible?

TOO FREAKIN PREDICTABLE!!!

What do you really know about the X's and O's of this offense? The passes seem meaningless but that's the nature of the Triangle. It's a multiple pass offense, with off ball motion and it's up to the players to be more creative within the flow of the offense. It doesn't have to be so predictable but if you don't have guards that can shake it up then it will look pretty predictable. As for Fish and his X's and O's I think you guys are fooling yourselves if you really think he doesn't know basketball at a high level. IMO most of the guys who complain don't even know what they're looking at when it comes to the Triangle.

Most PnR based offenses aren't exactly complicated either. This team needs more aggressiveness at guard in order to make it less predictable. We don't get enough early offense and end up running way too much of the Half Court offense and being forced into taking poor shots. If the wings and guards aren't playing aggressively then you end up with the post ups and midrange stuff. This is not the fault of the offense.

If you have individual ability to create a shot then you can and should use it if there's nothing else or the opening is there. We don't have a lot of players with that kind of ability so this offense actually helps them to get shots with having to do as much. If you are moving and moving the ball you can get some great looks. Still ALL of the scoring opportunities can't come against the set defense. Pushing the ball and looking for easy scoring is still needed.

lets put it this way... i dont have to know everything about the offense to see how it develops with the knicks. its up to the coach to run unpredictable plays or demand players from phil that will help him run them.

now...what do you know about Xs n Os of this offense and how does that in any way matter to fisher's predictable "coaching"?

I'm not an expert on the Triangle but I know a lot more than most of the guys who complain about it. Just listening to the comments it's clear that this offense is still not understood by most. No matter how many times I explain the facts about the offense guys still repeat the same wrong assumptions about it. It seems people are ready to assume the worst because it's not a fast paced PnR spread offense. I have a feeling that if it was and we were still losing a few games then people would still be trashing the offense or Fish or whoever we had as coach.

This team has some talent but not overwhelming talent. There are some important areas of weakness and they also have some young players that are still developing. This puts even more pressure on the need to execute perfectly. If you really intend to teach them the finer points of the game then you have to stick with it. I do think they are learning even if they have their ups and downs. This is year one of this process of developing this team and it was never realistic to expect a perfectly smooth process. It's gonna be very interesting to see how the rest of the season plays out.

Keep tooting your horn...you and dk7th are on the same boat. So instead of tweaking the triangle and being less predictable with the personnel he has...and playing to their strengths.....he is forcing the triangle down their throats?

Jerian Grant case in point...first 2 shots against the Hawks...3 point shots...thinks...uhh not my strength...bump the triangle let me drive...even in a half court set...and gets results.
Do you think Fisher should reprimand him for that or reward him?
And what do you think he really did...answer the question...
The reason why we won yesterday is because we played the triangle only 50% of the time....remaining time PNR, drives to baskets and feeding the hot hand.

You are mistaken if you think they only played the Triangle Offense 50% of the time. 1st of all it's s SYSTEM and when they are in transition they are moving according to the way they were taught in this system. It's about filling lanes and after that certain spots on the floor. To you it looks like they aren't running the offense because you don't really know all of the offense!!! If you really did know the offense you would know that all of the things they did are actually In the offense.

Nix, might help clear things up with folks who keep debating you about the Triangle is to tell them what part of the offense you're seeing on the floor this season isn't part of the Triangle offense.

The Side Triangle is only one aspect of the overall System. It's not the entire offense. Calling it the Triangle is misleading. The thing is it's likely the 1st thing they will try to teach and it will take time to learn and perfect that before being able to move on to more and more of the entire offense. Let's remember this team is NEW to all of this. It's such a varied offense that you can't master all of it as a group in a short period of time. This is why I say that the longer they stay in this system the better they will get and the more variety they will be able to bring out.

nixluva wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:fisher is a terrible coach at Xs n Os. have you guys noticed how EVERY SINGLE OFFENSIVE PLAY starts off with a pass from the wing to the center perimeter to the other wing followed by a feed to mid-range wing if possible?

TOO FREAKIN PREDICTABLE!!!

What do you really know about the X's and O's of this offense? The passes seem meaningless but that's the nature of the Triangle. It's a multiple pass offense, with off ball motion and it's up to the players to be more creative within the flow of the offense. It doesn't have to be so predictable but if you don't have guards that can shake it up then it will look pretty predictable. As for Fish and his X's and O's I think you guys are fooling yourselves if you really think he doesn't know basketball at a high level. IMO most of the guys who complain don't even know what they're looking at when it comes to the Triangle.

Most PnR based offenses aren't exactly complicated either. This team needs more aggressiveness at guard in order to make it less predictable. We don't get enough early offense and end up running way too much of the Half Court offense and being forced into taking poor shots. If the wings and guards aren't playing aggressively then you end up with the post ups and midrange stuff. This is not the fault of the offense.

If you have individual ability to create a shot then you can and should use it if there's nothing else or the opening is there. We don't have a lot of players with that kind of ability so this offense actually helps them to get shots with having to do as much. If you are moving and moving the ball you can get some great looks. Still ALL of the scoring opportunities can't come against the set defense. Pushing the ball and looking for easy scoring is still needed.

lets put it this way... i dont have to know everything about the offense to see how it develops with the knicks. its up to the coach to run unpredictable plays or demand players from phil that will help him run them.

now...what do you know about Xs n Os of this offense and how does that in any way matter to fisher's predictable "coaching"?

I'm not an expert on the Triangle but I know a lot more than most of the guys who complain about it. Just listening to the comments it's clear that this offense is still not understood by most. No matter how many times I explain the facts about the offense guys still repeat the same wrong assumptions about it. It seems people are ready to assume the worst because it's not a fast paced PnR spread offense. I have a feeling that if it was and we were still losing a few games then people would still be trashing the offense or Fish or whoever we had as coach.

This team has some talent but not overwhelming talent. There are some important areas of weakness and they also have some young players that are still developing. This puts even more pressure on the need to execute perfectly. If you really intend to teach them the finer points of the game then you have to stick with it. I do think they are learning even if they have their ups and downs. This is year one of this process of developing this team and it was never realistic to expect a perfectly smooth process. It's gonna be very interesting to see how the rest of the season plays out.

Keep tooting your horn...you and dk7th are on the same boat. So instead of tweaking the triangle and being less predictable with the personnel he has...and playing to their strengths.....he is forcing the triangle down their throats?

Jerian Grant case in point...first 2 shots against the Hawks...3 point shots...thinks...uhh not my strength...bump the triangle let me drive...even in a half court set...and gets results.
Do you think Fisher should reprimand him for that or reward him?
And what do you think he really did...answer the question...
The reason why we won yesterday is because we played the triangle only 50% of the time....remaining time PNR, drives to baskets and feeding the hot hand.

You are mistaken if you think they only played the Triangle Offense 50% of the time. 1st of all it's s SYSTEM and when they are in transition they are moving according to the way they were taught in this system. It's about filling lanes and after that certain spots on the floor. To you it looks like they aren't running the offense because you don't really know all of the offense!!! If you really did know the offense you would know that all of the things they did are actually In the offense.

Nix, might help clear things up with folks who keep debating you about the Triangle is to tell them what part of the offense you're seeing on the floor this season isn't part of the Triangle offense.

This assumes that they are doing something that isn't part of the SYSTEM. The Triple Post or Triangle Offense is pretty old and has been developed over many decades. At this stage it's a fully formed and fleshed out system. It's been designed to try and have an answer for any known defense. It forces the defense into undesirable positions if executed properly. The offense is about Filling spots and knowing the rules of what to do when X or Y happens.

The Side Triangle is only one aspect of the overall System. It's not the entire offense. Calling it the Triangle is misleading. The thing is it's likely the 1st thing they will try to teach and it will take time to learn and perfect that before being able to move on to more and more of the entire offense. Let's remember this team is NEW to all of this. It's such a varied offense that you can't master all of it as a group in a short period of time. This is why I say that the longer they stay in this system the better they will get and the more variety they will be able to bring out.

More accurately, you're saying that everything we've seen this season is part of the Triangle offense, as in the SYSTEM. I believe this debate keeps coming up because you are using the Triangle to describe not only the Triangle as a set, but other aspects, like uptempo basketball.

Sure, the Triangle offense doesn't discourage fast breaks, or run n gun offense, but it isnt what you would describe as its center. You can say its all part of the Triangle, but when folks say they want to see the team run more, they arent debating the Triangle offense and all its facets, just its core philosophy.

nixluva wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:fisher is a terrible coach at Xs n Os. have you guys noticed how EVERY SINGLE OFFENSIVE PLAY starts off with a pass from the wing to the center perimeter to the other wing followed by a feed to mid-range wing if possible?

TOO FREAKIN PREDICTABLE!!!

What do you really know about the X's and O's of this offense? The passes seem meaningless but that's the nature of the Triangle. It's a multiple pass offense, with off ball motion and it's up to the players to be more creative within the flow of the offense. It doesn't have to be so predictable but if you don't have guards that can shake it up then it will look pretty predictable. As for Fish and his X's and O's I think you guys are fooling yourselves if you really think he doesn't know basketball at a high level. IMO most of the guys who complain don't even know what they're looking at when it comes to the Triangle.

Most PnR based offenses aren't exactly complicated either. This team needs more aggressiveness at guard in order to make it less predictable. We don't get enough early offense and end up running way too much of the Half Court offense and being forced into taking poor shots. If the wings and guards aren't playing aggressively then you end up with the post ups and midrange stuff. This is not the fault of the offense.

If you have individual ability to create a shot then you can and should use it if there's nothing else or the opening is there. We don't have a lot of players with that kind of ability so this offense actually helps them to get shots with having to do as much. If you are moving and moving the ball you can get some great looks. Still ALL of the scoring opportunities can't come against the set defense. Pushing the ball and looking for easy scoring is still needed.

lets put it this way... i dont have to know everything about the offense to see how it develops with the knicks. its up to the coach to run unpredictable plays or demand players from phil that will help him run them.

now...what do you know about Xs n Os of this offense and how does that in any way matter to fisher's predictable "coaching"?

I'm not an expert on the Triangle but I know a lot more than most of the guys who complain about it. Just listening to the comments it's clear that this offense is still not understood by most. No matter how many times I explain the facts about the offense guys still repeat the same wrong assumptions about it. It seems people are ready to assume the worst because it's not a fast paced PnR spread offense. I have a feeling that if it was and we were still losing a few games then people would still be trashing the offense or Fish or whoever we had as coach.

This team has some talent but not overwhelming talent. There are some important areas of weakness and they also have some young players that are still developing. This puts even more pressure on the need to execute perfectly. If you really intend to teach them the finer points of the game then you have to stick with it. I do think they are learning even if they have their ups and downs. This is year one of this process of developing this team and it was never realistic to expect a perfectly smooth process. It's gonna be very interesting to see how the rest of the season plays out.

Keep tooting your horn...you and dk7th are on the same boat. So instead of tweaking the triangle and being less predictable with the personnel he has...and playing to their strengths.....he is forcing the triangle down their throats?

Jerian Grant case in point...first 2 shots against the Hawks...3 point shots...thinks...uhh not my strength...bump the triangle let me drive...even in a half court set...and gets results.
Do you think Fisher should reprimand him for that or reward him?
And what do you think he really did...answer the question...
The reason why we won yesterday is because we played the triangle only 50% of the time....remaining time PNR, drives to baskets and feeding the hot hand.

You are mistaken if you think they only played the Triangle Offense 50% of the time. 1st of all it's s SYSTEM and when they are in transition they are moving according to the way they were taught in this system. It's about filling lanes and after that certain spots on the floor. To you it looks like they aren't running the offense because you don't really know all of the offense!!! If you really did know the offense you would know that all of the things they did are actually In the offense.

no...you are mistaken... this can be a he said she said all we want... you are not really providing any proof...just stating it's triangle. smh. i saw a lot of pnr and simple drive penetration yesterday.

I'm not doing a he said, she said. I'm speaking based on actually looking at Tex's Hand Written Plays. I'm telling you that there is much more to the offense than the Side Triangle.

You only think you saw a lot more PnR and Simple Drive Penetration in the last game. You are forgetting all of the other Triangle looks they actually ran most of the game. You are also assuming that PnR and Driving are not part of the offense. AGAIN, you are talking about plays and not the entire system. PnR is not s system. It's a play. At any time a player can drive the ball if he sees a lane and that doesn't mean they have stopped running the system, which is much more complex than a single play. It's expected that there will be times where you break the offense if you have a great look.

So the TEAM may setup in one of many different spacing options. Could be Side Triangle or Center Middle Post with wings in the corners or Wing Solo with a Double Screen. Whatever they do, there are a myriad of options at that point and it's up to the players on the floor to decide what they'll use to attack. Fish using some different looks in order to give Jerian and KP some 2 man action is fully within the offense. 4 out looks are also PART OF THE OFFENSE. I'm looking at one of Tex's hand written 4 out plays right now.

great...so how about this... we need to run more drives to the basket and more pnr portion of the triangle like we did in the last game...does that soothe your palate better?

i will tell you that in our recent losses we have not been doing much of that.

Cartman718 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:fisher is a terrible coach at Xs n Os. have you guys noticed how EVERY SINGLE OFFENSIVE PLAY starts off with a pass from the wing to the center perimeter to the other wing followed by a feed to mid-range wing if possible?

TOO FREAKIN PREDICTABLE!!!

What do you really know about the X's and O's of this offense? The passes seem meaningless but that's the nature of the Triangle. It's a multiple pass offense, with off ball motion and it's up to the players to be more creative within the flow of the offense. It doesn't have to be so predictable but if you don't have guards that can shake it up then it will look pretty predictable. As for Fish and his X's and O's I think you guys are fooling yourselves if you really think he doesn't know basketball at a high level. IMO most of the guys who complain don't even know what they're looking at when it comes to the Triangle.

Most PnR based offenses aren't exactly complicated either. This team needs more aggressiveness at guard in order to make it less predictable. We don't get enough early offense and end up running way too much of the Half Court offense and being forced into taking poor shots. If the wings and guards aren't playing aggressively then you end up with the post ups and midrange stuff. This is not the fault of the offense.

If you have individual ability to create a shot then you can and should use it if there's nothing else or the opening is there. We don't have a lot of players with that kind of ability so this offense actually helps them to get shots with having to do as much. If you are moving and moving the ball you can get some great looks. Still ALL of the scoring opportunities can't come against the set defense. Pushing the ball and looking for easy scoring is still needed.

lets put it this way... i dont have to know everything about the offense to see how it develops with the knicks. its up to the coach to run unpredictable plays or demand players from phil that will help him run them.

now...what do you know about Xs n Os of this offense and how does that in any way matter to fisher's predictable "coaching"?

I'm not an expert on the Triangle but I know a lot more than most of the guys who complain about it. Just listening to the comments it's clear that this offense is still not understood by most. No matter how many times I explain the facts about the offense guys still repeat the same wrong assumptions about it. It seems people are ready to assume the worst because it's not a fast paced PnR spread offense. I have a feeling that if it was and we were still losing a few games then people would still be trashing the offense or Fish or whoever we had as coach.

This team has some talent but not overwhelming talent. There are some important areas of weakness and they also have some young players that are still developing. This puts even more pressure on the need to execute perfectly. If you really intend to teach them the finer points of the game then you have to stick with it. I do think they are learning even if they have their ups and downs. This is year one of this process of developing this team and it was never realistic to expect a perfectly smooth process. It's gonna be very interesting to see how the rest of the season plays out.

Keep tooting your horn...you and dk7th are on the same boat. So instead of tweaking the triangle and being less predictable with the personnel he has...and playing to their strengths.....he is forcing the triangle down their throats?

Jerian Grant case in point...first 2 shots against the Hawks...3 point shots...thinks...uhh not my strength...bump the triangle let me drive...even in a half court set...and gets results.
Do you think Fisher should reprimand him for that or reward him?
And what do you think he really did...answer the question...
The reason why we won yesterday is because we played the triangle only 50% of the time....remaining time PNR, drives to baskets and feeding the hot hand.

You are mistaken if you think they only played the Triangle Offense 50% of the time. 1st of all it's s SYSTEM and when they are in transition they are moving according to the way they were taught in this system. It's about filling lanes and after that certain spots on the floor. To you it looks like they aren't running the offense because you don't really know all of the offense!!! If you really did know the offense you would know that all of the things they did are actually In the offense.

no...you are mistaken... this can be a he said she said all we want... you are not really providing any proof...just stating it's triangle. smh. i saw a lot of pnr and simple drive penetration yesterday.

I'm not doing a he said, she said. I'm speaking based on actually looking at Tex's Hand Written Plays. I'm telling you that there is much more to the offense than the Side Triangle.

You only think you saw a lot more PnR and Simple Drive Penetration in the last game. You are forgetting all of the other Triangle looks they actually ran most of the game. You are also assuming that PnR and Driving are not part of the offense. AGAIN, you are talking about plays and not the entire system. PnR is not s system. It's a play. At any time a player can drive the ball if he sees a lane and that doesn't mean they have stopped running the system, which is much more complex than a single play. It's expected that there will be times where you break the offense if you have a great look.

So the TEAM may setup in one of many different spacing options. Could be Side Triangle or Center Middle Post with wings in the corners or Wing Solo with a Double Screen. Whatever they do, there are a myriad of options at that point and it's up to the players on the floor to decide what they'll use to attack. Fish using some different looks in order to give Jerian and KP some 2 man action is fully within the offense. 4 out looks are also PART OF THE OFFENSE. I'm looking at one of Tex's hand written 4 out plays right now.

great...so how about this... we need to run more drives to the basket and more pnr portion of the triangle like we did in the last game...does that soothe your palate better?

i will tell you that in our recent losses we have not been doing much of that.

Fish and the coaches have to keep working with the players on their recognition and execution. They can make things easier by focusing on a set that will only lead to one or 2 options as the 4 out look did a few times for Jerian and KP. They won't run this exclusively but a few times is great to give them some confidence. I will tell you that Jerian also ran a lot of basic Side Triangle sets just fine in the last game.