Didn't someone say recently that the triangle offense is really just a name for something about half the NBA teams do? That makes sense to me. I've tried a few times to look into what really is a triangle offense, and there are no real unique features to it that distinguishes it from a lot of other offenses. As GT said above, the general idea on offense is pretty universal.
My point is this, though, more importantly. I was watching a video of the Lakers running the pJ triangle offense, and one of the comments was something like "Stupid KObe, doesn't even run the triangle, just ballhogs and isos." lol. well, i don't think anyone can really tell when the triangle is and isn't being run. Maybe tex winter can. i honestly think it's just a bunch of offensive guidelines that are for the most part universal, but with specific terminology. meaning, the triangle offense may have a label for some kind of player movement that's the same as the princeton offense, but the princeton offense just calls that play another name. that's what i think it is.
there's only so much you can do in basketball. it's not like football where you can call a play every time.
What Jackson did talk about at length was his belief in "a structure" or "a format" that involves all five players and emphasizes ball and player movement, whether it's the triangle or another system. He cited the Spurs and Warriors and Hawks as teams that exemplified the ideal.
But he disdains much of what he sees: an endless series of pick-and-roll plays, one setting up the next, until someone gets a layup or a three-pointer.
So basically, what the Spurs, Warriors, and Hawks do. It takes five guys moving and passing to set up a continuous series of pick and rolls.
Yep. That's what makes me roll my eyes about so much of the anti-Warriors/Hawks stuff this year. They were remarkable in terms of player and ball movement. The Warriors had the most assists of any team in the last 20 years. Here are the offensive visualizations of the Spurs, Warriors, Hawks, & Knicks.
The Triangle Offense is highly masturbatory. A ton of ball and player movement that doesn't actually lead to open shots. That's survivable when you have the two greatest isolation players in the history of basketball, but it fails miserably pretty much every single time aside from that.
What's amazing is even from some guys that seem know basketball that they honestly think it's an offense that just jacks up 3's and runs up and down the court. If that's what one gets from watching GSW or Atlanta play, you're either watching only highlights or you should probably just stop watching basketball altogether. It's like nails on a chalkboard to me at this point.
Didn't someone say recently that the triangle offense is really just a name for something about half the NBA teams do? That makes sense to me. I've tried a few times to look into what really is a triangle offense, and there are no real unique features to it that distinguishes it from a lot of other offenses. As GT said above, the general idea on offense is pretty universal.
My point is this, though, more importantly. I was watching a video of the Lakers running the pJ triangle offense, and one of the comments was something like "Stupid KObe, doesn't even run the triangle, just ballhogs and isos." lol. well, i don't think anyone can really tell when the triangle is and isn't being run. Maybe tex winter can. i honestly think it's just a bunch of offensive guidelines that are for the most part universal, but with specific terminology. meaning, the triangle offense may have a label for some kind of player movement that's the same as the princeton offense, but the princeton offense just calls that play another name. that's what i think it is.
there's only so much you can do in basketball. it's not like football where you can call a play every time.
The guy who coached Michael Jordan is complaining about individualism in basketball. Interesting.
He's been saying this for 5 years now. Even when he was Laker coach he was saying it.
90 percent of teams in the league run S/R and 1 on 1 from the perimeter to create their offense or to start it.
When Phil left in 2004, Rudy came in. Most Laker fans despised Rudy's offense and type of offense. Yet years later, now everyone wants that O.
It's just the wave - it's in now. No problem in accepting that it's a successful way to play right now considering the talent. However, he is absolutely right that it isn't very entertaining and it isn't team oriented. How LBJ got to the Finals was appalling from an O stand point.
BTW, the beauty of the Warriors offense is they have multiple playmakers. Green, Iggy and Thompson all make plays - not just Curry. And Curry switches from PG/SG often. He's not just a pound the ball for 20 seconds, run S/R and dominate the ball type of PG. That's why I thoroughly enjoyed Curry's game and their run vs despising how Chris Paul plays for the Clippers.
Rudy T's is literally nothing like the system being run by the Warriors or Spurs.
No, but the high S/R and shooting 25-30 three pointers a game is a huge part of many teams offenses.
The guy who coached Michael Jordan is complaining about individualism in basketball. Interesting.
He's been saying this for 5 years now. Even when he was Laker coach he was saying it.
90 percent of teams in the league run S/R and 1 on 1 from the perimeter to create their offense or to start it.
When Phil left in 2004, Rudy came in. Most Laker fans despised Rudy's offense and type of offense. Yet years later, now everyone wants that O.
It's just the wave - it's in now. No problem in accepting that it's a successful way to play right now considering the talent. However, he is absolutely right that it isn't very entertaining and it isn't team oriented. How LBJ got to the Finals was appalling from an O stand point.
BTW, the beauty of the Warriors offense is they have multiple playmakers. Green, Iggy and Thompson all make plays - not just Curry. And Curry switches from PG/SG often. He's not just a pound the ball for 20 seconds, run S/R and dominate the ball type of PG. That's why I thoroughly enjoyed Curry's game and their run vs despising how Chris Paul plays for the Clippers.
Rudy T's is literally nothing like the system being run by the Warriors or Spurs.
No, but the high S/R and shooting 25-30 three pointers a game is a huge part of many teams offenses.
if Rudy ran fast, it might have been a little closer... but Rudy had a deliberate offense that jacked up 3s at a very high rate, with very few people actually capable of making the shot. I guess, that was the beef if I remember correctly...
but you are correct that Rudy also had an analytics point of view with his system... saying it was more reasonable to shoot 3s because of the percentages/numbers supporting it... something like that. _________________ "Now, if life is coffee, then the jobs, money & position in society are the cups. They are just tools to hold & contain life, but the quality of life doesn't change. Sometimes, by concentrating only on the cup, we fail to enjoy the coffee in it."
The guy who coached Michael Jordan is complaining about individualism in basketball. Interesting.
He's been saying this for 5 years now. Even when he was Laker coach he was saying it.
90 percent of teams in the league run S/R and 1 on 1 from the perimeter to create their offense or to start it.
When Phil left in 2004, Rudy came in. Most Laker fans despised Rudy's offense and type of offense. Yet years later, now everyone wants that O.
It's just the wave - it's in now. No problem in accepting that it's a successful way to play right now considering the talent. However, he is absolutely right that it isn't very entertaining and it isn't team oriented. How LBJ got to the Finals was appalling from an O stand point.
BTW, the beauty of the Warriors offense is they have multiple playmakers. Green, Iggy and Thompson all make plays - not just Curry. And Curry switches from PG/SG often. He's not just a pound the ball for 20 seconds, run S/R and dominate the ball type of PG. That's why I thoroughly enjoyed Curry's game and their run vs despising how Chris Paul plays for the Clippers.
Rudy T's is literally nothing like the system being run by the Warriors or Spurs.
No, but the high S/R and shooting 25-30 three pointers a game is a huge part of many teams offenses.
if Rudy ran fast, it might have been a little closer... but Rudy had a deliberate offense that jacked up 3s at a very high rate, with very few people actually capable of making the shot. I guess, that was the beef if I remember correctly...
but you are correct that Rudy also had an analytics point of view with his system... saying it was more reasonable to shoot 3s because of the percentages/numbers supporting it... something like that.
Yep, I remember much of Rudy's discussions. He was being teared apart by the media and Laker fans and I was actually defending him, saying give him a chance. He was saying stuff like you mentioned (that statistically it was better to shoot 3's) and that you should play guys like Lamar at 4 not 3. Things later on have become fact like.
My point is 10-11 years ago Rudy saying that - was called idiocy and was practically pushed out of town/retirement. A decade later, if Rudy came in and did that we'd welcome the change over Byron. The league is playing more S/R and 3 point shooting than ever. It's good for many teams. However, some teams can definitely be successful without it. They need the right balanced talent and coaching system though.
One major difference is also that teams have specifically scouted and analyzed what type of shots they want to be taking and what type of players should be taking them. This is part of why what was idiotic 10 years ago, now is much more efficient - since you have role players being brought in who you know can make these shots. I'm really not against it, I'm just hoping some teams also try different ways to play and ways to win. If everyone plays the exact same way almost, it's pretty boring basketball for me to watch.
The guy who coached Michael Jordan is complaining about individualism in basketball. Interesting.
He's been saying this for 5 years now. Even when he was Laker coach he was saying it.
90 percent of teams in the league run S/R and 1 on 1 from the perimeter to create their offense or to start it.
When Phil left in 2004, Rudy came in. Most Laker fans despised Rudy's offense and type of offense. Yet years later, now everyone wants that O.
It's just the wave - it's in now. No problem in accepting that it's a successful way to play right now considering the talent. However, he is absolutely right that it isn't very entertaining and it isn't team oriented. How LBJ got to the Finals was appalling from an O stand point.
BTW, the beauty of the Warriors offense is they have multiple playmakers. Green, Iggy and Thompson all make plays - not just Curry. And Curry switches from PG/SG often. He's not just a pound the ball for 20 seconds, run S/R and dominate the ball type of PG. That's why I thoroughly enjoyed Curry's game and their run vs despising how Chris Paul plays for the Clippers.
Rudy T's is literally nothing like the system being run by the Warriors or Spurs.
No, but the high S/R and shooting 25-30 three pointers a game is a huge part of many teams offenses.
if Rudy ran fast, it might have been a little closer... but Rudy had a deliberate offense that jacked up 3s at a very high rate, with very few people actually capable of making the shot. I guess, that was the beef if I remember correctly...
but you are correct that Rudy also had an analytics point of view with his system... saying it was more reasonable to shoot 3s because of the percentages/numbers supporting it... something like that.
Yep, I remember much of Rudy's discussions. He was being teared apart by the media and Laker fans and I was actually defending him, saying give him a chance. He was saying stuff like you mentioned (that statistically it was better to shoot 3's) and that you should play guys like Lamar at 4 not 3. Things later on have become fact like.
My point is 10-11 years ago Rudy saying that - was called idiocy and was practically pushed out of town/retirement. A decade later, if Rudy came in and did that we'd welcome the change over Byron. The league is playing more S/R and 3 point shooting than ever. It's good for many teams. However, some teams can definitely be successful without it. They need the right balanced talent and coaching system though.
One major difference is also that teams have specifically scouted and analyzed what type of shots they want to be taking and what type of players should be taking them. This is part of why what was idiotic 10 years ago, now is much more efficient - since you have role players being brought in who you know can make these shots. I'm really not against it, I'm just hoping some teams also try different ways to play and ways to win. If everyone plays the exact same way almost, it's pretty boring basketball for me to watch.
well said wolf... looking back, it's actually surreal to realize that, yeah, Rudy was not talking drunk... he was actually right... although I like Rudy T a lot, I actually didn't like the way we played in 2004, but mostly due to the lack of personnel shooting the 3s (mantra that year was live by the 3, die by the 3)... but if only the people had more patience, subscribed to his idea, and maybe got the right people to surround Kobe, Rudy probably lasted longer than he did. _________________ "Now, if life is coffee, then the jobs, money & position in society are the cups. They are just tools to hold & contain life, but the quality of life doesn't change. Sometimes, by concentrating only on the cup, we fail to enjoy the coffee in it."
Didn't someone say recently that the triangle offense is really just a name for something about half the NBA teams do? That makes sense to me. I've tried a few times to look into what really is a triangle offense, and there are no real unique features to it that distinguishes it from a lot of other offenses. As GT said above, the general idea on offense is pretty universal.
My point is this, though, more importantly. I was watching a video of the Lakers running the pJ triangle offense, and one of the comments was something like "Stupid KObe, doesn't even run the triangle, just ballhogs and isos." lol. well, i don't think anyone can really tell when the triangle is and isn't being run. Maybe tex winter can. i honestly think it's just a bunch of offensive guidelines that are for the most part universal, but with specific terminology. meaning, the triangle offense may have a label for some kind of player movement that's the same as the princeton offense, but the princeton offense just calls that play another name. that's what i think it is.
there's only so much you can do in basketball. it's not like football where you can call a play every time.
Yes, Horry said it.
Yup, that was the interview where he said Rudy T was a better coach than Phil Jackson and Pops, and that Dennis Rodman is a genius. He said Rudy T gave players more leeway to make their own decisions than Phil and Pops. He never explained why Rodman was a genius.
Joined: 29 Aug 2004 Posts: 11197 Location: The Other Perspective
Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2015 9:39 am Post subject:
activeverb wrote:
jonnybravo wrote:
Yes, Horry said it.
Yup, that was the interview where he said Rudy T was a better coach than Phil Jackson and Pops, and that Dennis Rodman is a genius. He said Rudy T gave players more leeway to make their own decisions than Phil and Pops. He never explained why Rodman was a genius.
Horry is first and foremost a Rocket. http://www.theplayerstribune.com/robert-horry-kobe-phil-jackson-lakers/ _________________ "Chick lived and breathed Lakers basketball…but he was also fair and objective and called every game the way it was played."
-from Chick: His Unpublished Memoirs and the Memories of Those Who Knew Him
Didn't someone say recently that the triangle offense is really just a name for something about half the NBA teams do? That makes sense to me. I've tried a few times to look into what really is a triangle offense, and there are no real unique features to it that distinguishes it from a lot of other offenses. As GT said above, the general idea on offense is pretty universal.
My point is this, though, more importantly. I was watching a video of the Lakers running the pJ triangle offense, and one of the comments was something like "Stupid KObe, doesn't even run the triangle, just ballhogs and isos." lol. well, i don't think anyone can really tell when the triangle is and isn't being run. Maybe tex winter can. i honestly think it's just a bunch of offensive guidelines that are for the most part universal, but with specific terminology. meaning, the triangle offense may have a label for some kind of player movement that's the same as the princeton offense, but the princeton offense just calls that play another name. that's what i think it is.
there's only so much you can do in basketball. it's not like football where you can call a play every time.
That's exactly what it is. I said in another thread a few weeks ago that the triangle isn't some magic offense and Phil could have achieved the same results using any other offense. Building on GT's point, the greatest value of the triangle comes from all of the off the ball movement and passing that leads to role players feeling more involved while Shaq, Kobe, MJ and Pippen dominate the offense anyway.
He really did do a phenomenal job shedding salaries by trading expiring deals for nothing and executing the trade with Dallas that sent out an expiring Chandler for Calderon who has 2 years, $15M left on his deal. This is some pretty hefty delusion.
He really did do a phenomenal job shedding salaries by trading expiring deals for nothing and executing the trade with Dallas that sent out an expiring Chandler for Calderon who has 2 years, $15M left on his deal. This is some pretty hefty delusion.
As a GM, Phil has proven he can help construct a championship contending tem. Only problem is he helped construct that team in Cleveland, not New York.
He really did do a phenomenal job shedding salaries by trading expiring deals for nothing and executing the trade with Dallas that sent out an expiring Chandler for Calderon who has 2 years, $15M left on his deal. This is some pretty hefty delusion.
I'll chalk it up to him being in his 70's and the rumors that he liked to enjoy a few natural substances during his time I feel bad for the Knicks.
Didn't someone say recently that the triangle offense is really just a name for something about half the NBA teams do? That makes sense to me. I've tried a few times to look into what really is a triangle offense, and there are no real unique features to it that distinguishes it from a lot of other offenses. As GT said above, the general idea on offense is pretty universal.
My point is this, though, more importantly. I was watching a video of the Lakers running the pJ triangle offense, and one of the comments was something like "Stupid KObe, doesn't even run the triangle, just ballhogs and isos." lol. well, i don't think anyone can really tell when the triangle is and isn't being run. Maybe tex winter can. i honestly think it's just a bunch of offensive guidelines that are for the most part universal, but with specific terminology. meaning, the triangle offense may have a label for some kind of player movement that's the same as the princeton offense, but the princeton offense just calls that play another name. that's what i think it is.
there's only so much you can do in basketball. it's not like football where you can call a play every time.
Phil's dream is that the triangle offense becomes synonymous with success and his name is mentioned along with James Naismith as the cofounders of basketball. Bless his heart .
There was all the zen and all of the hoopla about it being an incredibly complex offense that would take players months or even years to learn but aS you said, it's not incredibly discernible from the offenses he is calling ugly. Infact, Phil's great triangle teams all had a duo of players who were among the best in the game at creating their own offense through the post or isolation. For all of his banter about that offense not being pretty, he sure employed a lot of it on his way to those titles.
Tough luck....he knew what he was signing up for last year. He could've gone to a championship contending team elsewhere but he decided he liked the bright lights and $$$$$$.
Knicks are doing the right thing.
The Lakers did same to Kobe in 2005-2007. They were prime years but they had to change the roster completely and load up on young talent.
Lakers drafted or traded for kids or younger players, clear capspace and bad contracts.
They took a few years, but by 2008 Lakers were contenders. In the meantime Kobe demanded a trade and threw a fit, but it was because the re-building took time.
Of course it's highly unlikely Knicks have same success as those Lakers because for 1) Prime Kobe destroys prime Melo, and 2) Phil ain't coaching the teams, Fisher is, so those are two major differences. And I reserve to change my mind on this if they go out and say sign Dwayne Wade to a 4 year MAX with their cap space, but it seems for the first time ever they are actually trying to re-build and not choose players based on their star power or name. The Knicks tried it MDA's way, Isiah's way, Donnie Walsh's way. All mediocre to bad. Jackson has taken them to the absolute dumps in an effort to slowly re-build the culture and groom young talent to play basketball the right way. It'll take years, and no one in NY really has the patience for it. But it's what the franchise needed badly. It's a very risky move and one only Phil could actually convince an owner like Dolan to write off. I'm not sure Phil will pull this off, though. It's going to require years to actually change and see the affects of something like this, and I'm not sure the NY media and fanbase will tolerate it for very long. That said, I talked to a few NY Knicks fan friends of mine, and they loved that they traded Hardaway for the Grant pick.
To me what Phil does with the capspace this summer and next will define him as a FO guy. If he goes out and blows his money on declining players who don't have much left in the tank, he's really got no plan. If he stays consistent and bring in young talent that fits in the system and will be peaking/priming 2-3 years from now, he's got a real shot to pull it off.
traveling
carrying
offensive push offs by dribblers and screeners
no boxing out (guys just hold alot)
few who can hit a 10-20 footer consistently
no bounce passing
no post game
and on and on
terrible defense
the game has changed and I don't like a lot of what I see
That one right there is what pisses me off!!!! I see how the refs allow players like LeBron and Harden to push off continuously with that left arm!!!!! Its so damn annoying!!!! _________________ New Beginings
Knicks are doing the right thing.
The Lakers did same to Kobe in 2005-2007. They were prime years but they had to change the roster completely and load up on young talent.
Lakers drafted or traded for kids or younger players, clear capspace and bad contracts.
They took a few years, but by 2008 Lakers were contenders. In the meantime Kobe demanded a trade and threw a fit, but it was because the re-building took time.
Of course it's highly unlikely Knicks have same success as those Lakers because for 1) Prime Kobe destroys prime Melo, and 2) Phil ain't coaching the teams, Fisher is, so those are two major differences. And I reserve to change my mind on this if they go out and say sign Dwayne Wade to a 4 year MAX with their cap space, but it seems for the first time ever they are actually trying to re-build and not choose players based on their star power or name. The Knicks tried it MDA's way, Isiah's way, Donnie Walsh's way. All mediocre to bad. Jackson has taken them to the absolute dumps in an effort to slowly re-build the culture and groom young talent to play basketball the right way. It'll take years, and no one in NY really has the patience for it. But it's what the franchise needed badly. It's a very risky move and one only Phil could actually convince an owner like Dolan to write off. I'm not sure Phil will pull this off, though. It's going to require years to actually change and see the affects of something like this, and I'm not sure the NY media and fanbase will tolerate it for very long. That said, I talked to a few NY Knicks fan friends of mine, and they loved that they traded Hardaway for the Grant pick.
To me what Phil does with the capspace this summer and next will define him as a FO guy. If he goes out and blows his money on declining players who don't have much left in the tank, he's really got no plan. If he stays consistent and bring in young talent that fits in the system and will be peaking/priming 2-3 years from now, he's got a real shot to pull it off.
The major difference is that Kobe was 27 in 2005, whereas Melo is 31. They're 2-3 years away from being any good, even if everything works out for them.
All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2, 3, 4Next
Page 3 of 4
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
I feel bad for the Knicks.
