[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Maybe Shump should be the point guard
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 1 of 4  1  2  3 Next ›Last »
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
EnySpree
Posts: 44919
Alba Posts: 138
Joined: 4/18/2003
Member: #397
5/23/2014  12:40 PM
We are looking to run the triangle and is said we don't need a traditional point guard..... The team itself needs to be filled with ball handlers and facilitators.....


I've been watching the re runs of knick games on msg the last month or so. The Knicks excelled when they had Shump and Jr Smith dominating the ball handling. Shump is better suited to be a guy the ball starts off with....He needs to be looking for Melo and Amare. Not Melo getting the Rock waiting to find Shump and Jr spotting up.

What made Felton suck, is the fact we ran shump at the 3 and kept trying to hide Felton at the 2 with Prigioni at the point.

......

my theory is the Knicks need to get a triangle coach here, have Shump guard the point and be the point guard on paper with Thjr at the 2. Jr needs to be Starks/Manu off the bench being the primary ball handler. We don't need a point guard. We can stick Toure Murry and or Shannon Brown in there as the 3rd/4th ball handler off the bench.

This to me solves our issues in the backcourt....The Knicks could defend and bring the ball up fine. Anybody could initiate the offense in that case. Everyone can knock down the jumper and ate capable of making the necessary cuts needed to make the triangle successful.

Down the stretch Shump and Thjr had great chemistry in the open court as well where they both can dominate the opposition.

So my friends we don't need a point guard. Our guard play will be fine once Felton and Priggy are gone and the triangle is implemented.

BOOM!

Subscribe to my Podcast https://youtube.com/c/DiehardknicksPodcast https://twitter.com/DiehardknicksPC https://instagram.com/diehardknickspodcast
AUTOADVERT
yellowboy90
Posts: 33942
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/23/2011
Member: #3538
5/23/2014  12:48 PM
Shump needs to seriously improve every accett of his game before he can be depended on to handle the ball. His PG skills are non-existent. His ability to shoot, pass, rebound, dribble, finish, and some defensive skills needs to really improve.
EnySpree
Posts: 44919
Alba Posts: 138
Joined: 4/18/2003
Member: #397
5/23/2014  12:59 PM
yellowboy90 wrote:Shump needs to seriously improve every accett of his game before he can be depended on to handle the ball. His PG skills are non-existent. His ability to shoot, pass, rebound, dribble, finish, and some defensive skills needs to really improve.

Shump and Thjr need polish. It's now or never. Thjr strikes me as a dude that will make strides next year. Shump needs a focus. She has a leading personality. He has no excuse and I think the triangle will mask his flaws and make him look really good. His numbers can still be about the same as its always been...He doesn't have to be stephon marbury. He does need to be Ron Harper. He can do it in my opinion.

Keep in mind it's the triangle so anybody can initiate it. So like I said he doesn't have to dominate the ball like a traditional pg like a marbury or nash, or whoever you want to say. That ball will move and the assist will be a result of the offense and it will be evenly distributed throughout the team

Subscribe to my Podcast https://youtube.com/c/DiehardknicksPodcast https://twitter.com/DiehardknicksPC https://instagram.com/diehardknickspodcast
Finestrg
Posts: 27296
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 1/1/2006
Member: #1069
5/23/2014  1:05 PM    LAST EDITED: 5/23/2014  5:42 PM
See what you're saying Eny but I don't know if I really wanna see that to be honest. I like how Shump can rip down a rebound and sprint up the court with the ball -- that's a plus with him. If we wind up keeping Iman, I'd like to see more guys next year willing to get out and run with him. I remember Iman often sprinting up court with the ball only to slow it up and regroup because none of his teammates were there with him ready to receive & finish...I think he can make plays either for himself or for others in transition with ease but I don't really like what I see as a regular half court passer, however. Dude really doesn't have a feel for it, often delivering overly hard, off-the-mark passes to his teammates. Not a terrible passer but nothing close to PG-level precision passing unfortunately. That's my take on this part of his game. To me Iman's game needs to be 3 things: (1) take the opponent's best player on D and lock him down (hopefully we'll see much more man-to-man defense with the next coach and I think this will help him here -- his innate defensive instinct got lost with the gimmicky switching), (2) continue to spot up with the 3 ball (last year was an off year shooting it but I still like his 3-pt shot a lot -- his form is perfect & he's a much improved shooter since college) and (3) maintain that aggressiveness going to the glass & pushing the ball in transition -- hopefully his teammates can follow suit. And the biggest thing he needs to work on is finishing at the rim with contact. I'd recommend a little bit of every practice session this offseason dedicated to this somehow: forget the cones & chairs -- have real live human beings (coaches, trainers, authorized friends, whatever) d him up and play old school defense on him -- hands on, banging him around a little, etc. At the very least, in a low stress session, have coaches set up close to the rim with those big foam blockers ready to initiate/simulate some contact (I remember seeing footage of Herb Williams doing this at Knicks practice last pre-season and thought it looked worthwhile)...Shump desperately needs to toughen up in this area, to the point that he's anticipating, ready for and willing to accept CONTACT...Dude had a poor year overall but still could be a real nice piece for us in the right situation.

Another thing -- just thinking out loud for a sec: I think if we trade THJ selling high, that may also benefit Shumpert as well. Just feel we can get much more right now in a trade for THJ as opposed to Shumpert. Selling high on THJ might be the right move -- I honestly don't see that great a player here anyway I'm sorry. He's good just not great and very limited. Look at his best game -- the rookie/Sophomore game -- great shootout with Dion Waiters but you could clearly see Waiters was/is the more talented player. Skill-wise between the two, Waiters is on another level. Just mho..I like THJ but honestly like Shumpert's overall upside more, deficiencies/rough year and all. Just gotta get this kid right again... To me, it wouldn't be the worst move to sell high on THJ, get something good in return (maybe in conjunction with Chandler or Melo in the same deal?) and work Shump back to respectability as a SG splitting time with JR. I think he can get back there quickly if we get a coach who handles him properly.
skeng
Posts: 22090
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 10/27/2009
Member: #2959
Denmark
5/23/2014  1:12 PM
I would love for Shump to be able to run point! Can't believe I compared him to a very young, lite Gary Payton. Supreme fantasy. But I have serious doubts about Shump running PG
Legalize di NBA
BigDaddyG
Posts: 39941
Alba Posts: 9
Joined: 1/22/2010
Member: #3049
5/23/2014  1:18 PM
EnySpree wrote:We are looking to run the triangle and is said we don't need a traditional point guard..... The team itself needs to be filled with ball handlers and facilitators.....


I've been watching the re runs of knick games on msg the last month or so. The Knicks excelled when they had Shump and Jr Smith dominating the ball handling. Shump is better suited to be a guy the ball starts off with....He needs to be looking for Melo and Amare. Not Melo getting the Rock waiting to find Shump and Jr spotting up.

What made Felton suck, is the fact we ran shump at the 3 and kept trying to hide Felton at the 2 with Prigioni at the point.

......

my theory is the Knicks need to get a triangle coach here, have Shump guard the point and be the point guard on paper with Thjr at the 2. Jr needs to be Starks/Manu off the bench being the primary ball handler. We don't need a point guard. We can stick Toure Murry and or Shannon Brown in there as the 3rd/4th ball handler off the bench.

This to me solves our issues in the backcourt....The Knicks could defend and bring the ball up fine. Anybody could initiate the offense in that case. Everyone can knock down the jumper and ate capable of making the necessary cuts needed to make the triangle successful.

Down the stretch Shump and Thjr had great chemistry in the open court as well where they both can dominate the opposition.

So my friends we don't need a point guard. Our guard play will be fine once Felton and Priggy are gone and the triangle is implemented.

BOOM!


This might be what Shump needs to get more involved in the offense. Shump just stood around without a role on offense this season. Handling the ball might give him jump start and lead to him moving without the ball, attacking the glass and hitting the occasional corner 3. I'm good with it as long as he's not forced to take on too many traditional PG duties.
Always... always remember: Less is less. More is more. More is better and twice as much is good too. Not enough is bad, and too much is never enough except when it's just about right. - The Tick
knicks1248
Posts: 42059
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #582
5/23/2014  1:26 PM
he avg 1.7 ast, has no vision, no idea what he's doing during a fast break, and has no desire to play pg.
ES
EnySpree
Posts: 44919
Alba Posts: 138
Joined: 4/18/2003
Member: #397
5/23/2014  1:44 PM
knicks1248 wrote:he avg 1.7 ast, has no vision, no idea what he's doing during a fast break, and has no desire to play pg.

Knicks don't need him to be that guy. That's my whole point

Subscribe to my Podcast https://youtube.com/c/DiehardknicksPodcast https://twitter.com/DiehardknicksPC https://instagram.com/diehardknickspodcast
Vmart
Posts: 31800
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 5/23/2002
Member: #247
USA
5/23/2014  3:01 PM
Shump lacks mental stability and that is a huge concern of mine.
nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
5/23/2014  3:12 PM
EnySpree wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:he avg 1.7 ast, has no vision, no idea what he's doing during a fast break, and has no desire to play pg.

Knicks don't need him to be that guy. That's my whole point

Eny I think you may be wasting your time with some people around here. I've been trying to point out that you DON'T need a PG to run the Triangle using stats, diagrams, and videos and it still hasn't clicked with some yet. They can't understand why it is that a guy like Shump could be a PG in a Triangle system because there really isn't a ball dominant role for a guard in the Triangle. It's the same reason that a guard like Ron Harper could find success starting for PJax in the Triangle:


Season	Age Tm	Lg  Pos	 G  GS	 MP    FG   FGA	  FG%  3P   3PA	  3P%  2P   2PA	  2P%  FT   FTA	  FT%  ORB  DRB	 TRB  AST  STL	BLK   TOV  PF	PT
1994-95	31 CHI  NBA  SG  77  53  19.9  2.7  6.4  .426  0.4  1.4  .282  2.3  4.9  .467  1.1  1.7  .618  0.7  1.7  2.3  2.0  1.3  0.4   1.3  1.7  6.9
1995-96	32 CHI  NBA  PG	 80  80	 23.6  2.9  6.3	 .467  0.4  1.3	 .269  2.6  5.0	 .519  1.2  1.7	 .705  0.9  1.7	 2.7  2.6  1.3  0.4   0.9  1.7  7.4
1996-97	33 CHI	NBA  SG	 76  74	 22.9  2.3  5.3	 .436  0.9  2.5	 .362  1.4  2.9	 .500  0.8  1.1	 .707  0.6  1.9	 2.5  2.5  1.1	0.5   0.7  1.8	6.3
1997-98	34 CHI	NBA  PG	 82  82	 27.9  3.6  8.1	 .441  0.2  1.0	 .190  3.4  7.1	 .477  2.0  2.6	 .750  1.3  2.2	 3.5  2.9  1.3	0.6   1.1  2.2	9.3
1998-99	35 CHI	NBA  SG	 35  35	 31.6  4.2  11.1 .377  0.8  2.4	 .318  3.4  8.7  .393  2.0  2.9	 .703  1.4  3.7	 5.1  3.3  1.7	1.0   1.9  2.3	11.2
1999-00	36 LAL	NBA  PG	 80  78	 25.5  2.7  6.6	 .399  0.4  1.3	 .311  2.2  5.3	 .421  1.3  1.8	 .680  1.2  3.0	 4.2  3.4  1.1	0.5   1.7  2.1	7.0
2000-01	37 LAL	NBA  PG	 47  46  24.2  2.7  5.8	 .469  0.4  1.5	 .264  2.3  4.2	 .543  0.7  1.0	 .708  1.0  2.6	 3.5  2.4  0.8	0.5   1.3  1.5	6.5

You can see that Ron Harper wasn't a great 3pt shooter and wasn't a huge assist man. It didn't matter. The way the Triangle is made effective isn't from a Ball Dominant PG and you don't have to only shoot 3's to be a PG in the system. That's just an assumption made by those who don't know the history of the way PJax ran his teams. It helps if you can shoot from 3 but it's not the end all be all of the spot.
mreinman
Posts: 37827
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/14/2010
Member: #3189
5/23/2014  3:21 PM
nixluva wrote:
EnySpree wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:he avg 1.7 ast, has no vision, no idea what he's doing during a fast break, and has no desire to play pg.

Knicks don't need him to be that guy. That's my whole point

Eny I think you may be wasting your time with some people around here. I've been trying to point out that you DON'T need a PG to run the Triangle using stats, diagrams, and videos and it still hasn't clicked with some yet. They can't understand why it is that a guy like Shump could be a PG in a Triangle system because there really isn't a ball dominant role for a guard in the Triangle. It's the same reason that a guard like Ron Harper could find success starting for PJax in the Triangle:


Season	Age Tm	Lg  Pos	 G  GS	 MP    FG   FGA	  FG%  3P   3PA	  3P%  2P   2PA	  2P%  FT   FTA	  FT%  ORB  DRB	 TRB  AST  STL	BLK   TOV  PF	PT
1994-95	31 CHI  NBA  SG  77  53  19.9  2.7  6.4  .426  0.4  1.4  .282  2.3  4.9  .467  1.1  1.7  .618  0.7  1.7  2.3  2.0  1.3  0.4   1.3  1.7  6.9
1995-96	32 CHI  NBA  PG	 80  80	 23.6  2.9  6.3	 .467  0.4  1.3	 .269  2.6  5.0	 .519  1.2  1.7	 .705  0.9  1.7	 2.7  2.6  1.3  0.4   0.9  1.7  7.4
1996-97	33 CHI	NBA  SG	 76  74	 22.9  2.3  5.3	 .436  0.9  2.5	 .362  1.4  2.9	 .500  0.8  1.1	 .707  0.6  1.9	 2.5  2.5  1.1	0.5   0.7  1.8	6.3
1997-98	34 CHI	NBA  PG	 82  82	 27.9  3.6  8.1	 .441  0.2  1.0	 .190  3.4  7.1	 .477  2.0  2.6	 .750  1.3  2.2	 3.5  2.9  1.3	0.6   1.1  2.2	9.3
1998-99	35 CHI	NBA  SG	 35  35	 31.6  4.2  11.1 .377  0.8  2.4	 .318  3.4  8.7  .393  2.0  2.9	 .703  1.4  3.7	 5.1  3.3  1.7	1.0   1.9  2.3	11.2
1999-00	36 LAL	NBA  PG	 80  78	 25.5  2.7  6.6	 .399  0.4  1.3	 .311  2.2  5.3	 .421  1.3  1.8	 .680  1.2  3.0	 4.2  3.4  1.1	0.5   1.7  2.1	7.0
2000-01	37 LAL	NBA  PG	 47  46  24.2  2.7  5.8	 .469  0.4  1.5	 .264  2.3  4.2	 .543  0.7  1.0	 .708  1.0  2.6	 3.5  2.4  0.8	0.5   1.3  1.5	6.5

You can see that Ron Harper wasn't a great 3pt shooter and wasn't a huge assist man. It didn't matter. The way the Triangle is made effective isn't from a Ball Dominant PG and you don't have to only shoot 3's to be a PG in the system. That's just an assumption made by those who don't know the history of the way PJax ran his teams. It helps if you can shoot from 3 but it's not the end all be all of the spot.

But you have to be smart and understand the systematic ball movement. Can he do that? Time will tell but I believe that Phil will certainly give him a chance to succeed. He has the size and defensive skill that Phil likes.

so here is what phil is thinking ....
yellowboy90
Posts: 33942
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/23/2011
Member: #3538
5/23/2014  3:27 PM
nixluva wrote:
EnySpree wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:he avg 1.7 ast, has no vision, no idea what he's doing during a fast break, and has no desire to play pg.

Knicks don't need him to be that guy. That's my whole point

Eny I think you may be wasting your time with some people around here. I've been trying to point out that you DON'T need a PG to run the Triangle using stats, diagrams, and videos and it still hasn't clicked with some yet. They can't understand why it is that a guy like Shump could be a PG in a Triangle system because there really isn't a ball dominant role for a guard in the Triangle. It's the same reason that a guard like Ron Harper could find success starting for PJax in the Triangle:


Season	Age Tm	Lg  Pos	 G  GS	 MP    FG   FGA	  FG%  3P   3PA	  3P%  2P   2PA	  2P%  FT   FTA	  FT%  ORB  DRB	 TRB  AST  STL	BLK   TOV  PF	PT
1994-95	31 CHI  NBA  SG  77  53  19.9  2.7  6.4  .426  0.4  1.4  .282  2.3  4.9  .467  1.1  1.7  .618  0.7  1.7  2.3  2.0  1.3  0.4   1.3  1.7  6.9
1995-96	32 CHI  NBA  PG	 80  80	 23.6  2.9  6.3	 .467  0.4  1.3	 .269  2.6  5.0	 .519  1.2  1.7	 .705  0.9  1.7	 2.7  2.6  1.3  0.4   0.9  1.7  7.4
1996-97	33 CHI	NBA  SG	 76  74	 22.9  2.3  5.3	 .436  0.9  2.5	 .362  1.4  2.9	 .500  0.8  1.1	 .707  0.6  1.9	 2.5  2.5  1.1	0.5   0.7  1.8	6.3
1997-98	34 CHI	NBA  PG	 82  82	 27.9  3.6  8.1	 .441  0.2  1.0	 .190  3.4  7.1	 .477  2.0  2.6	 .750  1.3  2.2	 3.5  2.9  1.3	0.6   1.1  2.2	9.3
1998-99	35 CHI	NBA  SG	 35  35	 31.6  4.2  11.1 .377  0.8  2.4	 .318  3.4  8.7  .393  2.0  2.9	 .703  1.4  3.7	 5.1  3.3  1.7	1.0   1.9  2.3	11.2
1999-00	36 LAL	NBA  PG	 80  78	 25.5  2.7  6.6	 .399  0.4  1.3	 .311  2.2  5.3	 .421  1.3  1.8	 .680  1.2  3.0	 4.2  3.4  1.1	0.5   1.7  2.1	7.0
2000-01	37 LAL	NBA  PG	 47  46  24.2  2.7  5.8	 .469  0.4  1.5	 .264  2.3  4.2	 .543  0.7  1.0	 .708  1.0  2.6	 3.5  2.4  0.8	0.5   1.3  1.5	6.5

You can see that Ron Harper wasn't a great 3pt shooter and wasn't a huge assist man. It didn't matter. The way the Triangle is made effective isn't from a Ball Dominant PG and you don't have to only shoot 3's to be a PG in the system. That's just an assumption made by those who don't know the history of the way PJax ran his teams. It helps if you can shoot from 3 but it's not the end all be all of the spot.

it worked for Ron because he had other guys around him who could distribute the ball. RIght now Shump does not have that
GustavBahler
Posts: 42864
Alba Posts: 15
Joined: 7/12/2010
Member: #3186
5/23/2014  4:11 PM
I don't believe Shump would make a very good starting PG. Sure, he can be used as a backup at times, but a PG who still has trouble getting to the rim is going to make it easier on the defense to zone in on his teammates. Shumpert was starting to show that ability at the end of the season, but it remains to be seen if that will carry over into next season. Would much rather have a PG who already has shown that he is more than just OK at running the point.
NYKBocker
Posts: 38419
Alba Posts: 474
Joined: 1/14/2003
Member: #377
USA
5/23/2014  4:12 PM
The biggest problem with Shump IMHO is that he has trouble penetrating and finishing. His first step is suspect and his acceleration is not that good. I mean look at this top 10 clip for Shump. Driving skills is not there.
LivingLegend
Posts: 25746
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 8/13/2007
Member: #1645
5/23/2014  5:53 PM
EnySpree wrote:We are looking to run the triangle and is said we don't need a traditional point guard..... The team itself needs to be filled with ball handlers and facilitators.....


I've been watching the re runs of knick games on msg the last month or so. The Knicks excelled when they had Shump and Jr Smith dominating the ball handling. Shump is better suited to be a guy the ball starts off with....He needs to be looking for Melo and Amare. Not Melo getting the Rock waiting to find Shump and Jr spotting up.

What made Felton suck, is the fact we ran shump at the 3 and kept trying to hide Felton at the 2 with Prigioni at the point.

......

my theory is the Knicks need to get a triangle coach here, have Shump guard the point and be the point guard on paper with Thjr at the 2. Jr needs to be Starks/Manu off the bench being the primary ball handler. We don't need a point guard. We can stick Toure Murry and or Shannon Brown in there as the 3rd/4th ball handler off the bench.

This to me solves our issues in the backcourt....The Knicks could defend and bring the ball up fine. Anybody could initiate the offense in that case. Everyone can knock down the jumper and ate capable of making the necessary cuts needed to make the triangle successful.

Down the stretch Shump and Thjr had great chemistry in the open court as well where they both can dominate the opposition.

So my friends we don't need a point guard. Our guard play will be fine once Felton and Priggy are gone and the triangle is implemented.

BOOM!

We'll need to get approval from league for Shump to play with a seeing eye dog because that is only way he'll see other players dribbling with his head staring at the floor.
LivingLegend
Posts: 25746
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 8/13/2007
Member: #1645
5/23/2014  5:54 PM
knicks1248 wrote:he avg 1.7 ast, has no vision, no idea what he's doing during a fast break, and has no desire to play pg.

Shump on fast break is so pathetic --- even if by himself he can barely dunk the ball --- and forget about a layup.
gunsnewing
Posts: 55076
Alba Posts: 5
Joined: 2/24/2002
Member: #215
USA
5/23/2014  6:12 PM
Maybe his knee is not 100% yet?
EnySpree
Posts: 44919
Alba Posts: 138
Joined: 4/18/2003
Member: #397
5/23/2014  6:23 PM
The problem is alot of you guys are hypnotized by Westbrook, paul, rose, Kyrie, curry and the Portland kid....

NONE of those guys have won anything.

The team with the best game plan wins. Tony Parker scores but it's within the flow of what San Antonio is doing. That's why they are back every year with minimal talent.

The Triangle is a while different concept. You guys forgot Phil won 11 championships playing that boring ass style. That boring style that let's bums like paxson, by Armstrong, ron Harper, Steve kerr, Derek fisher, Brian Shaw and whoever else succeed against superior talent.

Yall must have forgot

Subscribe to my Podcast https://youtube.com/c/DiehardknicksPodcast https://twitter.com/DiehardknicksPC https://instagram.com/diehardknickspodcast
nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
5/23/2014  6:40 PM
EnySpree wrote:The problem is alot of you guys are hypnotized by Westbrook, paul, rose, Kyrie, curry and the Portland kid....

NONE of those guys have won anything.

The team with the best game plan wins. Tony Parker scores but it's within the flow of what San Antonio is doing. That's why they are back every year with minimal talent.

The Triangle is a while different concept. You guys forgot Phil won 11 championships playing that boring ass style. That boring style that let's bums like paxson, by Armstrong, ron Harper, Steve kerr, Derek fisher, Brian Shaw and whoever else succeed against superior talent.

Yall must have forgot

Like I said people just don't understand. For one thing they seem to think it requires the guards to be great thinkers and passers but that's not how the offense works.

The system's most important feature is the sideline triangle created by the center, who stands at the low post, the forward at the wing, and the guard at the corner. The team's other guard stands at the top of the key and the weak-side forward is on the weak-side high post — together forming the "two-man game." The goal of the offense is to fill those five spots, which creates good spacing between players and allows each one to pass to four teammates. Every pass and cut has a purpose and everything is dictated by the defense.

The offense starts when a guard passes to the wing and cuts to the strong-side corner. The triangle is created from a post player on the strong-side block, the strong-side corner, and the extended strong-side wing, who gains possession on the first pass. The desired initial option in the offense is to pass to the strong-side post player on the block who is in good scoring position. From there the player has the options of looking to score or pass to one of the perimeter players who are exchanging from strong-side corner and wing, a dive cut down the lane, or the opposite wing flashing to the top of the key which initiates another common option known as the "pinch post."

If a pass to the block is not possible, the second option is either to pass to the weak-side guard who flashes top of the key from the weak-side wing position or passing to the strong-side corner. If the ball is passed to the corner the options are either shoot, pass to the strong-side block, or pick and pop with the wing. If it is passed to the weak-side guard it initiates the "pinch post" option. There are two options. The first and most common is to pass to the weak-side forward who flashes to the elbow (corner of the key at the free throw line) to receive the pass. When he does the options are a rub handoff, back door cut by guard without the ball, post up of the guard on a smaller player, or face up and attack. The second option is a pick and roll with the forward. The advantage to the first option is there are so many weapons to attack the defense it opens up a lot of freedom and ability to score effectively. The advantage on the second option is that the player who has the ball and uses the screen now has the entire side of the floor to work with to go one on one. Meanwhile, on the other side, the wing sets a screen for the corner guard on the triangle split. If the hand-off is not available, the forward or the guard can pass to the corner guard coming off the screen. If the defense overplays or expects the split, both the wing and the corner guard can back cut to the basket. During all of this time the original strong-side block player is able to establish position for an easy shot while the defender is lured by all of the movement and cutting by the other players.

If the strong-side wing-to-guard pass is not possible, the third option is for the weak-side forward to flash to the strong-side elbow, take the pass, and cut to the basket on the trademark backdoor play of the offense. Meanwhile, the wing and corner guard exchange on a down screen. The forward with the ball can pass to the cutting guard or to the corner guard coming off the wing's screen. If nothing's available, he can shoot the basketball himself.

The offense also has a variety of options if there's heavy pressure from the defense. If the initial wing-pass by the guard isn't available, the triangle can be created on the other side by passing to the other guard, who then passes to the weak-side forward (who then becomes the strong-side wing). The guard, who initially had the ball, then cuts to the other corner. The center or the pressured wing can flash to the opposite post. If the guard-to-guard pass is not available, the weak-side forward can make a similar flash cut that was mentioned earlier. That also creates many cutting opportunities. If there is heavy pressure on everybody, the center can release the pressure by cutting to the high post for a pass by the ball-handling guard. That would also create space for possible cuts.

I know this is hard to follow, but basically none of this relies on a really good PG. The 1st move is for the PG to give up the ball on a very simple pass and make a cut. It's not rocket science from the PG standpoint. PJax has to make sure the post player can post up and pass and that his forward can pass and make good decisions with the ball. That's what he's going to be looking for. His team in NY will have to have players who can move the ball and move without the ball. No need to pound the ball from the PG or SG spot.
dk7th
Posts: 30006
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 5/14/2012
Member: #4228
USA
5/23/2014  7:28 PM
LivingLegend wrote:
EnySpree wrote:We are looking to run the triangle and is said we don't need a traditional point guard..... The team itself needs to be filled with ball handlers and facilitators.....


I've been watching the re runs of knick games on msg the last month or so. The Knicks excelled when they had Shump and Jr Smith dominating the ball handling. Shump is better suited to be a guy the ball starts off with....He needs to be looking for Melo and Amare. Not Melo getting the Rock waiting to find Shump and Jr spotting up.

What made Felton suck, is the fact we ran shump at the 3 and kept trying to hide Felton at the 2 with Prigioni at the point.

......

my theory is the Knicks need to get a triangle coach here, have Shump guard the point and be the point guard on paper with Thjr at the 2. Jr needs to be Starks/Manu off the bench being the primary ball handler. We don't need a point guard. We can stick Toure Murry and or Shannon Brown in there as the 3rd/4th ball handler off the bench.

This to me solves our issues in the backcourt....The Knicks could defend and bring the ball up fine. Anybody could initiate the offense in that case. Everyone can knock down the jumper and ate capable of making the necessary cuts needed to make the triangle successful.

Down the stretch Shump and Thjr had great chemistry in the open court as well where they both can dominate the opposition.

So my friends we don't need a point guard. Our guard play will be fine once Felton and Priggy are gone and the triangle is implemented.

BOOM!

We'll need to get approval from league for Shump to play with a seeing eye dog because that is only way he'll see other players dribbling with his head staring at the floor.

i am not sure you need great court vision to play the point guard position in the triangle. what you want is a guy who can hit the three from the corner and beyond the arc in the back court. then he needs to be an eager defender who can cover a lot of ground scrambling back on defense to recover from the corner, or backpedal quickly from above the free throw line. fisher is an adequate player who excelled in that offense. i don't have time to read through the thread but one name popped out and that was ron harper-- he too excelled in that role. shumpert's trajectory is a poor man's ron harper... for now. but patience is necessary to develop players such as shumpert under an overarching offensive philosophy. i agree with the notion of giving him the opportunity to develop.

knicks win 38-43 games in 16-17. rose MUST shoot no more than 14 shots per game, defer to kp6 + melo, and have a usage rate of less than 25%
Page 1 of 4  1  2  3 Next ›Last »
« Reply To Topic
Maybe Shump should be the point guard
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy