From the article:
Among Krzyzewski’s greatest coaching opponents was Jim Calhoun of Connecticut; invariably they faced each other in games of charged moment. Krzyzewski told me they were both “more people-oriented than system-oriented,” and Calhoun agreed.
These guys completely don't know what they're talking about.
The Triangle System is much more about people than non-Triangle approaches . . . (!)
Malcolm wrote:From the article:Among Krzyzewski’s greatest coaching opponents was Jim Calhoun of Connecticut; invariably they faced each other in games of charged moment. Krzyzewski told me they were both “more people-oriented than system-oriented,” and Calhoun agreed.
These guys completely don't know what they're talking about.
The Triangle System is much more about people than non-Triangle approaches . . . (!)
coach k is kinda dumb now that you mention it and jimmy c is a complete bonehead
From the article:
“What the triangle gave the Bulls and the Lakers was an organized way to put five players on the same page,” he [Krzyzewski] added. “It’s not a miracle cure. It creates freedom.”
OMG. What (!!!??)
Freedom is the cure, for heaven's sake . . .
Malcolm wrote:From the article:
“What the triangle gave the Bulls and the Lakers was an organized way to put five players on the same page,” he [Krzyzewski] added. “It’s not a miracle cure. It creates freedom.”
OMG. What (!!!??)Freedom is the cure, for heaven's sake . . .
So this knucklehead Krzyzewski is claiming two contradictory things about the Triangle System:
(1) it's not "people oriented" . . .
(2) it gives players freedom . . .
WHAT (!!!??) 
Malcolm wrote:Malcolm wrote:From the article:
“What the triangle gave the Bulls and the Lakers was an organized way to put five players on the same page,” he [Krzyzewski] added. “It’s not a miracle cure. It creates freedom.”
OMG. What (!!!??)Freedom is the cure, for heaven's sake . . .
So this knucklehead Krzyzewski is claiming two contradictory things about the Triangle System:(1) it's not "people oriented" . . .
(2) it gives players freedom . . .
WHAT (!!!??)
Knucklehead? Wow. He's forgotten more about basketball than anybody here knows. You really love the triangle dont you? Enough to become a Knicks fan.
Malcolm wrote:From the article:Among Krzyzewski’s greatest coaching opponents was Jim Calhoun of Connecticut; invariably they faced each other in games of charged moment. Krzyzewski told me they were both “more people-oriented than system-oriented,” and Calhoun agreed.
These guys completely don't know what they're talking about.
The Triangle System is much more about people than non-Triangle approaches . . . (!)
Being a college coach in todays results oriented big money environment is tricky. They can't wait on a team to learn the fundamentals needed to excel in the Triangle. Some lower tier coaches of women's basketball have been able to use the Triangle. Big teams like Duke or UCONN are gonna be very hesitant to risk doing that. At least not a full commitment anyway.
It's hard to get these coaches to understand the intangible aspects of the Triangle because they only focus on the X's and O's aspect of the system. Most people only focus on that aspect of what Phil does with his teams. The Triangle was a means to an end for Phil. Phil was looking for a system of ball that embodied his higher aspirations for team play and selflessness. The Triangle was a good vehicle for that.
GustavBahler wrote:Malcolm wrote:Malcolm wrote:From the article:
“What the triangle gave the Bulls and the Lakers was an organized way to put five players on the same page,” he [Krzyzewski] added. “It’s not a miracle cure. It creates freedom.”
OMG. What (!!!??)Freedom is the cure, for heaven's sake . . .
So this knucklehead Krzyzewski is claiming two contradictory things about the Triangle System:(1) it's not "people oriented" . . .
(2) it gives players freedom . . .
WHAT (!!!??)
Knucklehead? Wow. He's forgotten more about basketball than anybody here knows. You really love the triangle dont you? Enough to become a Knicks fan.
Just read the contradiction yourself -- regardless of what you think about the Triangle.
Giving players more freedom is NOT being "people oriented" (??)
He admits he doesn't know the Triangle . . . but pontificates about it anyway.
It's nonsense of the dumbest kind . . . 
nixluva wrote:Being a college coach in todays results oriented big money environment is tricky. They can't wait on a team to learn the fundamentals needed to excel in the Triangle. Some lower tier coaches of women's basketball have been able to use the Triangle. Big teams like Duke or UCONN are gonna be very hesitant to risk doing that. At least not a full commitment anyway.
Fine.
But for them to then take this "Oh, we don't approve of the Triangle System because we are for people not systems . . ." is just self-serving hypocritical ignorance.
I've followed Phil Jackson's teams around the league.
The Triangle is a hard offense to insert, as we've seen in NY.
But once you do, it's a marvel.
It allows players to be in sync and form a cohesion that few other offenses do.
Phil believes not as much in the Triangle X's and O's as much as he believes in the culture it promotes.
There's a lot of haters out there. I wouldn't listen to them. Phil has kicked their butt for years and they don't want to give him an inch.
But not many teams would do as well with Lopez, rookie Porzingis, Afflalo, Calderon around Melo as we are. It's gotten Melo to play a team game. It's gotten us to understand the importance of being in sync. These are things George Karl and Mike D'Antoni, Woodson as well to a degree tried to get out of Melo and couldn't.
Even Porzingis. He's arguably the greatest fit the Triangle will ever have at that PF position. Big guy that can handle the ball, shoot the ball, throw post entry passes, rebound on offense. Cut. Screen setting is not strong, but it can come. Most of Porzingis scores come within the Triangle.
I'll say this. I've seen Kobe Bryant play without the Triangle and with. The way he's playing in terms of being in sync with his team is a huge contrast. Is it a coincidence that Kobe and Jordan never won a ring without Phil Jackson and this offense? Seen Melo lately? When have we ever seen him play like Lebron James before this? That's Triangle culture at work.
Haters always gonna hate. The Triangle was an offense run for 11 championship teams. The reason other teams don't want to install it is that it requires too much work, too much patience, and they don't have the coaching staff with a history of success running it.
Malcolm wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Malcolm wrote:Malcolm wrote:From the article:
“What the triangle gave the Bulls and the Lakers was an organized way to put five players on the same page,” he [Krzyzewski] added. “It’s not a miracle cure. It creates freedom.”
OMG. What (!!!??)Freedom is the cure, for heaven's sake . . .
So this knucklehead Krzyzewski is claiming two contradictory things about the Triangle System:(1) it's not "people oriented" . . .
(2) it gives players freedom . . .
WHAT (!!!??)
Knucklehead? Wow. He's forgotten more about basketball than anybody here knows. You really love the triangle dont you? Enough to become a Knicks fan.
Just read the contradiction yourself -- regardless of what you think about the Triangle.Giving players more freedom is NOT being "people oriented" (??)
He admits he doesn't know the Triangle . . . but pontificates about it anyway.
It's nonsense of the dumbest kind . . .
I already read the article, I posted it. You pontificate about the Knicks, but you've been a fan for like 10 minutes. Who sounds dumber?
GustavBahler wrote:I already read the article, I posted it. You pontificate about the Knicks, but you've been a fan for like 10 minutes. Who sounds dumber?
I don't know where you get the "10 minutes" from.
But it doesn't even take ONE minute or much intelligence at all to see that Krzyzewski is contradicting himself.
He admits he doesn't know the Triangle . . . but still feels he's entitled to criticize it.
That's nonsense no matter who you are or how smart you are . . .
Malcolm wrote:GustavBahler wrote:I already read the article, I posted it. You pontificate about the Knicks, but you've been a fan for like 10 minutes. Who sounds dumber?
I don't know where you get the "10 minutes" from.But it doesn't even take ONE minute or much intelligence at all to see that Krzyzewski is contradicting himself.
He admits he doesn't know the Triangle . . . but still feels he's entitled to criticize it.
That's nonsense no matter who you are or how smart you are . . .
Calling one of the greatest coaches in college sports and international basketball a "Knucklehead" shows a lack of respect for his accomplishments. Not about you disagreeing.
Just one more question, if they scrap the Triangle will you stop being a Knicks fan? I ask this because I have never heard of anyone becoming a fan of a team purely for the system they run. Ever.
Malcolm wrote:GustavBahler wrote:I already read the article, I posted it. You pontificate about the Knicks, but you've been a fan for like 10 minutes. Who sounds dumber?
I don't know where you get the "10 minutes" from.But it doesn't even take ONE minute or much intelligence at all to see that Krzyzewski is contradicting himself.
He admits he doesn't know the Triangle . . . but still feels he's entitled to criticize it.
That's nonsense no matter who you are or how smart you are . . .
and you are entitled to criticize him based on an article? To call Coach K dumb? That is pretty silly.
Look Coach K did say some dumb things and that's not the same thing as saying he's dumb. The Media and many coaches have been wrong about the Triangle and the culture behind it that Phil promotes. That's OK. They don't have to like it or appreciate every aspect of it. As long as Phil is able to find success with it here, that's all that matters.
nixluva wrote:Look Coach K did say some dumb things and that's not the same thing as saying he's dumb. The Media and many coaches have been wrong about the Triangle and the culture behind it that Phil promotes. That's OK. They don't have to like it or appreciate every aspect of it. As long as Phil is able to find success with it here, that's all that matters.
Coach K does not say anything dumb.
If two genius's are having a debate and I was sitting there, Would I sit there and say, "boy that was dumb. Come on mr einstein, pull yourself together!".
To nixluva's point about women's basketball, this from the article jumped out at me:
The lone mainstream coach who has been running the triangle offense in recent years is Tara VanDerveer, the women’s coach at Stanford, one of only 10 men and women to have won 800 games with a single Division I college program. She said she turned to the triangle in 2002 “because we could not defend it.”...
Then she addressed a source of sorrow. Because the strength of Stanford’s roster this past season was guards, she could no longer run the triangle.
...
During the day, VanDerveer would frequently drop in on the Stanford men’s coach, Johnny Dawkins, who, coincidentally, began running the triangle last season. “I want to get my fix!” she would tell him. “Got to get my fix of Triangle!”
The Stanford men “struggled a little bit last year,” she said. “They had to think. In basketball you have to flow.”
She added, “With Triangle you might take your lumps early, but it’ll pay off later.”
Dawkins said, similarly: “It takes time. So many different components. But it’s an offense that can be and will be effective.”
Dawkins and VanDerveer both guessed that in New York, Fisher was having a similar experience. But VanDerveer promised that the Knicks would find “great satisfaction when it comes to fruition, and I don’t have any doubt that it will.”
DrAlphaeus wrote:To nixluva's point about women's basketball, this from the article jumped out at me:
The lone mainstream coach who has been running the triangle offense in recent years is Tara VanDerveer, the women’s coach at Stanford, one of only 10 men and women to have won 800 games with a single Division I college program. She said she turned to the triangle in 2002 “because we could not defend it.”...
Then she addressed a source of sorrow. Because the strength of Stanford’s roster this past season was guards, she could no longer run the triangle.
...
During the day, VanDerveer would frequently drop in on the Stanford men’s coach, Johnny Dawkins, who, coincidentally, began running the triangle last season. “I want to get my fix!” she would tell him. “Got to get my fix of Triangle!”
The Stanford men “struggled a little bit last year,” she said. “They had to think. In basketball you have to flow.”
She added, “With Triangle you might take your lumps early, but it’ll pay off later.”
Dawkins said, similarly: “It takes time. So many different components. But it’s an offense that can be and will be effective.”
Dawkins and VanDerveer both guessed that in New York, Fisher was having a similar experience. But VanDerveer promised that the Knicks would find “great satisfaction when it comes to fruition, and I don’t have any doubt that it will.”
Whoa - nice find. You can see it starting to payoff here. And the exciting thing is that you can tell that even though they're getting it, they're still just scratching the surface.
With all due respect to Coach K, he hasn't coached at the NBA level, with the NBA officiating and the NBA star driven teams. He coaches college where he is the man and whatever he says GOES, and at the international level a group of guys play roles to for a few weeks to feel patriotic. It's nothing like Coach K having to deal with coaching a star on a NBA team. Look at how Duke products even do in the league. There's not one superstar he's coached that translated to the NBA level to that level. He hasn't dealt with the Melo, Kobe, Jordan types in the NBA setting and to talk like that - to be honest he's full of it. Those guys are totally different types of players in the Team USA setting vs when they're the man on their far less talented teams. In one situation, Kobe's willing to play a Sefoslosha/Bruce Bowen role for Team USA. Yeah, good luck getting him to do that for the Lakers. Getting guys like Kobe, Jordan and now Melo to buy in and play team ball was one of the hardest things for a NBA coach to do in the NBA. Only the Triangle culture has paved the way for it. It doesn't mean that the Triangle is the best offense in the league or that every team should run it, but the types of shots and criticism it's taken since Phil left the league is all about guys getting shots back at Phil for kicking their ass for years. They're all salty at Phil's success and unique methods that they're never ever going to be able to do themselves.
You look at Popovic, why does he run a system as well then? Why did Adelman? These are established coaches with great resumes in the NBA circuit. Not just college or international ball. They've dealt with superstars who hog the ball and the whole NBA team dynamic. It's a completely selfish self centered league that if you don't install a good culture as a head coach, you're screwed.
Malcolm wrote:GustavBahler wrote:I already read the article, I posted it. You pontificate about the Knicks, but you've been a fan for like 10 minutes. Who sounds dumber?
I don't know where you get the "10 minutes" from.But it doesn't even take ONE minute or much intelligence at all to see that Krzyzewski is contradicting himself.
He admits he doesn't know the Triangle . . . but still feels he's entitled to criticize it.
That's nonsense no matter who you are or how smart you are . . .
I didn't jump into the thread you started about whether Triangle fans were welcome here, nor did I give you a proper welcome, so welcome Malcolm.
That out of the way, I have to say: I'm not sure I get you yet and what exactly you love about "Triangle" as the article puts it. Maybe you can use this thread as an opportunity to expound on the opinions of its advocates versus its detractors? The way you talk about it, it's obvious you aren't a fan simply from a Tex Winter Xs-and-Os perspective. Or not just the focus on the fundamentals and rudimentary drills... you speak of the culture... Triangle culture as refined by Phil Jackson, as described in the article as Jackson's more people-focused spiritual approach melded with Winter's systematic approach?
I felt like I learned something about the Triangle from this article... so would love to hear you expound on what you read here instead of focusing on "haters"... especially when this is a forum full of die-hards who root for the laundry no matter what pattern it runs around the court.
crzymdups wrote:DrAlphaeus wrote:To nixluva's point about women's basketball, this from the article jumped out at me:
The lone mainstream coach who has been running the triangle offense in recent years is Tara VanDerveer, the women’s coach at Stanford, one of only 10 men and women to have won 800 games with a single Division I college program. She said she turned to the triangle in 2002 “because we could not defend it.”...
Then she addressed a source of sorrow. Because the strength of Stanford’s roster this past season was guards, she could no longer run the triangle.
...
During the day, VanDerveer would frequently drop in on the Stanford men’s coach, Johnny Dawkins, who, coincidentally, began running the triangle last season. “I want to get my fix!” she would tell him. “Got to get my fix of Triangle!”
The Stanford men “struggled a little bit last year,” she said. “They had to think. In basketball you have to flow.”
She added, “With Triangle you might take your lumps early, but it’ll pay off later.”
Dawkins said, similarly: “It takes time. So many different components. But it’s an offense that can be and will be effective.”
Dawkins and VanDerveer both guessed that in New York, Fisher was having a similar experience. But VanDerveer promised that the Knicks would find “great satisfaction when it comes to fruition, and I don’t have any doubt that it will.”
Whoa - nice find. You can see it starting to payoff here. And the exciting thing is that you can tell that even though they're getting it, they're still just scratching the surface.
Indeed, yet with that caveat that you may be shooting yourself in the foot if your team's strength is overwhelmingly in the backcourt. Even with Jordan and Kobe as killer (but tall and high flying) guards — the article talks about after Jordan's Come to Triangle moment, he worked on his post game and feasted from there, because otherwise he'd lose all those scoring opportunities the Triangle put him in.
An observation about Batum's WS/48
http://knickerblogger.net/knicks-morning...
Batum does better in WP than in WS. He’s third among all shooting guards in overall Wins Produced this year, behind only Jimmy Butler and James Harden. On a per-minute basis he’s third in WP48 behind Butler and Manu Ginobilli. He consistently does well in WP year after year. He’s a boxscore-stuffer.He is a very solid rebounder for a SG/SF. He’s pulling down 6.7 boards per 36 this year, and he has had nice TRB% numbers his whole career. He’d be the best rebounding guard on this team by a comfortable margin. The Knicks are not a good defensive rebounding team, and the frontcourt of Lopez-KP-Melo seems locked in, so a guard who can rebound would be a nice thing to have.
He is the kind of player who does not have any one stand out skill, doesn’t have the one mindblowing stat that makes you go “wow,” but who has a very well-rounded game with few weaknesses. He scores efficiently– career .568 TS%. He’s not a great 3-point shooter, but he’s good– career .363 3PT%. He’s a good defensive player– at 6’8″ he’s long for a two-guard but he is not too slow to guard some of the quicker slashing two-guards in the league. He’s a good passer and a willing passer– has been averaging over 5 assists per game the last three seasons. He gets to the line and is a good free throw shooter.
Batum’s tepid WS48 this season is largely a byproduct of being on a mediocre team. His TS% is way up this season, rebounds are up, assists are up, usage is way up, turnovers are the same, blocks are the same, steals are the same. Last year he was on a 51-win team, while this year he is on a mediocre team that will probably finish below .500. He is actually playing better this year since moving to SG, regardless of what his WS48 says.
To me it does not matter if he puts up the crazy scoring numbers he was doing earlier because i liked him last year(bad shooting yr) and the years before that. He is a fit and we know what he is when surrounded by a good group of player.
It would be awesome to get Batun to me because he is like an older better all around version of Khris Middleton.
