Posted: Thu Jan 15, 2015 6:00 pm Post subject: Charles Barkley: Knicks Running Triangle Offense Is Stupid
Quote:
By James Herbert | NBA writer
January 15, 2015 7:26 pm ET
Charles Barkley joined the Doug Gottleib Show on Thursday, and he had strong words about the New York Knicks' disastrous season. He was asked how much blame president Phil Jackson, head coach Derek Fisher and superstar Carmelo Anthony deserve for what's gone wrong, and Barkley chose not to criticize Anthony or Fisher. As for Jackson and his triangle offense ... that was a different story.
"Carmelo's a terrific player," Barkley said. "He's probably the best offensive player we got in the NBA. It's not his fault they're not winning. The Knicks just don't have good players. They don't have good players, it's plain and simple. And I think Phil Jackson made a mistake trying to make those guys run the triangle. You know, a good coach, you have to work with the personnel you got. Because those guys, No. 1, they're not going to learn the triangle ‘cause they're all going to be gone next year. They're really just auditioning for their new team. So he should have known that, the triangle, that was a waste of time trying to get those guys to buy in. ‘Cause you know, to be a good team, you have to buy into it like, ‘We're all in this together.' The Knicks are probably going to have eight to nine new players next year, so to think that those guys are going to buy into the triangle for six months, that was ridiculous. They know they're not going to be there. So you can blame Phil for that.
"To bring in players that know they're not going to be there and expect them to do the triangle, that was just stupid," Barkley continued. "Plain and simple. Those guys are like, ‘I'm not going to be here, why am I trying to run the triangle? I'm trying to get some numbers so I can audition for my next team.' So he has to take some blame in that situation. But then, bottom line is the Knicks don't have good players, man."
The only thing that's stupid is Charles Barkley. The reason the Knicks aren't winning is because their two best players refuse to play defense and rebound and are perennial losers (Melo/Stoudemire).
Joined: 27 Jul 2004 Posts: 18223 Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posted: Thu Jan 15, 2015 7:54 pm Post subject:
The flaw in Chuck's reasoning is we ran the triangle during Phil's second stint when our two best players were Kobe and Lamar. It laid the groundwork for what became a championship roster. Only 6 players who were on the roster during Phil's first year back were on the roster when we won the title in 2009. _________________ "Suck it up. Don't be a baby. Do your job." - Kobe Bryant
The flaw in Chuck's reasoning is we ran the triangle during Phil's second stint when our two best players were Kobe and Lamar. It laid the groundwork for what became a championship roster. Only 6 players who were on the roster during Phil's first year back were on the roster when we won the title in 2009.
Joined: 24 Dec 2007 Posts: 35862 Location: Santa Clarita, CA (Hell) ->>>>>Ithaca, NY -≥≥≥≥≥Berkeley, CA
Posted: Thu Jan 15, 2015 11:58 pm Post subject:
Sacreligious wrote:
Slightly off topic but is the Triangle even worth using as an offense today? I honestly don't find it a great offensive system.
If i was the league, I would just copy whatever Coach Bud is doing. That is some incredibly beautiful offense and defense there.
It only won eleven rings and thirteen conference championships in twenty years... _________________ Damian Lillard shatters Dwight Coward's championship dreams:
Joined: 20 Apr 2006 Posts: 15294 Location: Southern California
Posted: Fri Jan 16, 2015 12:22 am Post subject:
non-player zealot wrote:
numero-ocho wrote:
The flaw in Chuck's reasoning is we ran the triangle during Phil's second stint when our two best players were Kobe and Lamar. It laid the groundwork for what became a championship roster. Only 6 players who were on the roster during Phil's first year back were on the roster when we won the title in 2009.
No way, Phil needs to listen to Charles to learn how to win in the NBA.
Phil also had players on those squads, three superstars (Jordan, O'Neal and Bryant), a bunch of all stars (Grant, Armstrong, Gasol and Rodman), a plethora of great roll players (Kerr, Fox, Horry, Paxson, Fisher) and couple of Swiss army knives - one who just so happen to be one of the 50 Greatest (Odom, Pippen).
Other than Anthony, who on this current Knick squad would any of us keep? You have got to have athletes and ball players to make the triangle work. It's easy to say the triangle works when Phil has had the players he's had. Dallas tried running it in the 90s and it failed.
The flaw in Chuck's reasoning is we ran the triangle during Phil's second stint when our two best players were Kobe and Lamar. It laid the groundwork for what became a championship roster. Only 6 players who were on the roster during Phil's first year back were on the roster when we won the title in 2009.
That sort of turnover really isnt all that bad, the Bulls had 2 people from their 93 title team on their 96 team. _________________ I believe everything the media tells me except for anything for which I have direct personal knowledge, which they always get wrong
The flaw in Chuck's reasoning is we ran the triangle during Phil's second stint when our two best players were Kobe and Lamar. It laid the groundwork for what became a championship roster. Only 6 players who were on the roster during Phil's first year back were on the roster when we won the title in 2009.
No way, Phil needs to listen to Charles to learn how to win in the NBA.
Phil also had players on those squads, three superstars (Jordan, O'Neal and Bryant), a bunch of all stars (Grant, Armstrong, Gasol and Rodman), a plethora of great roll players (Kerr, Fox, Horry, Paxson, Fisher) and couple of Swiss army knives - one who just so happen to be one of the 50 Greatest (Odom, Pippen).
Other than Anthony, who on this current Knick squad would any of us keep? You have got to have athletes and ball players to make the triangle work. It's easy to say the triangle works when Phil has had the players he's had. Dallas tried running it in the 90s and it failed.
C'mon, man. Those players were trying to figure out how to get to the summit of the mountain with lesser coaches and failing year after year before Phil. Those guys listed learned how to win UNDER Phil. Our memories of them are in the context of them overcoming their obstacles and becoming great winning players AS Phil Jackson's players. When they won in 98, Jordan grabbed Phil and hugged him harder than most of his teammates. Granted, superstars win titles, that's how it goes, but only 1-3 of them on a single team do it in a given year. We had West and Baylor and never won a title with them in their primes as teammates.
Phil's not a Larry Brown style coach. He could take a crap franchise (not team, franchise) like the Knicks and eventually get them winning again, but he does it in HIS style. He doesn't just accept his fate by creating a system around the players he has. The initial 1-5 years will be building years where he sees what he has, where they go thru a lot of pain trying to learn the triangle, and where he gets rid of players who don't pack the gear to run his beloved offense (cough, Carmela). He did the same with us in 2005/06, but it'll take longer to do it in NY without a bona fide superstar winner in hand.
I don't think Carmelo is the kind of player that will lead a team to a championship as 1A anyway, especially as he's getting older (and I know he won in the NCAA). He maxed out in Denver, far as he got. His championship window that was open for 1-2 yrs at best was closed by the triangle and a team willing to run it until it was perfected. I agree that Odom was a Swiss Army knife, but those were his best, most focused years because he bought into the system and believed he was a winner for the first time in his career. A coach like George Karl is touted all the time, but he has never won S and he would never get hired to run the Bulls with Jordan/Pippen or the Lakers with Shaq/Kobe. Phil's the guy you hire if you have a team that's almost there, but never won it without him. I admit, there's a lot of people who believe the best coaches adapt to their situation, but when Phil has 11 titles under his belt, it's easy to see why he wants to continue with the triangle offense until he dies.
Chuck was a great individual player and I enjoyed him immensely and I credit him all the time for his freakish abilities and his uniqueness at 6'4". However, compared to Magic, Larry, Isiah, Mike, Hakeem, Shaq, Kobe, Tim...he's a loser. He didn't have the mindset of a guy who inspired his troops. He was always in a bad mood, always preoccupied with refs, spent years outside of prime shape (maybe even more years than Shaq did). Further, he was always looking for something to blame for his losses - blamed Philly for not finding him superstar help, blamed Phoenix for the same thing although he had an excellent team around him. That kind of deep-seated negativity and insecurity as a superstar player just isn't suited to winning a title. The teams that have done it, especially repeaters, were uber-confident and mentally tough; i.e. the difference between LA and SAC in 2002. Without Chuck providing that mindset for his troops, forget it.
Scott Pippen said that Mike told him Chuck will never win one because he doesn't put in the work in the offseason and that he's not serious enough. Some of the games the Suns lost in those precious seasons of his championship window (93-95) were incredibly bad. They dropped a lot of critical games on their home floor. They came within an eyelash of losing to the Lakers as an 8th seed in 93. They blew a 3-1 lead on HOU one year. Long story short, Charles Barkley is one of the greats of the 80s era, no question about it. However, he's not in the position to question Phil Jackson on winning bball. If Chuck was gonna win it, it woudla been UNDER Phil. _________________ GOAT MAGIC REEL SEDALE TRIBUTE EDDIE DONX!
Joined: 20 Apr 2006 Posts: 15294 Location: Southern California
Posted: Fri Jan 16, 2015 2:37 am Post subject:
non-player zealot wrote:
doughboy90650 wrote:
non-player zealot wrote:
numero-ocho wrote:
The flaw in Chuck's reasoning is we ran the triangle during Phil's second stint when our two best players were Kobe and Lamar. It laid the groundwork for what became a championship roster. Only 6 players who were on the roster during Phil's first year back were on the roster when we won the title in 2009.
No way, Phil needs to listen to Charles to learn how to win in the NBA.
Phil also had players on those squads, three superstars (Jordan, O'Neal and Bryant), a bunch of all stars (Grant, Armstrong, Gasol and Rodman), a plethora of great roll players (Kerr, Fox, Horry, Paxson, Fisher) and couple of Swiss army knives - one who just so happen to be one of the 50 Greatest (Odom, Pippen).
Other than Anthony, who on this current Knick squad would any of us keep? You have got to have athletes and ball players to make the triangle work. It's easy to say the triangle works when Phil has had the players he's had. Dallas tried running it in the 90s and it failed.
C'mon, man. Those players were trying to figure out how to get to the summit of the mountain with lesser coaches and failing year after year before Phil. Those guys listed learned how to win UNDER Phil. Our memories of them are in the context of them overcoming their obstacles and becoming great winning players AS Phil Jackson's players. When they won in 98, Jordan grabbed Phil and hugged him harder than most of his teammates. Granted, superstars win titles, that's how it goes, but only 1-3 of them on a single team do it in a given year. We had West and Baylor and never won a title with them in their primes as teammates.
Phil's not a Larry Brown style coach. He could take a crap franchise (not team, franchise) like the Knicks and eventually get them winning again, but he does it in HIS style. He doesn't just accept his fate by creating a system around the players he has. The initial 1-5 years will be building years where he sees what he has, where they go thru a lot of pain trying to learn the triangle, and where he gets rid of players who don't pack the gear to run his beloved offense (cough, Carmela). He did the same with us in 2005/06, but it'll take longer to do it in NY without a bona fide superstar winner in hand.
I don't think Carmelo is the kind of player that will lead a team to a championship as 1A anyway, especially as he's getting older (and I know he won in the NCAA). He maxed out in Denver, far as he got. His championship window that was open for 1-2 yrs at best was closed by the triangle and a team willing to run it until it was perfected. I agree that Odom was a Swiss Army knife, but those were his best, most focused years because he bought into the system and believed he was a winner for the first time in his career. A coach like George Karl is touted all the time, but he has never won S and he would never get hired to run the Bulls with Jordan/Pippen or the Lakers with Shaq/Kobe. Phil's the guy you hire if you have a team that's almost there, but never won it without him. I admit, there's a lot of people who believe the best coaches adapt to their situation, but when Phil has 11 titles under his belt, it's easy to see why he wants to continue with the triangle offense until he dies.
Chuck was a great individual player and I enjoyed him immensely and I credit him all the time for his freakish abilities and his uniqueness at 6'4". However, compared to Magic, Larry, Isiah, Mike, Hakeem, Shaq, Kobe, Tim...he's a loser. He didn't have the mindset of a guy who inspired his troops. He was always in a bad mood, always preoccupied with refs, spent years outside of prime shape (maybe even more years than Shaq did). Further, he was always looking for something to blame for his losses - blamed Philly for not finding him superstar help, blamed Phoenix for the same thing although he had an excellent team around him. That kind of deep-seated negativity and insecurity as a superstar player just isn't suited to winning a title. The teams that have done it, especially repeaters, were uber-confident and mentally tough; i.e. the difference between LA and SAC in 2002. Without Chuck providing that mindset for his troops, forget it.
Scott Pippen said that Mike told him Chuck will never win one because he doesn't put in the work in the offseason and that he's not serious enough. Some of the games the Suns lost in those precious seasons of his championship window (93-95) were incredibly bad. They dropped a lot of critical games on their home floor. They came within an eyelash of losing to the Lakers as an 8th seed in 93. They blew a 3-1 lead on HOU one year. Long story short, Charles Barkley is one of the greats of the 80s era, no question about it. However, he's not in the position to question Phil Jackson on winning bball. If Chuck was gonna win it, it woudla been UNDER Phil.
I can agree with the Chuck assessment. That Laker squad should have never been up 2-0 especially winning both games in PHX. I think the players Phil had were already developed and game tight. I just think he gave them that umph that would get them over the top. Jordan and O'Neal were dominant and freaks pre-Phil and Bryant was baking in the oven. Not quite ready but you knew. I think Phil maybe bit off a little more than he can chew with this situation. He may create a squad that can get to the playoffs but title? Just don't see it. He needs players or its gonna look like Jim Cleamons and the Mavs in 1997-98.
I can agree with the Chuck assessment. That Laker squad should have never been up 2-0 especially winning both games in PHX. I think the players Phil had were already developed and game tight. I just think he gave them that umph that would get them over the top. Jordan and O'Neal were dominant and freaks pre-Phil and Bryant was baking in the oven. Not quite ready but you knew. I think Phil maybe bit off a little more than he can chew with this situation. He may create a squad that can get to the playoffs but title? Just don't see it. He needs players or its gonna look like Jim Cleamons and the Mavs in 1997-98.
Didn't mean to avalanche you up there, dude. I just re-read that. That was a late nite insomnia post, I was on fire. It's gonna be harder for him than it ever has been. He doesn't have his Phil type players, nor a superstar to his liking yet. Trying to make Melo that guy, you WILL be right.
I've never felt this bad for the two coaches of the New York Knicks and Los Angeles Lakers.
Forgot that PHX lost 3 home gms to Chicago in 93 too. The Bulls were a great team, but if you don't have any semblance of home court advantage, you ain't winnin jack. I think the Knicks would've beaten them too, on their defense, and those Knicks were idiots. Ewing against Mark West and Oliver. That's advantage Knicks. I've said this before, but I have one of those odd distinct random memories of a SportsCenter bit from 93. It was a day or so after Petrovic died. Johnny Bach was on there giving tidbits on what they wanted to do with PHX and they showed a clip of the Bulls' TV room where they were watching footage from the Lakers series as examples of strategy that worked. In other words, our scrappy Sedale Lakers apparently gave them the best template that year for beating them. _________________ GOAT MAGIC REEL SEDALE TRIBUTE EDDIE DONX!
Last edited by non-player zealot on Fri Jan 16, 2015 9:47 am; edited 1 time in total
The flaw in Chuck's reasoning is we ran the triangle during Phil's second stint when our two best players were Kobe and Lamar. It laid the groundwork for what became a championship roster. Only 6 players who were on the roster during Phil's first year back were on the roster when we won the title in 2009.
No way, Phil needs to listen to Charles to learn how to win in the NBA.
Phil also had players on those squads, three superstars (Jordan, O'Neal and Bryant), a bunch of all stars (Grant, Armstrong, Gasol and Rodman), a plethora of great roll players (Kerr, Fox, Horry, Paxson, Fisher) and couple of Swiss army knives - one who just so happen to be one of the 50 Greatest (Odom, Pippen).
Other than Anthony, who on this current Knick squad would any of us keep? You have got to have athletes and ball players to make the triangle work. It's easy to say the triangle works when Phil has had the players he's had. Dallas tried running it in the 90s and it failed.
C'mon, man. Those players were trying to figure out how to get to the summit of the mountain with lesser coaches and failing year after year before Phil. Those guys listed learned how to win UNDER Phil. Our memories of them are in the context of them overcoming their obstacles and becoming great winning players AS Phil Jackson's players. When they won in 98, Jordan grabbed Phil and hugged him harder than most of his teammates. Granted, superstars win titles, that's how it goes, but only 1-3 of them on a single team do it in a given year. We had West and Baylor and never won a title with them in their primes as teammates.
Phil's not a Larry Brown style coach. He could take a crap franchise (not team, franchise) like the Knicks and eventually get them winning again, but he does it in HIS style. He doesn't just accept his fate by creating a system around the players he has. The initial 1-5 years will be building years where he sees what he has, where they go thru a lot of pain trying to learn the triangle, and where he gets rid of players who don't pack the gear to run his beloved offense (cough, Carmela). He did the same with us in 2005/06, but it'll take longer to do it in NY without a bona fide superstar winner in hand.
I don't think Carmelo is the kind of player that will lead a team to a championship as 1A anyway, especially as he's getting older (and I know he won in the NCAA). He maxed out in Denver, far as he got. His championship window that was open for 1-2 yrs at best was closed by the triangle and a team willing to run it until it was perfected. I agree that Odom was a Swiss Army knife, but those were his best, most focused years because he bought into the system and believed he was a winner for the first time in his career. A coach like George Karl is touted all the time, but he has never won S and he would never get hired to run the Bulls with Jordan/Pippen or the Lakers with Shaq/Kobe. Phil's the guy you hire if you have a team that's almost there, but never won it without him. I admit, there's a lot of people who believe the best coaches adapt to their situation, but when Phil has 11 titles under his belt, it's easy to see why he wants to continue with the triangle offense until he dies.
Chuck was a great individual player and I enjoyed him immensely and I credit him all the time for his freakish abilities and his uniqueness at 6'4". However, compared to Magic, Larry, Isiah, Mike, Hakeem, Shaq, Kobe, Tim...he's a loser. He didn't have the mindset of a guy who inspired his troops. He was always in a bad mood, always preoccupied with refs, spent years outside of prime shape (maybe even more years than Shaq did). Further, he was always looking for something to blame for his losses - blamed Philly for not finding him superstar help, blamed Phoenix for the same thing although he had an excellent team around him. That kind of deep-seated negativity and insecurity as a superstar player just isn't suited to winning a title. The teams that have done it, especially repeaters, were uber-confident and mentally tough; i.e. the difference between LA and SAC in 2002. Without Chuck providing that mindset for his troops, forget it.
Scott Pippen said that Mike told him Chuck will never win one because he doesn't put in the work in the offseason and that he's not serious enough. Some of the games the Suns lost in those precious seasons of his championship window (93-95) were incredibly bad. They dropped a lot of critical games on their home floor. They came within an eyelash of losing to the Lakers as an 8th seed in 93. They blew a 3-1 lead on HOU one year. Long story short, Charles Barkley is one of the greats of the 80s era, no question about it. However, he's not in the position to question Phil Jackson on winning bball. If Chuck was gonna win it, it woudla been UNDER Phil.
Mike would never put up with Chuck's tomfoolery. He'd knock Chuck's blubbery ass out. Mike Tyson that is.
Mike would never put up with Chuck's tomfoolery. He'd knock Chuck's blubbery ass out. Mike Tyson that is.
I'd like to see that. Two Chucks were the biggest goons in the NBA in their years. Bark and Oak. They would fight at the drop of a hat. I would think that Malone would be the only guy who might give either of them a moment of pause. I remember the clip of Barkley semi-playfully slapping Oakley at MSG and it was on. Both ejected in the 1st Q or so. That's another thing I should've listed as reasons why Barkley never won. Doing things like throwing stans out of windows, bar fights. Distractions. That's not even to mention the girl spitting incident that put enough scare into him to look in the mirror for once. I've heard it said that he was a bad influence on Jayson "Shotgun" Williams. Jayson was already a disturbed kid and he forced his way out of PHX because he didn't wanna play in that city and he landed in Philly. He and Barkley went out to bars. They got in a fight where Jayson conked someone on the head with a beer mug. Iirc, they got arrested. I'd have to check on that, that's admittedly a vague memory. At any rate, young Jayson could've benefited from a calm, small market. _________________ GOAT MAGIC REEL SEDALE TRIBUTE EDDIE DONX!
Mike would never put up with Chuck's tomfoolery. He'd knock Chuck's blubbery ass out. Mike Tyson that is.
I'd like to see that. Two Chucks were the biggest goons in the NBA in their years. Bark and Oak. They would fight at the drop of a hat. I would think that Malone would be the only guy who might give either of them a moment of pause. I remember the clip of Barkley semi-playfully slapping Oakley at MSG and it was on. Both ejected in the 1st Q or so. That's another thing I should've listed as reasons why Barkley never won. Doing things like throwing stans out of windows, bar fights. Distractions. That's not even to mention the girl spitting incident that put enough scare into him to look in the mirror for once. I've heard it said that he was a bad influence on Jayson "Shotgun" Williams. Jayson was already a disturbed kid and he forced his way out of PHX because he didn't wanna play in that city and he landed in Philly. He and Barkley went out to bars. They got in a fight where Jayson conked someone on the head with a beer mug. Iirc, they got arrested. I'd have to check on that, that's admittedly a vague memory. At any rate, young Jayson could've benefited from a calm, small market.
This clip never gets old. I love how Chuck was cracking jokes about it immediately to the press.
Can you imagine KG, the biggest fugazi tough guy of the last 30 years playing in that era? If he tried that mean mugging non-sense on one of the Charles, the Mailman, Laimbeer, Mahorn or any the hooligan, beast-men of the 80's, they'd break his skinny ass. There'd more likely be be a steady diet of staring at his own feet and "yes sir", "no sir"'s.
Mike would never put up with Chuck's tomfoolery. He'd knock Chuck's blubbery ass out. Mike Tyson that is.
I'd like to see that. Two Chucks were the biggest goons in the NBA in their years. Bark and Oak. They would fight at the drop of a hat. I would think that Malone would be the only guy who might give either of them a moment of pause. I remember the clip of Barkley semi-playfully slapping Oakley at MSG and it was on. Both ejected in the 1st Q or so. That's another thing I should've listed as reasons why Barkley never won. Doing things like throwing stans out of windows, bar fights. Distractions. That's not even to mention the girl spitting incident that put enough scare into him to look in the mirror for once. I've heard it said that he was a bad influence on Jayson "Shotgun" Williams. Jayson was already a disturbed kid and he forced his way out of PHX because he didn't wanna play in that city and he landed in Philly. He and Barkley went out to bars. They got in a fight where Jayson conked someone on the head with a beer mug. Iirc, they got arrested. I'd have to check on that, that's admittedly a vague memory. At any rate, young Jayson could've benefited from a calm, small market.
This clip never gets old. I love how Chuck was cracking jokes about it immediately to the press.
Can you imagine KG, the biggest fugazi tough guy of the last 30 years playing in that era? If he tried that mean mugging non-sense on one of the Charles, the Mailman, Laimbeer, Mahorn or any the hooligan, beast-men of the 80's, they'd break his skinny ass. There'd more likely be be a steady diet of staring at his own feet and "yes sir", "no sir"'s.
Him and Dwight. Dwight's lucky he's in the millennial era. Shaq sounds like he longs for the chance he never got to punish him for merely existing.
Looking at that clip, I wanna -watch- those gms. CHI @ BOS, PHI @ DET. Good lineup. Isiah in that... I dunno how he was such a little warier and a little beatch at the same time, but he managed. He did something similar to Mychal T at the end of the Lakers' win at Detroit that same year. Was frustrated at losing and started slapping at Myc's back. Ejected. I respect the guy as a player, tho. He was tough in the locker room. Weird, but tough. This is a dude from the hood who actually wanted to play for Bobby Knight. His brother was there in the living room during Knight's presentation and it got hot and he told Isiah not to sign with him and Bobby later told Isiah that his brother would never amount to S and Isiah still signed there. Isiah's line about winning 2x with the Detroit Pistons is true. He says, "We weren't LA, Boston, Chicago, or NY......we were Detroit." He was krazy enough to convince others that they were gonna win if they followed him. _________________ GOAT MAGIC REEL SEDALE TRIBUTE EDDIE DONX!
Don't see why some coaches feel the need to force a system upon a group of players (ala d'antoni on howard/gasol squad). _________________ Smrek 2, Nevitt 1, Barkley 0
The flaw in Chuck's reasoning is we ran the triangle during Phil's second stint when our two best players were Kobe and Lamar. It laid the groundwork for what became a championship roster. Only 6 players who were on the roster during Phil's first year back were on the roster when we won the title in 2009.
No way, Phil needs to listen to Charles to learn how to win in the NBA.
The flaw in Chuck's reasoning is we ran the triangle during Phil's second stint when our two best players were Kobe and Lamar. It laid the groundwork for what became a championship roster. Only 6 players who were on the roster during Phil's first year back were on the roster when we won the title in 2009.
Chuck doesn't use Logic when applying thought to mouth. He uses the Homer Simpson/Peter Griffin thought to mouth process, but he needs to feed the brain hamsters first to get the wheel running. _________________ "If you see me in a fight with a bear, prey for the bear". Ive always loved that quote. Thats "mamba mentality" we don't quit, we don't cower, we don't run. We endure and conquer.
Melo and the Inside Triangle (Phil-Bulls version), should blend well together. But, they need more than a Hardaway Jr., to keep the D a little more honest.
Joined: 21 Feb 2008 Posts: 28497 Location: LA --> Bay Area
Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2015 4:58 pm Post subject:
Knicks roster is worse than the 04-07 Lakers. Aging Carmelo is nowhere near prime Kobe. Plus PJ isn't running the show, Dfish is. So it's not necessarily the system that's wrong with NY, Barkely is just trying to get attention.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
