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

I cant believe Phil is going to TRY and sell the triangle to FA..smh
Author Thread
knicks1248
Posts: 42059
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #582
4/23/2015  2:48 PM
Billups not sold on triangle: Jackson said he plans to use the triangle offense as a selling point with free agents this summer. At least one former NBA player thinks that’s a bad idea.

“I don’t know about that triangle,” ESPN analyst Chauncey Billups said on the “The Knicks Blog with Anthony Donahue” radio show. “The game is just different now. ... Look at the point-guard position right now; these guys are playmakers.

“They come down, they score, they’re playmakers. They need pick-and-rolls. You put one of those guys in the triangle offense, where it’s kind of just slow down, pass, cut -- it’s no real NBA playmaking ability. It’s no pick-and-roll stuff, it’s no pindown to the post, no counteraction. Obviously that offense won a lot of championships. But it was curtailed to the personnel that they had.”

Billups added: “You look at Shaq in the triangle -- there’s really no big man in the game like that today. It’s a guard’s game. The game is small, it’s a guard’s game. I got my reservations about the triangle, I really do.”


This is an absolute fact, neither Towns, or OK4 will thrive in the triangle, and if we don't have a play making PG we will suffer another 17 win season. Just base on some indirect comments, Phil knows this. Watching the playoffs, specifically , Aldridge, Gasol, those guys look for the PnR every time down court, it's the nature of the game.

I even heard shaq, rick fox, kerr, echoing these same words billups said.

Whats even more of a concern, what happens in 2016/17 when phil is gone,

ES
AUTOADVERT
fishmike
Posts: 53040
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
4/23/2015  3:03 PM
Great when nobody comes and we resign Bargs for the max you can tell everyone your right.
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
knicks1248
Posts: 42059
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #582
4/23/2015  3:40 PM
fishmike wrote:Great when nobody comes and we resign Bargs for the max you can tell everyone your right.

This is a case where i don't want to be right, I'm just not understanding the thought process.

It's like toyota car Co saying, forget hybrid, lets bring back the horse and carriage, we can really save the consumer a ton of money on gas.

ES
fishmike
Posts: 53040
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
4/23/2015  3:43 PM
knicks1248 wrote:
fishmike wrote:Great when nobody comes and we resign Bargs for the max you can tell everyone your right.

This is a case where i don't want to be right, I'm just not understanding the thought process.

It's like toyota car Co saying, forget hybrid, lets bring back the horse and carriage, we can really save the consumer a ton of money on gas.

yup... exact same thing.
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
crzymdups
Posts: 52018
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/1/2004
Member: #671
USA
4/23/2015  3:51 PM
Okafor would dominate in the Triangle. Have you heard tell of this Shaq fellow who did okay for the Triangular Lakers. Also this young Bynum character. Triangle is built for post players.

Also, the system seemed to get more flexible as Fisher grew into it. For everyone saying there's no pick and roll... I saw Shved run quite a few pick and rolls. The system isn't necessarily rigid.

Way too early to panic in any case.

¿ △ ?
Moonangie
Posts: 24728
Alba Posts: 5
Joined: 7/9/2009
Member: #2788

4/23/2015  3:52 PM
knicks1248 wrote:
Billups not sold on triangle: Jackson said he plans to use the triangle offense as a selling point with free agents this summer. At least one former NBA player thinks that’s a bad idea.

“I don’t know about that triangle,” ESPN analyst Chauncey Billups said on the “The Knicks Blog with Anthony Donahue” radio show. “The game is just different now. ... Look at the point-guard position right now; these guys are playmakers.

“They come down, they score, they’re playmakers. They need pick-and-rolls. You put one of those guys in the triangle offense, where it’s kind of just slow down, pass, cut -- it’s no real NBA playmaking ability. It’s no pick-and-roll stuff, it’s no pindown to the post, no counteraction. Obviously that offense won a lot of championships. But it was curtailed to the personnel that they had.”

Billups added: “You look at Shaq in the triangle -- there’s really no big man in the game like that today. It’s a guard’s game. The game is small, it’s a guard’s game. I got my reservations about the triangle, I really do.”


This is an absolute fact, neither Towns, or OK4 will thrive in the triangle, and if we don't have a play making PG we will suffer another 17 win season. Just base on some indirect comments, Phil knows this. Watching the playoffs, specifically , Aldridge, Gasol, those guys look for the PnR every time down court, it's the nature of the game.

I even heard shaq, rick fox, kerr, echoing these same words billups said.

Whats even more of a concern, what happens in 2016/17 when phil is gone,

Having a tough time deciding whether FirWoodson or knicks1248 are more intolerable. Both post the most idiotic stuff on here with such reckless abandon, I'm not sure how the trophies should be handed out.

nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
4/23/2015  3:53 PM
knicks1248 wrote:
Billups not sold on triangle: Jackson said he plans to use the triangle offense as a selling point with free agents this summer. At least one former NBA player thinks that’s a bad idea.

“I don’t know about that triangle,” ESPN analyst Chauncey Billups said on the “The Knicks Blog with Anthony Donahue” radio show. “The game is just different now. ... Look at the point-guard position right now; these guys are playmakers.

“They come down, they score, they’re playmakers. They need pick-and-rolls. You put one of those guys in the triangle offense, where it’s kind of just slow down, pass, cut -- it’s no real NBA playmaking ability. It’s no pick-and-roll stuff, it’s no pindown to the post, no counteraction. Obviously that offense won a lot of championships. But it was curtailed to the personnel that they had.”

Billups added: “You look at Shaq in the triangle -- there’s really no big man in the game like that today. It’s a guard’s game. The game is small, it’s a guard’s game. I got my reservations about the triangle, I really do.”


This is an absolute fact, neither Towns, or OK4 will thrive in the triangle, and if we don't have a play making PG we will suffer another 17 win season. Just base on some indirect comments, Phil knows this. Watching the playoffs, specifically , Aldridge, Gasol, those guys look for the PnR every time down court, it's the nature of the game.

I even heard shaq, rick fox, kerr, echoing these same words billups said.

Whats even more of a concern, what happens in 2016/17 when phil is gone,


The very essence of the Triangle is to have post players in prime scoring position. I have no idea what you're actually considering "facts" but in truth players like Towns and OK4 should thrive in this system.

1. Bigs get far more touches in this system because the flow of the offense isn't to pound the ball but rather to pass the ball into a post player and cut.

2. The history of Bigs in the Triangle suggests that they can be successful in the offense, since it actually enhances the looks that bigs get. The more skilled the Big the more options they'll have.

3. The Triangle is one of the few offenses that are designed to work with two pivots. Pau and Bynum is an example of this. There is always a low post option on the strong side "Triangle" and a 2 man game called "Pinch Post" on the opposite side where you can run PnR etc. So your PF and C are always involved in the flow of the offense.

knicks1248
Posts: 42059
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #582
4/23/2015  4:00 PM
crzymdups wrote:Okafor would dominate in the Triangle. Have you heard tell of this Shaq fellow who did okay for the Triangular Lakers. Also this young Bynum character. Triangle is built for post players.

Also, the system seemed to get more flexible as Fisher grew into it. For everyone saying there's no pick and roll... I saw Shved run quite a few pick and rolls. The system isn't necessarily rigid.

Way too early to panic in any case.


Yes i did see that, which is why I don't understand. You had more success running some pick and roll sets, why would you make that a staple of your offense

ES
knicks1248
Posts: 42059
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #582
4/23/2015  4:04 PM
nixluva wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:
Billups not sold on triangle: Jackson said he plans to use the triangle offense as a selling point with free agents this summer. At least one former NBA player thinks that’s a bad idea.

“I don’t know about that triangle,” ESPN analyst Chauncey Billups said on the “The Knicks Blog with Anthony Donahue” radio show. “The game is just different now. ... Look at the point-guard position right now; these guys are playmakers.

“They come down, they score, they’re playmakers. They need pick-and-rolls. You put one of those guys in the triangle offense, where it’s kind of just slow down, pass, cut -- it’s no real NBA playmaking ability. It’s no pick-and-roll stuff, it’s no pindown to the post, no counteraction. Obviously that offense won a lot of championships. But it was curtailed to the personnel that they had.”

Billups added: “You look at Shaq in the triangle -- there’s really no big man in the game like that today. It’s a guard’s game. The game is small, it’s a guard’s game. I got my reservations about the triangle, I really do.”


This is an absolute fact, neither Towns, or OK4 will thrive in the triangle, and if we don't have a play making PG we will suffer another 17 win season. Just base on some indirect comments, Phil knows this. Watching the playoffs, specifically , Aldridge, Gasol, those guys look for the PnR every time down court, it's the nature of the game.

I even heard shaq, rick fox, kerr, echoing these same words billups said.

Whats even more of a concern, what happens in 2016/17 when phil is gone,


The very essence of the Triangle is to have post players in prime scoring position. I have no idea what you're actually considering "facts" but in truth players like Towns and OK4 should thrive in this system.

1. Bigs get far more touches in this system because the flow of the offense isn't to pound the ball but rather to pass the ball into a post player and cut.

2. The history of Bigs in the Triangle suggests that they can be successful in the offense, since it actually enhances the looks that bigs get. The more skilled the Big the more options they'll have.

3. The Triangle is one of the few offenses that are designed to work with two pivots. Pau and Bynum is an example of this. There is always a low post option on the strong side "Triangle" and a 2 man game called "Pinch Post" on the opposite side where you can run PnR etc. So your PF and C are always involved in the flow of the offense.


I never said the triangle is bad system in general, but in a PG driven league, it doesn't make much sense to run it consistently.

ES
knicks1248
Posts: 42059
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #582
4/23/2015  4:08 PM
TripleThreat wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:I cant believe Phil is going to TRY and sell the triangle to FA


Bigger issues than recruitment IMHO

1) No major "feeder" system is using the Triangle exclusively.

2) No other NBA franchise is using it, thus negating the value of having other players train and develop on another team's dime/cost/time frame/resource pool.

3) Where Phil Jackson will have to heavily shop to fill the roster, Tiers 3, 4 and 5 of free agency, will likely be full of players who are ill suited for the Triangle

The Triangle was Tex Winter's brainchild, but Winters also took for granted, in his prime, of the "four year college player" With the current "One and Done" Generation of player, more players are lacking the polish and fundamentals to really use the Triangle effectively.

For the Knicks to succeed in the Triangle, they must build and train in house, for a team where they have one high draft pick in three years and have to mine FA fringes heavily to just fill out the roster, it's IMHO a plan to fail. How it needs to work is incongruent to what the circumstances lay out for this team currently.

You hit it on the head Trip..

When phil said that no 19 yr old is gong to come in and make that much of a difference, that exactly what he was looking at.

It's no wonder he grabbed a 4 yr player in C Early..

ES
nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
4/23/2015  4:21 PM
knicks1248 wrote:
nixluva wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:
Billups not sold on triangle: Jackson said he plans to use the triangle offense as a selling point with free agents this summer. At least one former NBA player thinks that’s a bad idea.

“I don’t know about that triangle,” ESPN analyst Chauncey Billups said on the “The Knicks Blog with Anthony Donahue” radio show. “The game is just different now. ... Look at the point-guard position right now; these guys are playmakers.

“They come down, they score, they’re playmakers. They need pick-and-rolls. You put one of those guys in the triangle offense, where it’s kind of just slow down, pass, cut -- it’s no real NBA playmaking ability. It’s no pick-and-roll stuff, it’s no pindown to the post, no counteraction. Obviously that offense won a lot of championships. But it was curtailed to the personnel that they had.”

Billups added: “You look at Shaq in the triangle -- there’s really no big man in the game like that today. It’s a guard’s game. The game is small, it’s a guard’s game. I got my reservations about the triangle, I really do.”


This is an absolute fact, neither Towns, or OK4 will thrive in the triangle, and if we don't have a play making PG we will suffer another 17 win season. Just base on some indirect comments, Phil knows this. Watching the playoffs, specifically , Aldridge, Gasol, those guys look for the PnR every time down court, it's the nature of the game.

I even heard shaq, rick fox, kerr, echoing these same words billups said.

Whats even more of a concern, what happens in 2016/17 when phil is gone,


The very essence of the Triangle is to have post players in prime scoring position. I have no idea what you're actually considering "facts" but in truth players like Towns and OK4 should thrive in this system.

1. Bigs get far more touches in this system because the flow of the offense isn't to pound the ball but rather to pass the ball into a post player and cut.

2. The history of Bigs in the Triangle suggests that they can be successful in the offense, since it actually enhances the looks that bigs get. The more skilled the Big the more options they'll have.

3. The Triangle is one of the few offenses that are designed to work with two pivots. Pau and Bynum is an example of this. There is always a low post option on the strong side "Triangle" and a 2 man game called "Pinch Post" on the opposite side where you can run PnR etc. So your PF and C are always involved in the flow of the offense.


I never said the triangle is bad system in general, but in a PG driven league, it doesn't make much sense to run it consistently.

You said that "This is an absolute fact, neither Towns, or OK4 will thrive in the triangle". That's what I was primarily addressing. I was very specific in my response to this statement.

As for the point you're making about this being a PG driven league, there are still teams in the playoffs that have bigs as key parts of their attack. Duncan, Gasol, Aldridge, Griffin, Dirk, Howard etc. Bigs are still very much present and impactful on the best teams. We do need an upgrade at guard, but that has nothing to do with your 1st point about Towns and OK4 not being successful in the Triangle. Their success in the Triangle isn't really based on PG play. The Triangle has been successful without having a great PG over the decades.

knicks1248
Posts: 42059
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #582
4/23/2015  5:00 PM
nixluva wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:
nixluva wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:
Billups not sold on triangle: Jackson said he plans to use the triangle offense as a selling point with free agents this summer. At least one former NBA player thinks that’s a bad idea.

“I don’t know about that triangle,” ESPN analyst Chauncey Billups said on the “The Knicks Blog with Anthony Donahue” radio show. “The game is just different now. ... Look at the point-guard position right now; these guys are playmakers.

“They come down, they score, they’re playmakers. They need pick-and-rolls. You put one of those guys in the triangle offense, where it’s kind of just slow down, pass, cut -- it’s no real NBA playmaking ability. It’s no pick-and-roll stuff, it’s no pindown to the post, no counteraction. Obviously that offense won a lot of championships. But it was curtailed to the personnel that they had.”

Billups added: “You look at Shaq in the triangle -- there’s really no big man in the game like that today. It’s a guard’s game. The game is small, it’s a guard’s game. I got my reservations about the triangle, I really do.”


This is an absolute fact, neither Towns, or OK4 will thrive in the triangle, and if we don't have a play making PG we will suffer another 17 win season. Just base on some indirect comments, Phil knows this. Watching the playoffs, specifically , Aldridge, Gasol, those guys look for the PnR every time down court, it's the nature of the game.

I even heard shaq, rick fox, kerr, echoing these same words billups said.

Whats even more of a concern, what happens in 2016/17 when phil is gone,


The very essence of the Triangle is to have post players in prime scoring position. I have no idea what you're actually considering "facts" but in truth players like Towns and OK4 should thrive in this system.

1. Bigs get far more touches in this system because the flow of the offense isn't to pound the ball but rather to pass the ball into a post player and cut.

2. The history of Bigs in the Triangle suggests that they can be successful in the offense, since it actually enhances the looks that bigs get. The more skilled the Big the more options they'll have.

3. The Triangle is one of the few offenses that are designed to work with two pivots. Pau and Bynum is an example of this. There is always a low post option on the strong side "Triangle" and a 2 man game called "Pinch Post" on the opposite side where you can run PnR etc. So your PF and C are always involved in the flow of the offense.


I never said the triangle is bad system in general, but in a PG driven league, it doesn't make much sense to run it consistently.

You said that "This is an absolute fact, neither Towns, or OK4 will thrive in the triangle". That's what I was primarily addressing. I was very specific in my response to this statement.

As for the point you're making about this being a PG driven league, there are still teams in the playoffs that have bigs as key parts of their attack. Duncan, Gasol, Aldridge, Griffin, Dirk, Howard etc. Bigs are still very much present and impactful on the best teams. We do need an upgrade at guard, but that has nothing to do with your 1st point about Towns and OK4 not being successful in the Triangle. Their success in the Triangle isn't really based on PG play. The Triangle has been successful without having a great PG over the decades.

They have eliminated the center position in the all star ballot, and most of the current bigs,are VETs in their 30's

Look at anthony davis, does he even play like any old school big.

You keep saying the triangle doesn't required an all star pg, well that maybe true, but on the other end of the floor, you can't have no calderon/kerr type pg guarding the likes of rose, westbrook, cp3, holiday, ect.


The bulls were a relentless defensive team, that did not rely on offense to win games, see CHARLES SMITH.

How many all 1st defensive teams did shaq, kobe, jordan, pipen and rodman make.

At the end of the day those same guys took majority of the shots, there were no balance scoring attack that the so called triangle produces.

ES
knickscity
Posts: 24533
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 6/2/2012
Member: #4241
USA
4/23/2015  5:00 PM
Billups certainly has made points that has been said quite a bit. The triangle may very wellbe outdated in today's nba, but teams do use facets of it. It is true this is a guard/wing dominant league, but your better teams do have quality bigs. Imo, as long as your offense attacks the rim, shares the ball, penetrates to kick out for wide open shots, is receptive, and is adaptive to the personnel and promotes efficient shots then it should be good enough to win with.
nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
4/23/2015  5:29 PM
knicks1248 wrote:
nixluva wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:
nixluva wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:
Billups not sold on triangle: Jackson said he plans to use the triangle offense as a selling point with free agents this summer. At least one former NBA player thinks that’s a bad idea.

“I don’t know about that triangle,” ESPN analyst Chauncey Billups said on the “The Knicks Blog with Anthony Donahue” radio show. “The game is just different now. ... Look at the point-guard position right now; these guys are playmakers.

“They come down, they score, they’re playmakers. They need pick-and-rolls. You put one of those guys in the triangle offense, where it’s kind of just slow down, pass, cut -- it’s no real NBA playmaking ability. It’s no pick-and-roll stuff, it’s no pindown to the post, no counteraction. Obviously that offense won a lot of championships. But it was curtailed to the personnel that they had.”

Billups added: “You look at Shaq in the triangle -- there’s really no big man in the game like that today. It’s a guard’s game. The game is small, it’s a guard’s game. I got my reservations about the triangle, I really do.”


This is an absolute fact, neither Towns, or OK4 will thrive in the triangle, and if we don't have a play making PG we will suffer another 17 win season. Just base on some indirect comments, Phil knows this. Watching the playoffs, specifically , Aldridge, Gasol, those guys look for the PnR every time down court, it's the nature of the game.

I even heard shaq, rick fox, kerr, echoing these same words billups said.

Whats even more of a concern, what happens in 2016/17 when phil is gone,


The very essence of the Triangle is to have post players in prime scoring position. I have no idea what you're actually considering "facts" but in truth players like Towns and OK4 should thrive in this system.

1. Bigs get far more touches in this system because the flow of the offense isn't to pound the ball but rather to pass the ball into a post player and cut.

2. The history of Bigs in the Triangle suggests that they can be successful in the offense, since it actually enhances the looks that bigs get. The more skilled the Big the more options they'll have.

3. The Triangle is one of the few offenses that are designed to work with two pivots. Pau and Bynum is an example of this. There is always a low post option on the strong side "Triangle" and a 2 man game called "Pinch Post" on the opposite side where you can run PnR etc. So your PF and C are always involved in the flow of the offense.


I never said the triangle is bad system in general, but in a PG driven league, it doesn't make much sense to run it consistently.

You said that "This is an absolute fact, neither Towns, or OK4 will thrive in the triangle". That's what I was primarily addressing. I was very specific in my response to this statement.

As for the point you're making about this being a PG driven league, there are still teams in the playoffs that have bigs as key parts of their attack. Duncan, Gasol, Aldridge, Griffin, Dirk, Howard etc. Bigs are still very much present and impactful on the best teams. We do need an upgrade at guard, but that has nothing to do with your 1st point about Towns and OK4 not being successful in the Triangle. Their success in the Triangle isn't really based on PG play. The Triangle has been successful without having a great PG over the decades.

They have eliminated the center position in the all star ballot, and most of the current bigs,are VETs in their 30's

Look at anthony davis, does he even play like any old school big.

You keep saying the triangle doesn't required an all star pg, well that maybe true, but on the other end of the floor, you can't have no calderon/kerr type pg guarding the likes of rose, westbrook, cp3, holiday, ect.


The bulls were a relentless defensive team, that did not rely on offense to win games, see CHARLES SMITH.

How many all 1st defensive teams did shaq, kobe, jordan, pipen and rodman make.

At the end of the day those same guys took majority of the shots, there were no balance scoring attack that the so called triangle produces.

Don't understand your 1st point about the All Star game eliminating Centers. We will most certainly have PF's and Centers on our roster and as I posted above many of the playoff teams have good PF's and C's.

Doesn't matter what Anthony Davis plays like.

In terms of defense on the perimeter we most certainly will be looking to improve our defense at the guard position. That still has nothing to do with how we play offense on the other end. We simply need to improve our defense on the perimeter with guards who can defend at a high level. That was the idea of Galloway and I'm sure they'll be looking for another guard who can defend.

Don't understand your points about The Bulls, Shaq, Kobe, Jordan, Pippen and Rodman in reference to this argument about Towns and OK4 not being successful in the Triangle. How we play offensively has no bearing on our ability to defend top PG's.

EwingsGlass
Posts: 26035
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 4/29/2005
Member: #893
USA
4/24/2015  3:58 PM
nixluva wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:
nixluva wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:
nixluva wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:
Billups not sold on triangle: Jackson said he plans to use the triangle offense as a selling point with free agents this summer. At least one former NBA player thinks that’s a bad idea.

“I don’t know about that triangle,” ESPN analyst Chauncey Billups said on the “The Knicks Blog with Anthony Donahue” radio show. “The game is just different now. ... Look at the point-guard position right now; these guys are playmakers.

“They come down, they score, they’re playmakers. They need pick-and-rolls. You put one of those guys in the triangle offense, where it’s kind of just slow down, pass, cut -- it’s no real NBA playmaking ability. It’s no pick-and-roll stuff, it’s no pindown to the post, no counteraction. Obviously that offense won a lot of championships. But it was curtailed to the personnel that they had.”

Billups added: “You look at Shaq in the triangle -- there’s really no big man in the game like that today. It’s a guard’s game. The game is small, it’s a guard’s game. I got my reservations about the triangle, I really do.”


This is an absolute fact, neither Towns, or OK4 will thrive in the triangle, and if we don't have a play making PG we will suffer another 17 win season. Just base on some indirect comments, Phil knows this. Watching the playoffs, specifically , Aldridge, Gasol, those guys look for the PnR every time down court, it's the nature of the game.

I even heard shaq, rick fox, kerr, echoing these same words billups said.

Whats even more of a concern, what happens in 2016/17 when phil is gone,


The very essence of the Triangle is to have post players in prime scoring position. I have no idea what you're actually considering "facts" but in truth players like Towns and OK4 should thrive in this system.

1. Bigs get far more touches in this system because the flow of the offense isn't to pound the ball but rather to pass the ball into a post player and cut.

2. The history of Bigs in the Triangle suggests that they can be successful in the offense, since it actually enhances the looks that bigs get. The more skilled the Big the more options they'll have.

3. The Triangle is one of the few offenses that are designed to work with two pivots. Pau and Bynum is an example of this. There is always a low post option on the strong side "Triangle" and a 2 man game called "Pinch Post" on the opposite side where you can run PnR etc. So your PF and C are always involved in the flow of the offense.


I never said the triangle is bad system in general, but in a PG driven league, it doesn't make much sense to run it consistently.

You said that "This is an absolute fact, neither Towns, or OK4 will thrive in the triangle". That's what I was primarily addressing. I was very specific in my response to this statement.

As for the point you're making about this being a PG driven league, there are still teams in the playoffs that have bigs as key parts of their attack. Duncan, Gasol, Aldridge, Griffin, Dirk, Howard etc. Bigs are still very much present and impactful on the best teams. We do need an upgrade at guard, but that has nothing to do with your 1st point about Towns and OK4 not being successful in the Triangle. Their success in the Triangle isn't really based on PG play. The Triangle has been successful without having a great PG over the decades.

They have eliminated the center position in the all star ballot, and most of the current bigs,are VETs in their 30's

Look at anthony davis, does he even play like any old school big.

You keep saying the triangle doesn't required an all star pg, well that maybe true, but on the other end of the floor, you can't have no calderon/kerr type pg guarding the likes of rose, westbrook, cp3, holiday, ect.


The bulls were a relentless defensive team, that did not rely on offense to win games, see CHARLES SMITH.

How many all 1st defensive teams did shaq, kobe, jordan, pipen and rodman make.

At the end of the day those same guys took majority of the shots, there were no balance scoring attack that the so called triangle produces.

Don't understand your 1st point about the All Star game eliminating Centers. We will most certainly have PF's and Centers on our roster and as I posted above many of the playoff teams have good PF's and C's.

Doesn't matter what Anthony Davis plays like.

In terms of defense on the perimeter we most certainly will be looking to improve our defense at the guard position. That still has nothing to do with how we play offense on the other end. We simply need to improve our defense on the perimeter with guards who can defend at a high level. That was the idea of Galloway and I'm sure they'll be looking for another guard who can defend.

Don't understand your points about The Bulls, Shaq, Kobe, Jordan, Pippen and Rodman in reference to this argument about Towns and OK4 not being successful in the Triangle. How we play offensively has no bearing on our ability to defend top PG's.

You might call me NixLuvaLuva cause I think Nix is dead on. Commentary that the game has passed the triangle by is like saying passing is no longer a necessary cpmponent cause PGs are faster and athletic now. Yeah, maybe the old school iteration of the Bulls Triangle where BJ Armstrong and Luc Longley filled out the roster is less acceptable -- that said Westbrook isn't even in the playoffs (clearly an athletic PG is not the end of the story). Westbrook, Rose, etc. have not won a thing. Since 1999 the Spurs and Lakers have won 14 out of 16 Western conference championships. The Spurs with Tony Parker arguably have a dynamic PG that can get to and finish in the paint, but I would not call him uber-athletic in the Westbrook/Rose sense. The Lakers did not have this. Both teams played system basketball with a stable core of highly trained players.

The Heat put all their talent together and won a couple chips, but even they skipped the PG and C and focused on the wings.

You give me a 3+D PG, an athletic SG that can drive to the basket and play D, a Melo that commits on defense, a Pivot that can pass and play the low post, (and play D), and a defensive rebounding center == ALL with a high enough basketball IQ to react to the defense and there is a championship to be had. Can we have that championship next year? Probably not. But I think the Knicks, properly cultivated a team of players understanding system basketball can share the kind of success that Pop had in San Antonio and PJax had in LA. Two teams, 14 out of 16 is not an aberration. Its a testament to system basketball.

This is the Randle.
nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
4/24/2015  4:13 PM
EwingsGlass wrote:
nixluva wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:
nixluva wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:
nixluva wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:
Billups not sold on triangle: Jackson said he plans to use the triangle offense as a selling point with free agents this summer. At least one former NBA player thinks that’s a bad idea.

“I don’t know about that triangle,” ESPN analyst Chauncey Billups said on the “The Knicks Blog with Anthony Donahue” radio show. “The game is just different now. ... Look at the point-guard position right now; these guys are playmakers.

“They come down, they score, they’re playmakers. They need pick-and-rolls. You put one of those guys in the triangle offense, where it’s kind of just slow down, pass, cut -- it’s no real NBA playmaking ability. It’s no pick-and-roll stuff, it’s no pindown to the post, no counteraction. Obviously that offense won a lot of championships. But it was curtailed to the personnel that they had.”

Billups added: “You look at Shaq in the triangle -- there’s really no big man in the game like that today. It’s a guard’s game. The game is small, it’s a guard’s game. I got my reservations about the triangle, I really do.”


This is an absolute fact, neither Towns, or OK4 will thrive in the triangle, and if we don't have a play making PG we will suffer another 17 win season. Just base on some indirect comments, Phil knows this. Watching the playoffs, specifically , Aldridge, Gasol, those guys look for the PnR every time down court, it's the nature of the game.

I even heard shaq, rick fox, kerr, echoing these same words billups said.

Whats even more of a concern, what happens in 2016/17 when phil is gone,


The very essence of the Triangle is to have post players in prime scoring position. I have no idea what you're actually considering "facts" but in truth players like Towns and OK4 should thrive in this system.

1. Bigs get far more touches in this system because the flow of the offense isn't to pound the ball but rather to pass the ball into a post player and cut.

2. The history of Bigs in the Triangle suggests that they can be successful in the offense, since it actually enhances the looks that bigs get. The more skilled the Big the more options they'll have.

3. The Triangle is one of the few offenses that are designed to work with two pivots. Pau and Bynum is an example of this. There is always a low post option on the strong side "Triangle" and a 2 man game called "Pinch Post" on the opposite side where you can run PnR etc. So your PF and C are always involved in the flow of the offense.


I never said the triangle is bad system in general, but in a PG driven league, it doesn't make much sense to run it consistently.

You said that "This is an absolute fact, neither Towns, or OK4 will thrive in the triangle". That's what I was primarily addressing. I was very specific in my response to this statement.

As for the point you're making about this being a PG driven league, there are still teams in the playoffs that have bigs as key parts of their attack. Duncan, Gasol, Aldridge, Griffin, Dirk, Howard etc. Bigs are still very much present and impactful on the best teams. We do need an upgrade at guard, but that has nothing to do with your 1st point about Towns and OK4 not being successful in the Triangle. Their success in the Triangle isn't really based on PG play. The Triangle has been successful without having a great PG over the decades.

They have eliminated the center position in the all star ballot, and most of the current bigs,are VETs in their 30's

Look at anthony davis, does he even play like any old school big.

You keep saying the triangle doesn't required an all star pg, well that maybe true, but on the other end of the floor, you can't have no calderon/kerr type pg guarding the likes of rose, westbrook, cp3, holiday, ect.


The bulls were a relentless defensive team, that did not rely on offense to win games, see CHARLES SMITH.

How many all 1st defensive teams did shaq, kobe, jordan, pipen and rodman make.

At the end of the day those same guys took majority of the shots, there were no balance scoring attack that the so called triangle produces.

Don't understand your 1st point about the All Star game eliminating Centers. We will most certainly have PF's and Centers on our roster and as I posted above many of the playoff teams have good PF's and C's.

Doesn't matter what Anthony Davis plays like.

In terms of defense on the perimeter we most certainly will be looking to improve our defense at the guard position. That still has nothing to do with how we play offense on the other end. We simply need to improve our defense on the perimeter with guards who can defend at a high level. That was the idea of Galloway and I'm sure they'll be looking for another guard who can defend.

Don't understand your points about The Bulls, Shaq, Kobe, Jordan, Pippen and Rodman in reference to this argument about Towns and OK4 not being successful in the Triangle. How we play offensively has no bearing on our ability to defend top PG's.

You might call me NixLuvaLuva cause I think Nix is dead on. Commentary that the game has passed the triangle by is like saying passing is no longer a necessary cpmponent cause PGs are faster and athletic now. Yeah, maybe the old school iteration of the Bulls Triangle where BJ Armstrong and Luc Longley filled out the roster is less acceptable -- that said Westbrook isn't even in the playoffs (clearly an athletic PG is not the end of the story). Westbrook, Rose, etc. have not won a thing. Since 1999 the Spurs and Lakers have won 14 out of 16 Western conference championships. The Spurs with Tony Parker arguably have a dynamic PG that can get to and finish in the paint, but I would not call him uber-athletic in the Westbrook/Rose sense. The Lakers did not have this. Both teams played system basketball with a stable core of highly trained players.

The Heat put all their talent together and won a couple chips, but even they skipped the PG and C and focused on the wings.

You give me a 3+D PG, an athletic SG that can drive to the basket and play D, a Melo that commits on defense, a Pivot that can pass and play the low post, (and play D), and a defensive rebounding center == ALL with a high enough basketball IQ to react to the defense and there is a championship to be had. Can we have that championship next year? Probably not. But I think the Knicks, properly cultivated a team of players understanding system basketball can share the kind of success that Pop had in San Antonio and PJax had in LA. Two teams, 14 out of 16 is not an aberration. Its a testament to system basketball.


Yeah Duncan is STILL dominating in the playoffs. Which is freaking incredible. Marc Gasol is the best player on his team. It's still important to have bigs that you can play thru. Even tho the league has a ton of guards who like Steph Curry are changing the style of play, you look at how big the Bulls are and how the Mavs brought back Tyson and then added STAT and you can see that it's very important to the best teams to have strength at PF and C.
knicks1248
Posts: 42059
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #582
4/24/2015  4:13 PM    LAST EDITED: 4/24/2015  4:16 PM
EwingsGlass wrote:
nixluva wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:
nixluva wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:
nixluva wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:
Billups not sold on triangle: Jackson said he plans to use the triangle offense as a selling point with free agents this summer. At least one former NBA player thinks that’s a bad idea.

“I don’t know about that triangle,” ESPN analyst Chauncey Billups said on the “The Knicks Blog with Anthony Donahue” radio show. “The game is just different now. ... Look at the point-guard position right now; these guys are playmakers.

“They come down, they score, they’re playmakers. They need pick-and-rolls. You put one of those guys in the triangle offense, where it’s kind of just slow down, pass, cut -- it’s no real NBA playmaking ability. It’s no pick-and-roll stuff, it’s no pindown to the post, no counteraction. Obviously that offense won a lot of championships. But it was curtailed to the personnel that they had.”

Billups added: “You look at Shaq in the triangle -- there’s really no big man in the game like that today. It’s a guard’s game. The game is small, it’s a guard’s game. I got my reservations about the triangle, I really do.”


This is an absolute fact, neither Towns, or OK4 will thrive in the triangle, and if we don't have a play making PG we will suffer another 17 win season. Just base on some indirect comments, Phil knows this. Watching the playoffs, specifically , Aldridge, Gasol, those guys look for the PnR every time down court, it's the nature of the game.

I even heard shaq, rick fox, kerr, echoing these same words billups said.

Whats even more of a concern, what happens in 2016/17 when phil is gone,


The very essence of the Triangle is to have post players in prime scoring position. I have no idea what you're actually considering "facts" but in truth players like Towns and OK4 should thrive in this system.

1. Bigs get far more touches in this system because the flow of the offense isn't to pound the ball but rather to pass the ball into a post player and cut.

2. The history of Bigs in the Triangle suggests that they can be successful in the offense, since it actually enhances the looks that bigs get. The more skilled the Big the more options they'll have.

3. The Triangle is one of the few offenses that are designed to work with two pivots. Pau and Bynum is an example of this. There is always a low post option on the strong side "Triangle" and a 2 man game called "Pinch Post" on the opposite side where you can run PnR etc. So your PF and C are always involved in the flow of the offense.


I never said the triangle is bad system in general, but in a PG driven league, it doesn't make much sense to run it consistently.

You said that "This is an absolute fact, neither Towns, or OK4 will thrive in the triangle". That's what I was primarily addressing. I was very specific in my response to this statement.

As for the point you're making about this being a PG driven league, there are still teams in the playoffs that have bigs as key parts of their attack. Duncan, Gasol, Aldridge, Griffin, Dirk, Howard etc. Bigs are still very much present and impactful on the best teams. We do need an upgrade at guard, but that has nothing to do with your 1st point about Towns and OK4 not being successful in the Triangle. Their success in the Triangle isn't really based on PG play. The Triangle has been successful without having a great PG over the decades.

They have eliminated the center position in the all star ballot, and most of the current bigs,are VETs in their 30's

Look at anthony davis, does he even play like any old school big.

You keep saying the triangle doesn't required an all star pg, well that maybe true, but on the other end of the floor, you can't have no calderon/kerr type pg guarding the likes of rose, westbrook, cp3, holiday, ect.


The bulls were a relentless defensive team, that did not rely on offense to win games, see CHARLES SMITH.

How many all 1st defensive teams did shaq, kobe, jordan, pipen and rodman make.

At the end of the day those same guys took majority of the shots, there were no balance scoring attack that the so called triangle produces.

Don't understand your 1st point about the All Star game eliminating Centers. We will most certainly have PF's and Centers on our roster and as I posted above many of the playoff teams have good PF's and C's.

Doesn't matter what Anthony Davis plays like.

In terms of defense on the perimeter we most certainly will be looking to improve our defense at the guard position. That still has nothing to do with how we play offense on the other end. We simply need to improve our defense on the perimeter with guards who can defend at a high level. That was the idea of Galloway and I'm sure they'll be looking for another guard who can defend.

Don't understand your points about The Bulls, Shaq, Kobe, Jordan, Pippen and Rodman in reference to this argument about Towns and OK4 not being successful in the Triangle. How we play offensively has no bearing on our ability to defend top PG's.

You might call me NixLuvaLuva cause I think Nix is dead on. Commentary that the game has passed the triangle by is like saying passing is no longer a necessary cpmponent cause PGs are faster and athletic now. Yeah, maybe the old school iteration of the Bulls Triangle where BJ Armstrong and Luc Longley filled out the roster is less acceptable -- that said Westbrook isn't even in the playoffs (clearly an athletic PG is not the end of the story). Westbrook, Rose, etc. have not won a thing. Since 1999 the Spurs and Lakers have won 14 out of 16 Western conference championships. The Spurs with Tony Parker arguably have a dynamic PG that can get to and finish in the paint, but I would not call him uber-athletic in the Westbrook/Rose sense. The Lakers did not have this. Both teams played system basketball with a stable core of highly trained players.

The Heat put all their talent together and won a couple chips, but even they skipped the PG and C and focused on the wings.

You give me a 3+D PG, an athletic SG that can drive to the basket and play D, a Melo that commits on defense, a Pivot that can pass and play the low post, (and play D), and a defensive rebounding center == ALL with a high enough basketball IQ to react to the defense and there is a championship to be had. Can we have that championship next year? Probably not. But I think the Knicks, properly cultivated a team of players understanding system basketball can share the kind of success that Pop had in San Antonio and PJax had in LA. Two teams, 14 out of 16 is not an aberration. Its a testament to system basketball.

The triangle is a great system that hasn't been proven to work with out the most talented player on both ends of the floor on the face of the earth. Until that happens, they're will be question marks all day.

You also need a core of players that have played within that system for a few years, not players on one yr deals, and have no future with the team

ES
nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
4/24/2015  4:21 PM    LAST EDITED: 4/24/2015  4:26 PM
knicks1248 wrote:The triangle is a great system that hasn't been proven to work with out the most talented player on the face of the earth. Until that happens, they're will me question marks all day.

All teams need great talent to win a title. Most of the time the best players tend to win. No different for Magic, Bird, Dr. J, etc. It's always the case that the best talent makes it more likely you can win a title. There are exceptions along the way but mostly the titles are dominated by the top players. Let's just say that the Triangle isn't detrimental to teams winning titles. Not when you win 11 of 13 finals appearances. Note that Phil didn't win every year even with Kobe and Shaq. Having the best players doesn't guarantee a title, even if it makes it more likely.

knicks1248 wrote:You also need a core of players that have played within that system for a few years, not players on one yr deals, and have no future with the team

You're still stuck on this one year which was always going to be a transition year. Forget this season and move on. We should expect that this team will play in the system for a few years and hopefully get better. The Lakers responded quickly to Phil but they had a good roster and players that bought in.
EwingsGlass
Posts: 26035
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 4/29/2005
Member: #893
USA
4/24/2015  4:35 PM
nixluva wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:The triangle is a great system that hasn't been proven to work with out the most talented player on the face of the earth. Until that happens, they're will me question marks all day.

All teams need great talent to win a title. Most of the time the best players tend to win. No different for Magic, Bird, Dr. J, etc. It's always the case that the best talent makes it more likely you can win a title. There are exceptions along the way but mostly the titles are dominated by the top players. Let's just say that the Triangle isn't detrimental to teams winning titles. Not when you win 11 of 13 finals appearances. Note that Phil didn't win every year even with Kobe and Shaq. Having the best players doesn't guarantee a title, even if it makes it more likely.

knicks1248 wrote:You also need a core of players that have played within that system for a few years, not players on one yr deals, and have no future with the team

You're still stuck on this one year which was always going to be a transition year. Forget this season and move on. We should expect that this team will play in the system for a few years and hopefully get better. The Lakers responded quickly to Phil but they had a good roster and players that bought in.

MJ didn't win a thing without PJax. PJax has won without MJ.

Kobe hasn't won a thing without PJax. PJax won without Kobe.

PJax won three times and then left the Lakers. When he left, they stunk. When he came back, they won two more championships.

Can't say the same thing about Shaq. But Shaq spent three years in LA before PJax showed up without winning a thing. He got a chip with DWade, but I don't think that changes the point.

Yeah, talented players win championships, but good systems make players better.

You cannot say that PJax was lucky or did not affect those championship teams -or Kobe or MJ directly. That is just wrong. To say that MJ or Kobe would win in any system is wrong...cause they didn't.

This is the Randle.
ramtour420
Posts: 25910
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 3/19/2007
Member: #1388
Russian Federation
4/24/2015  4:40 PM
knicks1248 wrote:
fishmike wrote:Great when nobody comes and we resign Bargs for the max you can tell everyone your right.

This is a case where i don't want to be right, I'm just not understanding the thought process.

It's like toyota car Co saying, forget hybrid, lets bring back the horse and carriage, we can really save the consumer a ton of money on gas.

I am sorry but this is a really bad analogy, why not take it a step further and say with the current tecnology we need to explore more space rather then try to help our current planet? Do you see what i did here? one part of analogy has nothing to do with what you are comparing it to. hybrids are to stay because fossil fuels are limited, horse and carriage is no longer viable because our needs have changed so much. Passing, driving to the hole and being open for your shot are timeless concepts and they will will not change no matter how atletic the NBA players get

Everything you have ever wanted is on the other side of fear- George Adair
I cant believe Phil is going to TRY and sell the triangle to FA..smh

©2001-2012 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