knicks1248 wrote:

martin wrote:

crzymdups wrote:Barkley is kinda dumb and inconsistent... BUT, players around the league listen to his opinion. This doesn't bode well for free agent signings, IMHO.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/AdamZagoria/status/707230576269467649

For me, Barley didn't say anything new, and it really doesn't have anything to do with the Triangle.

GSW can't run their offense without Curry, Green and Thompson. Larry Brown's team couldn't do their team/defensive thing without Wallace, Wallace, Prince, Billups, Rip. Sprus can't run their system without Duncan, Parker, Ginoboli.

Am I missing something?

You need high level talent to be a high winning team. And even if you have high talent, that doesn't guarantee wins. That's the short of it.

I think a lot of people know this except phil and rambust

You think that's the case?

martin wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

martin wrote:

crzymdups wrote:Barkley is kinda dumb and inconsistent... BUT, players around the league listen to his opinion. This doesn't bode well for free agent signings, IMHO.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/AdamZagoria/status/707230576269467649

For me, Barley didn't say anything new, and it really doesn't have anything to do with the Triangle.

GSW can't run their offense without Curry, Green and Thompson. Larry Brown's team couldn't do their team/defensive thing without Wallace, Wallace, Prince, Billups, Rip. Sprus can't run their system without Duncan, Parker, Ginoboli.

Am I missing something?

You need high level talent to be a high winning team. And even if you have high talent, that doesn't guarantee wins. That's the short of it.

I think a lot of people know this except phil and rambust

You think that's the case?

The convincing part was when they fired fisher. you know I had no love for fisher, but he was trying to stray away from the triangle and pick up the tempo. what he wanted to do, and what he was instructed to do clouded his judgment.

When phil said he took little to no advice from rambust, and his conversations where becoming more and more brief with him, WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU?

Clearly the rotations were RAMBUST DEPT, and he continues to give sporadic minutes to everyone on the roster except Melo and Galloway.

knicks1248 wrote:

martin wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

martin wrote:

crzymdups wrote:Barkley is kinda dumb and inconsistent... BUT, players around the league listen to his opinion. This doesn't bode well for free agent signings, IMHO.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/AdamZagoria/status/707230576269467649

For me, Barley didn't say anything new, and it really doesn't have anything to do with the Triangle.

GSW can't run their offense without Curry, Green and Thompson. Larry Brown's team couldn't do their team/defensive thing without Wallace, Wallace, Prince, Billups, Rip. Sprus can't run their system without Duncan, Parker, Ginoboli.

Am I missing something?

You need high level talent to be a high winning team. And even if you have high talent, that doesn't guarantee wins. That's the short of it.

I think a lot of people know this except phil and rambust

You think that's the case?

The convincing part was when they fired fisher. you know I had no love for fisher, but he was trying to stray away from the triangle and pick up the tempo. what he wanted to do, and what he was instructed to do clouded his judgment.

When phil said he took little to no advice from rambust, and his conversations where becoming more and more brief with him, WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU?

Clearly the rotations were RAMBUST DEPT, and he continues to give sporadic minutes to everyone on the roster except Melo and Galloway.

That's your conclusion but not the only one. Phil cited 2 big things, maybe 3, that were wrong with the Knicks situation: very little back and forth from Fish to Phil, coaching division, missed communication on that coach meeting with Phil. Leads me to believe, at least from those words, that Phil was telling us, amongst other things, Fish's communication with staff and management were not up to snuff

martin wrote:

mreinman wrote:

martin wrote:

crzymdups wrote:Barkley is kinda dumb and inconsistent... BUT, players around the league listen to his opinion. This doesn't bode well for free agent signings, IMHO.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/AdamZagoria/status/707230576269467649

For me, Barley didn't say anything new, and it really doesn't have anything to do with the Triangle.

GSW can't run their offense without Curry, Green and Thompson. Larry Brown's team couldn't do their team/defensive thing without Wallace, Wallace, Prince, Billups, Rip. Sprus can't run their system without Duncan, Parker, Ginoboli.

Am I missing something?

You need high level talent to be a high winning team. And even if you have high talent, that doesn't guarantee wins. That's the short of it.

isn't the point of triangle or alike systems is to reduce the importance or minimize the need for star players? Isn't that the point of? It certainly should not look worse.

Maybe barkley's (and others) point is that the SUPER DUPER stars made the triangle look good/not bad.

I would assume that crappier players have an easier time utilizing picks.

It may be one cog in the wheel but certainly not the bigger picture

So Martin, what is your honest personal feeling about the triangle and using it in today's (spread/Pnr) game?

knicks1248 wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:A stop gap solution implies that he is an short term answer for a problem but his play indicates that as a starter he is a problem because his offensive play is erratic and his defense doesn't exist. Throw in the fact that he plays alongside Calderon and you have huge issues. Phil misevaluated AA and thought he was apart of a win now team but he only contributed to the lose now culture.

So why didn't he give him 4 yr deal and lock him up for the rest of his career?

With a cap expected to sky rocket, what sense would it make to sign any 2nd tier player for more than 2 yrs

Point being that AA was one of the few available options for us at SG. He wanted to be a Knick, and Phil gave him a contract worth his value rather than a long term deal. Which we would have done in the past hoping that he reclaimed his Orlando production. Don't think there were any higher expectations for AA then to be a solid vet. Robin Lopez is a contract that has expectations to it not Affalo.

Im almost certain that if we were running anything but the triangle, a lot of players on this team would be having much better seasons. You can't even judge half the players on their current play, because it's foreign to almost all of them. Add in the herky jerky rotation, that pretty much sums up our record

You say this but what players are dropping off from there career numbers due the tri?

newyorknewyork wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:A stop gap solution implies that he is an short term answer for a problem but his play indicates that as a starter he is a problem because his offensive play is erratic and his defense doesn't exist. Throw in the fact that he plays alongside Calderon and you have huge issues. Phil misevaluated AA and thought he was apart of a win now team but he only contributed to the lose now culture.

So why didn't he give him 4 yr deal and lock him up for the rest of his career?

With a cap expected to sky rocket, what sense would it make to sign any 2nd tier player for more than 2 yrs

Point being that AA was one of the few available options for us at SG. He wanted to be a Knick, and Phil gave him a contract worth his value rather than a long term deal. Which we would have done in the past hoping that he reclaimed his Orlando production. Don't think there were any higher expectations for AA then to be a solid vet. Robin Lopez is a contract that has expectations to it not Affalo.

Im almost certain that if we were running anything but the triangle, a lot of players on this team would be having much better seasons. You can't even judge half the players on their current play, because it's foreign to almost all of them. Add in the herky jerky rotation, that pretty much sums up our record

You say this but what players are dropping off from there career numbers due the tri?

it not so much of how they played before they got here, it's that this system hasn't made anyone better other than Lopez(and thats only after in started getting consistent minutes). Melo is having a solid all around season, but the rest of the line up is as inconsistent as i ever seen from players.

When grant and Dwill play well, we almost never lose, but how can they, when they get jerked around every other game for no reason other than to play sasha, seraphin and lance because rambust thinks they know the triangle better.

How would you respond If one game you get 21 mins, the next game 11 min, the next game you 7 min, and the very next game you don't even play.

Nothing on the face of the earth runs smoothly without consistency.

When you play a player(sasha) who has the worst shooting percentage on the roster , and does nothing remotely good, and then in the same sentence talk about trying to win ball games and make the playoffs, who the hell is going to take you serious.

fishmike wrote:

mreinman wrote:

martin wrote:

mreinman wrote:

martin wrote:

crzymdups wrote:Barkley is kinda dumb and inconsistent... BUT, players around the league listen to his opinion. This doesn't bode well for free agent signings, IMHO.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/AdamZagoria/status/707230576269467649

For me, Barley didn't say anything new, and it really doesn't have anything to do with the Triangle.

GSW can't run their offense without Curry, Green and Thompson. Larry Brown's team couldn't do their team/defensive thing without Wallace, Wallace, Prince, Billups, Rip. Sprus can't run their system without Duncan, Parker, Ginoboli.

Am I missing something?

You need high level talent to be a high winning team. And even if you have high talent, that doesn't guarantee wins. That's the short of it.

isn't the point of triangle or alike systems is to reduce the importance or minimize the need for star players? Isn't that the point of? It certainly should not look worse.

Maybe barkley's (and others) point is that the SUPER DUPER stars made the triangle look good/not bad.

I would assume that crappier players have an easier time utilizing picks.

It may be one cog in the wheel but certainly not the bigger picture

So Martin, what is your honest personal feeling about the triangle and using it in today's (spread/Pnr) game?

he's said it like 80 times. Its as good as your talent. No system works without good players.

thanks martin

mreinman wrote:

Chandler wrote:there's an awful lot of bellyaching about the triangle but not a lot of suggestions about what we should be doing. ANd I hope the answer isn't simply more PnR because if so I want some evidence of that ever being a championship plan. If you have two or three great players and you focus on PnR you can win games and probably end up anywhere from the dreaded 8 seed to an upper seed (Stockton and Malone having perhaps perfected it best)

With the exception of 2 years of the Heat when they were totally stacked (and where there was a lot of ISO ball), most championship teams have had heavy reliance on ball and player movement. I might be missing someone but I think I have to go back to the Pistons where I can say that wasn't the case.

You want mediocre, Ok let's go back to ISO melo, and PnR and a couple of guys camped out in a corner for a drive and dish from our unicorn, elite point guard that we can't even name, let alone get

PnR in itself is not the answer. If you watch how most of the league is trending then you would see that it is very different then old school systems.

Guys like Al Jeff parking in the post and slowing down the game doesn't fly anymore. Spread spread spread, drive kick, drive kick etc ...

the triangle is not for now.

The tenets of the Triangle work in theory... but you need someone who will update it. You need constant movement - minimize post play. Maximize dribble penetration and drag screens and pick and rolls. Spread the floor so that those open jumpers you are creating are 3s, not 18-20 foot 2s. Get the right personnel to play that style.

Triangle can work - just needs to be tweaked. Needs to minimize the triple post and maximize the ball movement, the read and react and floor spacing.

There are things it gets right. But Knicks are built too slow and don't have enough great passers or shooters.

I do think they could win more games with this roster with a different system, but not that many more. But I think they could be in the playoffs race if they had used a different system for this group of players.

crzymdups wrote:
The problem with THIS team is the way it was constructed to run THIS Triangle. But Phil was the guy who signed every single player on the roster, so you have to think this is close to how he wants them to play - he just envisioned them being better at it.

Every major player he tried to add last summer was a post guy - DeAndre Jordan, Monroe, LaMarcus Aldridge.

He didn't even talk to any guards like Rondo or anything. No point guard was ever approached.

After Afflalo, I don't think we added a single guard, did we? Oh yeah... Sasha...

DJ is not a post guy and ROLO wasn't but he turned him into one.