callmened wrote:is Yogi or Felder a triangle PG? BRIGGS you asked if phil could play a 6-3 and 6-2 backcourt? How would he feel about a a 5-10 PG?again, great names and prospects but my question is HOW to we acquire these draft picks without assets? Last yr we were lucky that ATL was foolish enough to trade timmy for a 1st rder
unless youre talking about Melo getting traded, then i dont understand the talk of 1st rd draft picks. and of course only Melo dictates whether he gets traded and therefore whether we get draft picks
Here are some of my concerns with Phil and his triangle:
#1 - Phil possibly dismissing "smaller" PGs (say 6'1-6'2-ish and under) even if they have obvious talent because he doesn't think they're big enough or fits for his system. To me, that's a problem. I'd love a detailed explanation here.
#2 - Players, some quite talented, saying outright that they would never come play here because of said system, not to mention certain players that have played here and have since spoken out against said system. HUGE concern.
#3 - Phil possibly dismissing quality coaches, maybe even a Tom Thibodeau, because they may not fit his system = a problem.
#4 - At some point Phil will move on. He's even said as much. Do we want him leaving us with a bunch of triangle/Phil Jackson-specific players & coaches that the next regime will automatically look to unload to start over or do we want some pieces in place that any team would want to continue rebuilding with? That's what I fear will happen. Yet another concern of mine..
#5 - Show me any kind of evidence that the system was a winner without the best players in the sport at the time or better yet, how the system has been able to elevate/get the best out of a mediocre roster. Haven't seen that this year, that's for sure. Is there a chapter in Phil's book about this?? 
Yogi Ferrell has some damn good qualities -- yeah he's only around 6' (I don't think that's too small btw) but he's tough, seasoned/experienced (college senior), he's got very good speed and quickness, real shifty with the ball, he can get deep in the lane and make plays and he shoots it well. Look at a guy like Isaiah Canaan, a FA who I basically like. He's not top shelf by any means but a decent NBA PG around 6' that can shoot the 3. Those qualities probably get him paid a decent contract. The Sixers feature Ish Smith and Canaan as their main PGs. I think Ferrell's a better player than either of those guys. Who knows how good he could be -- as good or better than Darren Collison? Kyle Lowry perhaps? Never say never, man. Ferrell's real solid value anywhere from 40-60 in this draft and if we could ever ink him up if he goes undrafted, all the better (esp. on a team like ours with such a hole at that position. We also have no pick but you figure it's reasonable to think Phil could garner a late pick where we'd have a shot to get Ferrell. Beggars can't be choosers)...Outside of being slightly on the smaller side, how does he not fit the triangle exactly? I'm not saying you, Ned -- I'm addressing that question at Phil. To me, you would think that he has most of the requisite skills. Plus size for a PG is a bonus, no doubt, but how is that really applied unless said PG has some post up ability or enough size to play some 2G? I personally believe all this "ability to see over the defense" stuff is overrated. Gimmie a PG that can cut right threw the damn defense like a knife or look to outrun the defense at times any day--then if neither of those options are there, he can still function well in the half-court. Those are the main qualities in a PG that we should be looking for. Our search for a point can't possibly start and end looking at size only...Forget the triangle--any GM rebuilding a team should covet a lead guard with multiple skills, no? I think Ferrell fit the profile...
2/18/2016 11:52 PM