Basically, this article argues that the Triangle is just another system, just another offense. That there's nothing mystical about it. Basketball is just basketball and any system depends on the ability of the players to function in it. Players make the Triangle succeed . . . the Triangle doesn't make the players succeed.

100% Wrong. This is trying to reduce the Triangle to Xs and Os.

What makes the Triangle unique is the specific psychological effects it has on the players who become attuned to it. This is well attested to by the Michael Jordans and Kobe Bryants who thrived in it. These were great players BEFORE the Triangle . . . and they unqualifiedly testify to operating at yet another level within the Triangle.

It's not just the Triangle Xs and Os that make the difference . . . but a Triangle state of mind. Developed within a Triangle culture.

Don't like the idea of basketball "psychology" (?) Too "woo-woo" for you (?)

You deny that some days people play better than other days -- whatever the system (?) And that there must be a REASON for that (?) And that the reason can be KNOWN (?) And that something can be DONE about it (?)

Read Phils books and judge for yourself. While the Triangle is important, there are many other ingredients that add up.

Malcolm wrote:

Nalod wrote:Not sure I agree with this even as a big fan of the triangle . . . If you have the guns, even ISO systems can succeed!

No one is saying that you can't succeed without the Triangle. Someone wins the NBA championship . . . every year.

But why didn't the Bulls succeed equally well before the Triangle (?)
Why didn't the Lakers succeed equally well before the Triangle (?)

Why did Jordan (calling the triangle a "white man's system") and Bryant hate the Triangle before . . . and then swear by it afterwards (?)

LIke I said, Phil packaged it with the Zen and they learned to trust their teammates, and when they experienced the success and the confidence that came with it it all came together.

Thus, you do need the right players, personalities, and coach's. The players have to be professional and embrace their roles.
Even management has to buy into it!!! Its why it failed in Minny and Denver. I doubt you can install the system with a new coach with the same players. Its not gonna work for some players and if they are in contract years it compounds the difficulty as business gets in the way.

Bryant and Jordan were uber Alpha players who were not comfortable NOT being at the center of it all. The system has to allow that if your triple teams you gotta pass the ball! And if you do make sure the guy getting it does his job. When Kerr or Paxton hit open shots Jordan "won"!! I recall bill wennington hitting a critical layup when wide open to win a game when Jordan fed him. Jordan when given the shot took it, but when the defense took it away he trusted others to do their job. That's how basketball is supposed to be played.

They also learned to make their cuts and work off the ball. This is what Melo has not demonstrated in his career and what makes his "buy in" interesting to see. This is what I think Phil has challenged him on.
If successful the team will go further and even if he does not win a chip with knicks he can still be seen as finishing his career as a winner. Barkley, Payton, Stockton, Malone and Ewing are HOF players who might not have won a chip, but are far from being labeled "losers"!