crzymdups wrote:

fishmike wrote:crzymdups.. maybe Phil knows the guy and simply hates him. You just don't have all the info. Unless you think Thibs should be doing here what he's doing in Sota, running the whole ship. Otherwise Phil is more important than Thibs, bottom line. He gets who he wants to get. Coaching means nothing if the FO relationship isn't great. We have seen this so many times. Calling Phil arrogant because he's doesn't interview someone he doesn't want to work with? Is it his show or not?

It's his show. But is he interested in the Knicks winning? Or is he interested in proving the Triangle works?

I don't give a flying **** about the Triangle. I'd like the Knicks to win a championship in my lifetime.

Picking up the biggest name regardless of fit has bit us in the ass multiple upon multiple times. Maybe Thibbs would have worked out maybe he wouldn't have. But Phil should be given the freedom to do what he was brought here to do over the length of his 5 yr contract and see how it all plays out.

newyorknewyork wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

fishmike wrote:crzymdups.. maybe Phil knows the guy and simply hates him. You just don't have all the info. Unless you think Thibs should be doing here what he's doing in Sota, running the whole ship. Otherwise Phil is more important than Thibs, bottom line. He gets who he wants to get. Coaching means nothing if the FO relationship isn't great. We have seen this so many times. Calling Phil arrogant because he's doesn't interview someone he doesn't want to work with? Is it his show or not?

It's his show. But is he interested in the Knicks winning? Or is he interested in proving the Triangle works?

I don't give a flying **** about the Triangle. I'd like the Knicks to win a championship in my lifetime.

Picking up the biggest name regardless of fit has bit us in the ass multiple upon multiple times. Maybe Thibbs would have worked out maybe he wouldn't have. But Phil should be given the freedom to do what he was brought here to do over the length of his 5 yr contract and see how it all plays out.

short and to the point. couldn't have said it better myself.

fishmike wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

fishmike wrote:crzymdups.. maybe Phil knows the guy and simply hates him. You just don't have all the info. Unless you think Thibs should be doing here what he's doing in Sota, running the whole ship. Otherwise Phil is more important than Thibs, bottom line. He gets who he wants to get. Coaching means nothing if the FO relationship isn't great. We have seen this so many times. Calling Phil arrogant because he's doesn't interview someone he doesn't want to work with? Is it his show or not?

It's his show. But is he interested in the Knicks winning? Or is he interested in proving the Triangle works?

I don't give a flying **** about the Triangle. I'd like the Knicks to win a championship in my lifetime.

Picking up the biggest name regardless of fit has bit us in the ass multiple upon multiple times. Maybe Thibbs would have worked out maybe he wouldn't have. But Phil should be given the freedom to do what he was brought here to do over the length of his 5 yr contract and see how it all plays out.

every time its screwed us. Where did this notion that "Phil out to prove the triangle" come from? Its like saying Obama is trying to prove a black man can be elected POTUS. Those jobs are done. Phil won 11 rings and needs to prove the triangle? To who? That makes zero sense.

People have asked if its still a fit, and yes Phil has defended the system he wants his team to play. Is that the same as painting this picture that the guy's #1 MO is to prove people that the triangle works? Seriously.. that's nuts. Every move Phil has made has been future based.

Woj and Berger have both run stories that Phil is interested primarily in proving the Triangle works. Fisher was fired in part because he didn't use the Triangle enough. Valuable assets have been traded away for poor return because they didn't fit the Triangle. We've turned away coaches who wanted to be here who are great because they aren't Triangle enough. I'm not sure how much more needs to happen for people to admit that Phil is out to prove the Triangle works.

And, yes, there's plenty of people in the league who say Phil is full of it and the Triangle didn't win the championships, Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant and Shaq and Pippen and Gasol and Rodman and Grant and Odom had a lot more to do with it.

I tend to be in the latter camp.

You take the Triangle to OKC? Maybe that finally gets that group of players over the hump. That's a championship caliber roster that seems to not have quite figured out how to play together. Maybe there the Triangle is the final piece.

Phil's disciples have a 253-557 record. I think that's pretty good evidence that the Triangle as the first piece of the puzzle has not worked. That's a 31% winning percentage over 800 games. That's almost ten seasons of the Triangle not working.

fishmike wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

fishmike wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

fishmike wrote:crzymdups.. maybe Phil knows the guy and simply hates him. You just don't have all the info. Unless you think Thibs should be doing here what he's doing in Sota, running the whole ship. Otherwise Phil is more important than Thibs, bottom line. He gets who he wants to get. Coaching means nothing if the FO relationship isn't great. We have seen this so many times. Calling Phil arrogant because he's doesn't interview someone he doesn't want to work with? Is it his show or not?

It's his show. But is he interested in the Knicks winning? Or is he interested in proving the Triangle works?

I don't give a flying **** about the Triangle. I'd like the Knicks to win a championship in my lifetime.

Picking up the biggest name regardless of fit has bit us in the ass multiple upon multiple times. Maybe Thibbs would have worked out maybe he wouldn't have. But Phil should be given the freedom to do what he was brought here to do over the length of his 5 yr contract and see how it all plays out.

every time its screwed us. Where did this notion that "Phil out to prove the triangle" come from? Its like saying Obama is trying to prove a black man can be elected POTUS. Those jobs are done. Phil won 11 rings and needs to prove the triangle? To who? That makes zero sense.

People have asked if its still a fit, and yes Phil has defended the system he wants his team to play. Is that the same as painting this picture that the guy's #1 MO is to prove people that the triangle works? Seriously.. that's nuts. Every move Phil has made has been future based.

Woj and Berger have both run stories that Phil is interested primarily in proving the Triangle works. Fisher was fired in part because he didn't use the Triangle enough. Valuable assets have been traded away for poor return because they didn't fit the Triangle. We've turned away coaches who wanted to be here who are great because they aren't Triangle enough. I'm not sure how much more needs to happen for people to admit that Phil is out to prove the Triangle works.

And, yes, there's plenty of people in the league who say Phil is full of it and the Triangle didn't win the championships, Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant and Shaq and Pippen and Gasol and Rodman and Grant and Odom had a lot more to do with it.

I tend to be in the latter camp.

You take the Triangle to OKC? Maybe that finally gets that group of players over the hump. That's a championship caliber roster that seems to not have quite figured out how to play together. Maybe there the Triangle is the final piece.

Phil's disciples have a 253-557 record. I think that's pretty good evidence that the Triangle as the first piece of the puzzle has not worked. That's a 31% winning percentage over 800 games. That's almost ten seasons of the Triangle not working.

you include Kerr and Walton in that? If you aren't you are just pushing your agenda. You are clearly furious about the prospect of Rambis coaching and your posts have shifted into a straight up hate Phil mode/agenda. You have said
1) He's only out to prove the triangle
2) He only won because of great players

I cant say if you are right or wrong. I can say this is a process. Yes I predicted 45 wins last season. They were 20-20 trending upward and Melo turns and ankle, they lose every game for 3 weeks and there is the season. He comes back gimpy, along the way other guys go down and this stuff happens. Melo also had one of his best most complete seasons. Lopez is a bonafid asset. Lopez's value right now is fantastic as is his contract. KP is the franchise changing unicorn. I still believe in Grant. We have some other pieces that may or may not pop but I like the growth and how this is being built. I am fine with letting him continue to grow this.

Kerr is a hybrid of Jackson and Popovich - he played and won championships under both. He's not running the Triangle, he's running elements of the Triangle (kinda like Thibs!). Phil would never be cool with a PG dictating the offense as much as Kerr has Curry do it in GSW. Kerr has actually said his time in Phoenix with Nash and Gentry has influenced that as much as anything else. So Kerr is a hybrid of Jackson / Pop / Nash/MDA.

I'm sure Phil would love to take credit for it, but why did he make the "how's it goink" comment about the Warriors last spring if the Warriors are running the Triangle? Because they're not and he's threatened by their updates to it.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/philjackson11/status/597453125297917953

I'm talking about coaches who run the pure Triangle, or attempt to. Fisher tried to modernize the Triangle and it is a big reason why he got fired, along with the Barnes debacle.

I would be on board if Phil brought in Blatt and allowed for some modernization of the Triangle, but I bet you a sandwich that doesn't happen and Rambis is hired to run the "pure" Triangle. Time will tell. I'm done yelling at the sky. Not much we can do - Phil's gonna do what Phil's gonna do. We already blew an opportunity to hire the best defensive coach in the league. Blatt could be one of the better offensive minds - hey, at least he got an interview.

crzymdups wrote:

fishmike wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

fishmike wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

fishmike wrote:crzymdups.. maybe Phil knows the guy and simply hates him. You just don't have all the info. Unless you think Thibs should be doing here what he's doing in Sota, running the whole ship. Otherwise Phil is more important than Thibs, bottom line. He gets who he wants to get. Coaching means nothing if the FO relationship isn't great. We have seen this so many times. Calling Phil arrogant because he's doesn't interview someone he doesn't want to work with? Is it his show or not?

It's his show. But is he interested in the Knicks winning? Or is he interested in proving the Triangle works?

I don't give a flying **** about the Triangle. I'd like the Knicks to win a championship in my lifetime.

Picking up the biggest name regardless of fit has bit us in the ass multiple upon multiple times. Maybe Thibbs would have worked out maybe he wouldn't have. But Phil should be given the freedom to do what he was brought here to do over the length of his 5 yr contract and see how it all plays out.

every time its screwed us. Where did this notion that "Phil out to prove the triangle" come from? Its like saying Obama is trying to prove a black man can be elected POTUS. Those jobs are done. Phil won 11 rings and needs to prove the triangle? To who? That makes zero sense.

People have asked if its still a fit, and yes Phil has defended the system he wants his team to play. Is that the same as painting this picture that the guy's #1 MO is to prove people that the triangle works? Seriously.. that's nuts. Every move Phil has made has been future based.

Woj and Berger have both run stories that Phil is interested primarily in proving the Triangle works. Fisher was fired in part because he didn't use the Triangle enough. Valuable assets have been traded away for poor return because they didn't fit the Triangle. We've turned away coaches who wanted to be here who are great because they aren't Triangle enough. I'm not sure how much more needs to happen for people to admit that Phil is out to prove the Triangle works.

And, yes, there's plenty of people in the league who say Phil is full of it and the Triangle didn't win the championships, Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant and Shaq and Pippen and Gasol and Rodman and Grant and Odom had a lot more to do with it.

I tend to be in the latter camp.

You take the Triangle to OKC? Maybe that finally gets that group of players over the hump. That's a championship caliber roster that seems to not have quite figured out how to play together. Maybe there the Triangle is the final piece.

Phil's disciples have a 253-557 record. I think that's pretty good evidence that the Triangle as the first piece of the puzzle has not worked. That's a 31% winning percentage over 800 games. That's almost ten seasons of the Triangle not working.

you include Kerr and Walton in that? If you aren't you are just pushing your agenda. You are clearly furious about the prospect of Rambis coaching and your posts have shifted into a straight up hate Phil mode/agenda. You have said
1) He's only out to prove the triangle
2) He only won because of great players

I cant say if you are right or wrong. I can say this is a process. Yes I predicted 45 wins last season. They were 20-20 trending upward and Melo turns and ankle, they lose every game for 3 weeks and there is the season. He comes back gimpy, along the way other guys go down and this stuff happens. Melo also had one of his best most complete seasons. Lopez is a bonafid asset. Lopez's value right now is fantastic as is his contract. KP is the franchise changing unicorn. I still believe in Grant. We have some other pieces that may or may not pop but I like the growth and how this is being built. I am fine with letting him continue to grow this.

Kerr is a hybrid of Jackson and Popovich - he played and won championships under both. He's not running the Triangle, he's running elements of the Triangle (kinda like Thibs!). Phil would never be cool with a PG dictating the offense as much as Kerr has Curry do it in GSW. Kerr has actually said his time in Phoenix with Nash and Gentry has influenced that as much as anything else. So Kerr is a hybrid of Jackson / Pop / Nash/MDA.

I'm sure Phil would love to take credit for it, but why did he make the "how's it goink" comment about the Warriors last spring if the Warriors are running the Triangle? Because they're not and he's threatened by their updates to it.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/philjackson11/status/597453125297917953

I'm talking about coaches who run the pure Triangle, or attempt to. Fisher tried to modernize the Triangle and it is a big reason why he got fired, along with the Barnes debacle.

I would be on board if Phil brought in Blatt and allowed for some modernization of the Triangle, but I bet you a sandwich that doesn't happen and Rambis is hired to run the "pure" Triangle. Time will tell. I'm done yelling at the sky. Not much we can do - Phil's gonna do what Phil's gonna do. We already blew an opportunity to hire the best defensive coach in the league. Blatt could be one of the better offensive minds - hey, at least he got an interview.

I don't blame you for that. I mean winning is everything and its been two bad seasons in the W/L column. For me personally I am fine with the overall process as I see it... I mentioned the player development and the young players he's brought in as why. If you take my patience as being passive and not questioning Phil's moves that's fine. I don't see it that way. Certain moves a GM makes are franchise changing. Resigning your star play. Not phucking up your top 5 draft pick. Not signing bad contracts that cripple your cap. These were the past mistakes that Phil has not repeated and the reason for my patience. Coaches come and go.

fishmike wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

fishmike wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

fishmike wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

fishmike wrote:crzymdups.. maybe Phil knows the guy and simply hates him. You just don't have all the info. Unless you think Thibs should be doing here what he's doing in Sota, running the whole ship. Otherwise Phil is more important than Thibs, bottom line. He gets who he wants to get. Coaching means nothing if the FO relationship isn't great. We have seen this so many times. Calling Phil arrogant because he's doesn't interview someone he doesn't want to work with? Is it his show or not?

It's his show. But is he interested in the Knicks winning? Or is he interested in proving the Triangle works?

I don't give a flying **** about the Triangle. I'd like the Knicks to win a championship in my lifetime.

Picking up the biggest name regardless of fit has bit us in the ass multiple upon multiple times. Maybe Thibbs would have worked out maybe he wouldn't have. But Phil should be given the freedom to do what he was brought here to do over the length of his 5 yr contract and see how it all plays out.

every time its screwed us. Where did this notion that "Phil out to prove the triangle" come from? Its like saying Obama is trying to prove a black man can be elected POTUS. Those jobs are done. Phil won 11 rings and needs to prove the triangle? To who? That makes zero sense.

People have asked if its still a fit, and yes Phil has defended the system he wants his team to play. Is that the same as painting this picture that the guy's #1 MO is to prove people that the triangle works? Seriously.. that's nuts. Every move Phil has made has been future based.

Woj and Berger have both run stories that Phil is interested primarily in proving the Triangle works. Fisher was fired in part because he didn't use the Triangle enough. Valuable assets have been traded away for poor return because they didn't fit the Triangle. We've turned away coaches who wanted to be here who are great because they aren't Triangle enough. I'm not sure how much more needs to happen for people to admit that Phil is out to prove the Triangle works.

And, yes, there's plenty of people in the league who say Phil is full of it and the Triangle didn't win the championships, Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant and Shaq and Pippen and Gasol and Rodman and Grant and Odom had a lot more to do with it.

I tend to be in the latter camp.

You take the Triangle to OKC? Maybe that finally gets that group of players over the hump. That's a championship caliber roster that seems to not have quite figured out how to play together. Maybe there the Triangle is the final piece.

Phil's disciples have a 253-557 record. I think that's pretty good evidence that the Triangle as the first piece of the puzzle has not worked. That's a 31% winning percentage over 800 games. That's almost ten seasons of the Triangle not working.

you include Kerr and Walton in that? If you aren't you are just pushing your agenda. You are clearly furious about the prospect of Rambis coaching and your posts have shifted into a straight up hate Phil mode/agenda. You have said
1) He's only out to prove the triangle
2) He only won because of great players

I cant say if you are right or wrong. I can say this is a process. Yes I predicted 45 wins last season. They were 20-20 trending upward and Melo turns and ankle, they lose every game for 3 weeks and there is the season. He comes back gimpy, along the way other guys go down and this stuff happens. Melo also had one of his best most complete seasons. Lopez is a bonafid asset. Lopez's value right now is fantastic as is his contract. KP is the franchise changing unicorn. I still believe in Grant. We have some other pieces that may or may not pop but I like the growth and how this is being built. I am fine with letting him continue to grow this.

Kerr is a hybrid of Jackson and Popovich - he played and won championships under both. He's not running the Triangle, he's running elements of the Triangle (kinda like Thibs!). Phil would never be cool with a PG dictating the offense as much as Kerr has Curry do it in GSW. Kerr has actually said his time in Phoenix with Nash and Gentry has influenced that as much as anything else. So Kerr is a hybrid of Jackson / Pop / Nash/MDA.

I'm sure Phil would love to take credit for it, but why did he make the "how's it goink" comment about the Warriors last spring if the Warriors are running the Triangle? Because they're not and he's threatened by their updates to it.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/philjackson11/status/597453125297917953

I'm talking about coaches who run the pure Triangle, or attempt to. Fisher tried to modernize the Triangle and it is a big reason why he got fired, along with the Barnes debacle.

I would be on board if Phil brought in Blatt and allowed for some modernization of the Triangle, but I bet you a sandwich that doesn't happen and Rambis is hired to run the "pure" Triangle. Time will tell. I'm done yelling at the sky. Not much we can do - Phil's gonna do what Phil's gonna do. We already blew an opportunity to hire the best defensive coach in the league. Blatt could be one of the better offensive minds - hey, at least he got an interview.

Kerr was Phil's first choice, and had a foot in the door, so that is a convenient leave-out on your part. But dude.. these are your feelings. You are literally throwing a fit because Phil didn't interview Thibs to make you feel better. Im sorry but Im not holding Phil accountable for not going through the motions to appease the fans. Especially ones that have pretty clearly turned on him.

I don't blame you for that. I mean winning is everything and its been two bad seasons in the W/L column. For me personally I am fine with the overall process as I see it... I mentioned the player development and the young players he's brought in as why. If you take my patience as being passive and not questioning Phil's moves that's fine. I don't see it that way. Certain moves a GM makes are franchise changing. Resigning your star play. Not phucking up your top 5 draft pick. Not signing bad contracts that cripple your cap. These were the past mistakes that Phil has not repeated and the reason for my patience. Coaches come and go.

I'm talking about coaches who run the Triangle. Kerr does not. Phil has taken multiple pot shots at them for the way they run their system, so to call him a Phil disciple is a bit of a stretch.

I'm fine on Phil not making major mistakes. The KP draft pick is the best thing to happen to this franchise in years and years and years. I'm so relieved he didn't trade that pick.

I'm not on board with how he's handled the coaching situation. Anyway. Time will tell. We have no choice but to see what he does, I just question the method of not talking to coaches who use the Triangle and want to be here.

Anyway, whatever. I guess we'll see what happens. I'm not rooting against Phil, nor against the Knicks, I'm just not loving the signs I'm seeing right now. We'll see.

crzymdups wrote:

fishmike wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

fishmike wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

fishmike wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

fishmike wrote:crzymdups.. maybe Phil knows the guy and simply hates him. You just don't have all the info. Unless you think Thibs should be doing here what he's doing in Sota, running the whole ship. Otherwise Phil is more important than Thibs, bottom line. He gets who he wants to get. Coaching means nothing if the FO relationship isn't great. We have seen this so many times. Calling Phil arrogant because he's doesn't interview someone he doesn't want to work with? Is it his show or not?

It's his show. But is he interested in the Knicks winning? Or is he interested in proving the Triangle works?

I don't give a flying **** about the Triangle. I'd like the Knicks to win a championship in my lifetime.

Picking up the biggest name regardless of fit has bit us in the ass multiple upon multiple times. Maybe Thibbs would have worked out maybe he wouldn't have. But Phil should be given the freedom to do what he was brought here to do over the length of his 5 yr contract and see how it all plays out.

every time its screwed us. Where did this notion that "Phil out to prove the triangle" come from? Its like saying Obama is trying to prove a black man can be elected POTUS. Those jobs are done. Phil won 11 rings and needs to prove the triangle? To who? That makes zero sense.

People have asked if its still a fit, and yes Phil has defended the system he wants his team to play. Is that the same as painting this picture that the guy's #1 MO is to prove people that the triangle works? Seriously.. that's nuts. Every move Phil has made has been future based.

Woj and Berger have both run stories that Phil is interested primarily in proving the Triangle works. Fisher was fired in part because he didn't use the Triangle enough. Valuable assets have been traded away for poor return because they didn't fit the Triangle. We've turned away coaches who wanted to be here who are great because they aren't Triangle enough. I'm not sure how much more needs to happen for people to admit that Phil is out to prove the Triangle works.

And, yes, there's plenty of people in the league who say Phil is full of it and the Triangle didn't win the championships, Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant and Shaq and Pippen and Gasol and Rodman and Grant and Odom had a lot more to do with it.

I tend to be in the latter camp.

You take the Triangle to OKC? Maybe that finally gets that group of players over the hump. That's a championship caliber roster that seems to not have quite figured out how to play together. Maybe there the Triangle is the final piece.

Phil's disciples have a 253-557 record. I think that's pretty good evidence that the Triangle as the first piece of the puzzle has not worked. That's a 31% winning percentage over 800 games. That's almost ten seasons of the Triangle not working.

you include Kerr and Walton in that? If you aren't you are just pushing your agenda. You are clearly furious about the prospect of Rambis coaching and your posts have shifted into a straight up hate Phil mode/agenda. You have said
1) He's only out to prove the triangle
2) He only won because of great players

I cant say if you are right or wrong. I can say this is a process. Yes I predicted 45 wins last season. They were 20-20 trending upward and Melo turns and ankle, they lose every game for 3 weeks and there is the season. He comes back gimpy, along the way other guys go down and this stuff happens. Melo also had one of his best most complete seasons. Lopez is a bonafid asset. Lopez's value right now is fantastic as is his contract. KP is the franchise changing unicorn. I still believe in Grant. We have some other pieces that may or may not pop but I like the growth and how this is being built. I am fine with letting him continue to grow this.

Kerr is a hybrid of Jackson and Popovich - he played and won championships under both. He's not running the Triangle, he's running elements of the Triangle (kinda like Thibs!). Phil would never be cool with a PG dictating the offense as much as Kerr has Curry do it in GSW. Kerr has actually said his time in Phoenix with Nash and Gentry has influenced that as much as anything else. So Kerr is a hybrid of Jackson / Pop / Nash/MDA.

I'm sure Phil would love to take credit for it, but why did he make the "how's it goink" comment about the Warriors last spring if the Warriors are running the Triangle? Because they're not and he's threatened by their updates to it.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/philjackson11/status/597453125297917953

I'm talking about coaches who run the pure Triangle, or attempt to. Fisher tried to modernize the Triangle and it is a big reason why he got fired, along with the Barnes debacle.

I would be on board if Phil brought in Blatt and allowed for some modernization of the Triangle, but I bet you a sandwich that doesn't happen and Rambis is hired to run the "pure" Triangle. Time will tell. I'm done yelling at the sky. Not much we can do - Phil's gonna do what Phil's gonna do. We already blew an opportunity to hire the best defensive coach in the league. Blatt could be one of the better offensive minds - hey, at least he got an interview.

Kerr was Phil's first choice, and had a foot in the door, so that is a convenient leave-out on your part. But dude.. these are your feelings. You are literally throwing a fit because Phil didn't interview Thibs to make you feel better. Im sorry but Im not holding Phil accountable for not going through the motions to appease the fans. Especially ones that have pretty clearly turned on him.

I don't blame you for that. I mean winning is everything and its been two bad seasons in the W/L column. For me personally I am fine with the overall process as I see it... I mentioned the player development and the young players he's brought in as why. If you take my patience as being passive and not questioning Phil's moves that's fine. I don't see it that way. Certain moves a GM makes are franchise changing. Resigning your star play. Not phucking up your top 5 draft pick. Not signing bad contracts that cripple your cap. These were the past mistakes that Phil has not repeated and the reason for my patience. Coaches come and go.

I'm talking about coaches who run the Triangle. Kerr does not. Phil has taken multiple pot shots at them for the way they run their system, so to call him a Phil disciple is a bit of a stretch.

I'm fine on Phil not making major mistakes. The KP draft pick is the best thing to happen to this franchise in years and years and years. I'm so relieved he didn't trade that pick.

I'm not on board with how he's handled the coaching situation. Anyway. Time will tell. We have no choice but to see what he does, I just question the method of not talking to coaches who use the Triangle and want to be here.

Anyway, whatever. I guess we'll see what happens. I'm not rooting against Phil, nor against the Knicks, I'm just not loving the signs I'm seeing right now. We'll see.

I was about to break down all the coaches from the coaching tree and there rosters but had to step out. From the looks of what I have seen so far though is 2 coaches were hired post Jordan era for the rebuilding Bulls. Rebuilding Dallas Mavericks team pre Dirk. Rebuilding Denver and Minnisota teams. All teams that have continued to struggle while they rebuilt even after these coaches left.

crzymdups wrote:

fishmike wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

fishmike wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

fishmike wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

fishmike wrote:crzymdups.. maybe Phil knows the guy and simply hates him. You just don't have all the info. Unless you think Thibs should be doing here what he's doing in Sota, running the whole ship. Otherwise Phil is more important than Thibs, bottom line. He gets who he wants to get. Coaching means nothing if the FO relationship isn't great. We have seen this so many times. Calling Phil arrogant because he's doesn't interview someone he doesn't want to work with? Is it his show or not?

It's his show. But is he interested in the Knicks winning? Or is he interested in proving the Triangle works?

I don't give a flying **** about the Triangle. I'd like the Knicks to win a championship in my lifetime.

Picking up the biggest name regardless of fit has bit us in the ass multiple upon multiple times. Maybe Thibbs would have worked out maybe he wouldn't have. But Phil should be given the freedom to do what he was brought here to do over the length of his 5 yr contract and see how it all plays out.

every time its screwed us. Where did this notion that "Phil out to prove the triangle" come from? Its like saying Obama is trying to prove a black man can be elected POTUS. Those jobs are done. Phil won 11 rings and needs to prove the triangle? To who? That makes zero sense.

People have asked if its still a fit, and yes Phil has defended the system he wants his team to play. Is that the same as painting this picture that the guy's #1 MO is to prove people that the triangle works? Seriously.. that's nuts. Every move Phil has made has been future based.

Woj and Berger have both run stories that Phil is interested primarily in proving the Triangle works. Fisher was fired in part because he didn't use the Triangle enough. Valuable assets have been traded away for poor return because they didn't fit the Triangle. We've turned away coaches who wanted to be here who are great because they aren't Triangle enough. I'm not sure how much more needs to happen for people to admit that Phil is out to prove the Triangle works.

And, yes, there's plenty of people in the league who say Phil is full of it and the Triangle didn't win the championships, Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant and Shaq and Pippen and Gasol and Rodman and Grant and Odom had a lot more to do with it.

I tend to be in the latter camp.

You take the Triangle to OKC? Maybe that finally gets that group of players over the hump. That's a championship caliber roster that seems to not have quite figured out how to play together. Maybe there the Triangle is the final piece.

Phil's disciples have a 253-557 record. I think that's pretty good evidence that the Triangle as the first piece of the puzzle has not worked. That's a 31% winning percentage over 800 games. That's almost ten seasons of the Triangle not working.

you include Kerr and Walton in that? If you aren't you are just pushing your agenda. You are clearly furious about the prospect of Rambis coaching and your posts have shifted into a straight up hate Phil mode/agenda. You have said
1) He's only out to prove the triangle
2) He only won because of great players

I cant say if you are right or wrong. I can say this is a process. Yes I predicted 45 wins last season. They were 20-20 trending upward and Melo turns and ankle, they lose every game for 3 weeks and there is the season. He comes back gimpy, along the way other guys go down and this stuff happens. Melo also had one of his best most complete seasons. Lopez is a bonafid asset. Lopez's value right now is fantastic as is his contract. KP is the franchise changing unicorn. I still believe in Grant. We have some other pieces that may or may not pop but I like the growth and how this is being built. I am fine with letting him continue to grow this.

Kerr is a hybrid of Jackson and Popovich - he played and won championships under both. He's not running the Triangle, he's running elements of the Triangle (kinda like Thibs!). Phil would never be cool with a PG dictating the offense as much as Kerr has Curry do it in GSW. Kerr has actually said his time in Phoenix with Nash and Gentry has influenced that as much as anything else. So Kerr is a hybrid of Jackson / Pop / Nash/MDA.

I'm sure Phil would love to take credit for it, but why did he make the "how's it goink" comment about the Warriors last spring if the Warriors are running the Triangle? Because they're not and he's threatened by their updates to it.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/philjackson11/status/597453125297917953

I'm talking about coaches who run the pure Triangle, or attempt to. Fisher tried to modernize the Triangle and it is a big reason why he got fired, along with the Barnes debacle.

I would be on board if Phil brought in Blatt and allowed for some modernization of the Triangle, but I bet you a sandwich that doesn't happen and Rambis is hired to run the "pure" Triangle. Time will tell. I'm done yelling at the sky. Not much we can do - Phil's gonna do what Phil's gonna do. We already blew an opportunity to hire the best defensive coach in the league. Blatt could be one of the better offensive minds - hey, at least he got an interview.

Kerr was Phil's first choice, and had a foot in the door, so that is a convenient leave-out on your part. But dude.. these are your feelings. You are literally throwing a fit because Phil didn't interview Thibs to make you feel better. Im sorry but Im not holding Phil accountable for not going through the motions to appease the fans. Especially ones that have pretty clearly turned on him.

I don't blame you for that. I mean winning is everything and its been two bad seasons in the W/L column. For me personally I am fine with the overall process as I see it... I mentioned the player development and the young players he's brought in as why. If you take my patience as being passive and not questioning Phil's moves that's fine. I don't see it that way. Certain moves a GM makes are franchise changing. Resigning your star play. Not phucking up your top 5 draft pick. Not signing bad contracts that cripple your cap. These were the past mistakes that Phil has not repeated and the reason for my patience. Coaches come and go.

I'm talking about coaches who run the Triangle. Kerr does not. Phil has taken multiple pot shots at them for the way they run their system, so to call him a Phil disciple is a bit of a stretch.

I'm fine on Phil not making major mistakes. The KP draft pick is the best thing to happen to this franchise in years and years and years. I'm so relieved he didn't trade that pick.

I'm not on board with how he's handled the coaching situation. Anyway. Time will tell. We have no choice but to see what he does, I just question the method of not talking to coaches who use the Triangle and want to be here.

Anyway, whatever. I guess we'll see what happens. I'm not rooting against Phil, nor against the Knicks, I'm just not loving the signs I'm seeing right now. We'll see.

crzymdups wrote:
Woj and Berger have both run stories that Phil is interested primarily in proving the Triangle works. Fisher was fired in part because he didn't use the Triangle enough. Valuable assets have been traded away for poor return because they didn't fit the Triangle. We've turned away coaches who wanted to be here who are great because they aren't Triangle enough. I'm not sure how much more needs to happen for people to admit that Phil is out to prove the Triangle works.

And, yes, there's plenty of people in the league who say Phil is full of it and the Triangle didn't win the championships, Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant and Shaq and Pippen and Gasol and Rodman and Grant and Odom had a lot more to do with it.

I tend to be in the latter camp.

You take the Triangle to OKC? Maybe that finally gets that group of players over the hump. That's a championship caliber roster that seems to not have quite figured out how to play together. Maybe there the Triangle is the final piece.

Phil's disciples have a 253-557 record. I think that's pretty good evidence that the Triangle as the first piece of the puzzle has not worked. That's a 31% winning percentage over 800 games. That's almost ten seasons of the Triangle not working.

Woj and Berger have both run stories that Phil is interested primarily in proving the Triangle works

Fisher was fired in part because he didn't use the Triangle enough.

Valuable assets have been traded away for poor return because they didn't fit the Triangle.

- Shumpert - Phil indicated he wanted to keep but had an injury history, had inefficient advanced stats and never reached potential.
- Smith - was a me first type player who had continual off/on the court issues, was high potential never reached and was a "me first" type
- Tyson - was was coming off an injury plagued season, was older, last year of contract and was becoming malcontent
- Felton - was mediocre at best, had off the court issues, was coming off a bad season and a $4 plus million contract over several years

That's pretty much it (see below for all PJ trades). Why do people expect we would have a plethora of first rounders or up and coming talent in return for these guys?

Prigs was 39 years old - Netted Schved and 2 2nd Rounders

Shumpert & JR Smith (off the court issues, malcontent, never has reached athletic potential) were traded for Admundson & Lance Thomas. Should be noted that Shumpert signed a $40 Million contract ($10 million per) with the Cavs. Is that what you want on this roster at that salary?

Hardaway was traded for rights to Grant

Ellington & Jeremy Tyler were traded for Acy & Outlaw

Chandler & Felton were traded for Dalembert, Calderon, Larkin, Ellington and 2 Second Rounders (Early & Thanasis)

Labyrie was acquired for Cash

Hernangomez was aquired for 2 2nd Rounders

We've turned away coaches who wanted to be here who are great because they aren't Triangle enough.

I'm not sure how much more needs to happen for people to admit that Phil is out to prove the Triangle works.

Phil's disciples have a 253-557 record.

foosballnick wrote:

crzymdups wrote:
Woj and Berger have both run stories that Phil is interested primarily in proving the Triangle works. Fisher was fired in part because he didn't use the Triangle enough. Valuable assets have been traded away for poor return because they didn't fit the Triangle. We've turned away coaches who wanted to be here who are great because they aren't Triangle enough. I'm not sure how much more needs to happen for people to admit that Phil is out to prove the Triangle works.

And, yes, there's plenty of people in the league who say Phil is full of it and the Triangle didn't win the championships, Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant and Shaq and Pippen and Gasol and Rodman and Grant and Odom had a lot more to do with it.

I tend to be in the latter camp.

You take the Triangle to OKC? Maybe that finally gets that group of players over the hump. That's a championship caliber roster that seems to not have quite figured out how to play together. Maybe there the Triangle is the final piece.

Phil's disciples have a 253-557 record. I think that's pretty good evidence that the Triangle as the first piece of the puzzle has not worked. That's a 31% winning percentage over 800 games. That's almost ten seasons of the Triangle not working.

Woj and Berger have both run stories that Phil is interested primarily in proving the Triangle works

Opinion pieces, that's what writers do to stir interest and readers.

Fisher was fired in part because he didn't use the Triangle enough.

Actually none of us really know why Fisher was fired. It would be reasonable to assume that Fisher was fired due to a number of reasons including most prominently communication and effectiveness issues.

Valuable assets have been traded away for poor return because they didn't fit the Triangle.

Trying to figure out who all these valuable assets were that the triangle chased away?

- Shumpert - Phil indicated he wanted to keep but had an injury history, had inefficient advanced stats and never reached potential.
- Smith - was a me first type player who had continual off/on the court issues, was high potential never reached and was a "me first" type
- Tyson - was was coming off an injury plagued season, was older, last year of contract and was becoming malcontent
- Felton - was mediocre at best, had off the court issues, was coming off a bad season and a $4 plus million contract over several years

That's pretty much it (see below for all PJ trades). Why do people expect we would have a plethora of first rounders or up and coming talent in return for these guys?

Prigs was 39 years old - Netted Schved and 2 2nd Rounders

Shumpert & JR Smith (off the court issues, malcontent, never has reached athletic potential) were traded for Admundson & Lance Thomas. Should be noted that Shumpert signed a $40 Million contract ($10 million per) with the Cavs. Is that what you want on this roster at that salary?

Hardaway was traded for rights to Grant

Ellington & Jeremy Tyler were traded for Acy & Outlaw

Chandler & Felton were traded for Dalembert, Calderon, Larkin, Ellington and 2 Second Rounders (Early & Thanasis)

Labyrie was acquired for Cash

Hernangomez was aquired for 2 2nd Rounders

We've turned away coaches who wanted to be here who are great because they aren't Triangle enough.

What coaches have been turned away with the exception of Thibs? And what is your definition of greatness in a coach? Thibs he is certainly a good coach....but Great? Perhaps he will prove his greatness in Minny, perhaps not? JVG would never come and work for Phil. Not sure what other "Great" coaches that Phil has spurned.

I'm not sure how much more needs to happen for people to admit that Phil is out to prove the Triangle works.

DUH. The triangle is a system that Phil used and won championships with. Of course he believes in it and will continue to expound it's philosophy and principles for the Knicks. I am much more interested in how he continues to build the roster for the long haul.

Phil's disciples have a 253-557 record.

Not sure how Phil's disciples is defined. Are Kerr and Walton part of that group? If you are using this to discredit the Triangle than you need to show which of these coaches adhered to strict Triangle philosophy and which did not.

Q: What’s the feeling on the Knicks’ limited coaching search outside of New York?
A: I like Kurt [Rambis] a lot and he’s a really, really bright guy who I worked with at ESPN. It’s just weird to me that you would stick with the interim without conducting an extensive search when there are attractive candidates out there. … But not to really conduct a search is really odd. The Knicks job is in a major market, and it’s one guys are going to want because you’ll be a hero if you can figure out how to turn it around.

Q: Is it time to be seriously worried about Phil Jackson
A: It’s fair to look at where they are to where they were when he got there, and there should be a lot more progress. People still kind of see it as chaotic. This is a major offseason for the Knicks. They need to be showing they are moving in the right direction.

IT'S like EVERY time some one lays out phils so call agenda, you guys try to act like no one knows what they are talking about.

THE TRIANGLE MEANS MORE TO PHIL THAN ANYTHING KNICK RELATED..How can you argue reality