Knicks · Help me understand modern basketball and where the league is headed and why the Triangle is not apart of that (page 3)

martin wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

martin wrote:

fishmike wrote:far too advanced a topic requiring reading, insightful response, possible research... what were you thinking?

The triangle is fine. Phil has a lot of (his own) mistakes to fix, and needs more from other guys who were hurt. We will have some offseason options. We will see if Phil can get this right or not.

That the word antiquated was thrown about when discussing the Triangle and I have no idea why

We get a new coach and 10 new players every yr, and we have SASHA and RAMBIS as the only 2 that are familiar with the system. You hire a coach that doesn't no anything about the triangle, and sign, and trade for players that are the complete opposite of what you're trying to do..

The system would not be a topic if we had a core, and coach that knew the ins and out..but we don't and it's obviously a very IQ system that takes time and 100% commitment across the board, which we never seem to have..

That's nice but off topic. Thanks though.

Modern basketball, Analytics, Triangle. Help me understand the differences.

Your not even realizing that all your references and statistics are being compared with lakers and Spurs, rosters that have been together for yrs..

Today's nba is spread and go(why you think JH and fisher a high speed triangle), Phil offense is half court spread, and every body keeps moving and cutting and passing the ball until the defense is off balance. The problem is that our execution is terrible most of the time(mostly because of familiarity), and guys get frustrated and quit on it.

So you can run numbers all day, it's just a terrible way to look at why the system doesn't work.

I still don't have a good idea about what analytics has shown to inform us about modern basketball.

Is it all 3 point shooting? Thought it had to do with shots at rim too?

knicks1248 wrote:

martin wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

martin wrote:

fishmike wrote:far too advanced a topic requiring reading, insightful response, possible research... what were you thinking?

The triangle is fine. Phil has a lot of (his own) mistakes to fix, and needs more from other guys who were hurt. We will have some offseason options. We will see if Phil can get this right or not.

That the word antiquated was thrown about when discussing the Triangle and I have no idea why

We get a new coach and 10 new players every yr, and we have SASHA and RAMBIS as the only 2 that are familiar with the system. You hire a coach that doesn't no anything about the triangle, and sign, and trade for players that are the complete opposite of what you're trying to do..

The system would not be a topic if we had a core, and coach that knew the ins and out..but we don't and it's obviously a very IQ system that takes time and 100% commitment across the board, which we never seem to have..

That's nice but off topic. Thanks though.

Modern basketball, Analytics, Triangle. Help me understand the differences.

Your not even realizing that all your references and statistics are being compared with lakers and Spurs, rosters that have been together for yrs..

Today's nba is spread and go, Phil offense is half court spread, and every body keeps moving and cutting and passing the ball until the defense is off balance. The problem is that our execution is terrible most of the time, and guys get frustrated and quit on it.

So you can run numbers all day, it's just a terrible way to look at why the system doesn't work.

Oh I agree with you that the Knicks not only suck but they also execute poorly. They also sucked in Woodson's last year under a different system.

But I'm not really focusing on today's roster and execution so much as pure systems and why one COULD be better than the next and what modern basketball has informed us about what should be run.

crzymdups wrote:More importantly - let's talk about the Knicks.

Knicks

2010-11 - MDA. Melo's first half season. Playoffs
Three point shots made per game: 9.3 made shots, 1st in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 2nd in league

2011-12 MDA. Lin. Melo. Playoffs.
Three point shots made per game: 7.6 made shots, 5th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 2nd in league

2012-13 Woodyball. Playoffs
Three point shots made per game: 10.5 made shots, 2nd in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 2nd in league

2013-4 Miss playoffs by one game due to Bargs being present and Tyson breaking leg
Three point shots made per game: 9.3 made shots, 6th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 3rd in league

2014-15 ▲ 17 wins
Three point shots made per game: 6.8 made shots, 20th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 21st in league

2015-16 ▲ 32 wins - Knicks acquire generational 7'3" 3pt shooter... continue to shoot fewer threes relative to league
Three point shots made per game: 7.4 made shots, 24th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 22nd in league

2016-17 ▲ 31 wins
Three point shots made per game: 8.6 made shots, 24th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 25th in league

Great find....lol at the triangle

Is there a self-fulfilling prophecy going here?

Stats show that post play is not as efficient today...but bigs are not learning to play in the post in college and HS, just finish on the pick and roll and take 3s.

In HS bigs probably just overpower smaller players and we know that more and more are working on their 3 pt shooting.

The numbers in the post are therefore going to be poor, since bigs are not taught to play in the post as much as they once were.

Add to this the fact that rules seem to favor the high pick and roll, as refs allow moving picks in those situations and hand check rules favor the offensive player. You also have to consider that many of today's stars such as Curry, Westbrook, and Harden benefit from this style of play.

Uptown wrote:

crzymdups wrote:More importantly - let's talk about the Knicks.

Knicks

2010-11 - MDA. Melo's first half season. Playoffs
Three point shots made per game: 9.3 made shots, 1st in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 2nd in league

2011-12 MDA. Lin. Melo. Playoffs.
Three point shots made per game: 7.6 made shots, 5th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 2nd in league

2012-13 Woodyball. Playoffs
Three point shots made per game: 10.5 made shots, 2nd in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 2nd in league

2013-4 Miss playoffs by one game due to Bargs being present and Tyson breaking leg
Three point shots made per game: 9.3 made shots, 6th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 3rd in league

2014-15 ▲ 17 wins
Three point shots made per game: 6.8 made shots, 20th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 21st in league

2015-16 ▲ 32 wins - Knicks acquire generational 7'3" 3pt shooter... continue to shoot fewer threes relative to league
Three point shots made per game: 7.4 made shots, 24th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 22nd in league

2016-17 ▲ 31 wins
Three point shots made per game: 8.6 made shots, 24th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 25th in league

Great find....lol at the triangle

The interesting thing is - the number of 3s the Knicks made this year would have been good for third in the league in 2010-11. This year it's good for 24th... kinda insane.

The league is evolving at a rapid rate in this regard.

I don't think analytics is just about threes, but any analytical approach to shot distribution obviously tells teams that taking a lot of threes is better. You really have to gear your offense to be able to match it AND you defense to be able to guard it. Long, quick players with close out speed.

I wonder if Phil's resistance to the three ball also includes a resistance to admitting you need to tailor your roster to GUARD teams that shoot 30 threes a game? That's not a Phil slam, just an honest question. We need to improve our personnel to be able to take and make more threes... but also to be able to close out on shooters and cover defensive ground more quickly.

WaltLongmire wrote:Is there a self-fulfilling prophecy going here?

Stats show that post play is not as efficient today...but bigs are not learning to play in the post in college and HS, just finish on the pick and roll and take 3s.

In HS bigs probably just overpower smaller players and we know that more and more are working on their 3 pt shooting.

The numbers in the post are therefore going to be poor, since bigs are not taught to play in the post as much as they once were.

Add to this the fact that rules seem to favor the high pick and roll, as refs allow moving picks in those situations and hand check rules favor the offensive player. You also have to consider that many of today's stars such as Curry, Westbrook, and Harden benefit from this style of play.

I think there have absolutely been rule changes to encourage this style of play.

I forget where I saw this - but there have been more four point plays and fouled three point shooters than ever this year. So teams are trying to get better at closing out, but the league is calling fouls almost to discourage good defense on these shots. They allow that crappy lean in foul on the three point shots which to me is almost more annoying than the rip through offensive move that KD popularized was.

Basically it seems players will always adapt to be able to take maximum advantage of the way the game is called and played.

Phil strikes me as a guy who is too honourable and stubborn to take advantage of some of this stuff... but in a season where we lost what 10 or 12 games by 3pts or less?... you start to see where stealing a point here and there throughout the game can be the difference between a lost season and a playoffs run. To me the guys you see delighting in taking advantage of the rules the most are MDA and Harden. It's almost like they figured out the cheat codes for a video game.

And not for nothing but shouldn't MDA be the father of modern basketball, not Pop?

MDA and 7 Seconds or Less made it rain!

martin wrote:I still don't have a good idea about what analytics has shown to inform us about modern basketball.

Is it all 3 point shooting? Thought it had to do with shots at rim too?

IMO the Modern Approach is focused on Early Offense because it tends to be more Efficient than later in the shot clock. So you see more Spread PnR early to get the D moving and open up efficient 3pt shots. It's more than just Transition Ball.

In comparison older style Offense doesn't always Prioritize Early Offense to the same degree but Old School Triangle would often start with about 3 passes before really getting into a Post Up or Cuts. Also Modern O tries to avoid Mid Range and Post Ups. Triangle tends not to avoid ANY type of look. Read and React can lead to any shot from any spot on the floor.

That said Jeff's version of the Triangle does include more Early Offense and Phil Approves of this as long as they have the fundamentals of the Triangle that they can flow into if there isn't an Early Scoring opportunity. The kids really got the hang of it late in the season. So you can do BOTH.

crzymdups wrote:If you look at the proliferation of the 3pt shot, it's kinda crazy. Here we go -

San Antonio Spurs

2005-06
Three point shots made per game: 6.3 made shots, 10th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 15th in league

06-07
Three point shots made per game: 7.3 made shots, 6th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 6th in league

07-08
Three point shots made per game: 7.3 made shots, 8th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 8th in league

08-09
Three point shots made per game: 7.5 made shots, 6th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 8th in league

09-10
Three point shots made per game: 6.5 made shots, 13th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 12th in league

10-11
Three point shots made per game: 8.1 made shots, 6th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 6th in league

11-12
Three point shots made per game: 8.6 made shots, 2nd in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 6th in league

12-13
Three point shots made per game: 8.1 made shots, 8th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 9th in league

13-14 - here is where you start to see the league catch up - San Antonio makes enough shots to be second in the league in 3pts made just two years earlier, but they're suddenly only 10th in the league, 16th in rate
Three point shots made per game: 8.5 made shots, 10th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 16th in league

14-15 - again enough made shots to be second in the league in 2011-12... now just 12th, 15th in per/100
Three point shots made per game: 8.4 made shots, 12th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 15th in league

15-16 - Here you see Duncan has retired for LMA, Spurs still taking numbers consistent with 06-07, except now it is near last in league
Three point shots made per game: 7.1 made shots, 25th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 25th in league

16-17 - Spurs make more threes per game this year than ever before. Only good for 17th in the league.
Three point shots made per game: 9.2 made shots, 17th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 24th in league

In 2005-06 the number 2 team in the league made 7 threes a game. (the #1 team was MDA's Suns at 10 makes per game.)

This year, the number 2 team in the league makes 14 threes a game. BUT, the top 11 teams all make more than 10 threes per game. And EVERY SINGLE TEAM IN THE LEAGUE makes more threes than the #2 team from 05-06.

The league has changed.

source -
https://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stat/th...

https://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stat/th...

I do find this as good stuff.

Also, 3point shots made seems to be a factor of both system and talent, whereas 3point shots per 100 possessions tells us more about the system than the players within the system. Now, obviously, players will also influence and dictate shots per 100 possessions, you always shade towards what is working for you.

I had been under the assumption that modern basketball was more reflective of where the league has been over the past 3-5 years, especially when GS really accelerated the 3 point shooting, and not starting way back in 2005-2006, or even 2010. Don't remember hearing Modern Basketball until a couple of years ago.

nixluva wrote:

martin wrote:I still don't have a good idea about what analytics has shown to inform us about modern basketball.

Is it all 3 point shooting? Thought it had to do with shots at rim too?

IMO the Modern Approach is focused on Early Offense because it tends to be more Efficient than later in the shot clock. So you see more Spread PnR early to get the D moving and open up efficient 3pt shots. It's more than just Transition Ball.

In comparison older style Offense doesn't always Prioritize Early Offense to the same degree but Old School Triangle would often start with about 3 passes before really getting into a Post Up or Cuts. Also Modern O tries to avoid Mid Range and Post Ups. Triangle tends not to avoid ANY type of look. Read and React can lead to any shot from any spot on the floor.

That said Jeff's version of the Triangle does include more Early Offense and Phil Approves of this as long as they have the fundamentals of the Triangle that they can flow into if there isn't an Early Scoring opportunity. The kids really got the hang of it late in the season. So you can do BOTH.

OK thanks, sounds about right.

Anyone else? Is there any nuance or different way of explaining?

martin wrote:

nixluva wrote:

martin wrote:I still don't have a good idea about what analytics has shown to inform us about modern basketball.

Is it all 3 point shooting? Thought it had to do with shots at rim too?

IMO the Modern Approach is focused on Early Offense because it tends to be more Efficient than later in the shot clock. So you see more Spread PnR early to get the D moving and open up efficient 3pt shots. It's more than just Transition Ball.

In comparison older style Offense doesn't always Prioritize Early Offense to the same degree but Old School Triangle would often start with about 3 passes before really getting into a Post Up or Cuts. Also Modern O tries to avoid Mid Range and Post Ups. Triangle tends not to avoid ANY type of look. Read and React can lead to any shot from any spot on the floor.

That said Jeff's version of the Triangle does include more Early Offense and Phil Approves of this as long as they have the fundamentals of the Triangle that they can flow into if there isn't an Early Scoring opportunity. The kids really got the hang of it late in the season. So you can do BOTH.

OK thanks, sounds about right.

Anyone else? Is there any nuance or different way of explaining?

Also as you pointed out the Spurs play more of an Old School style where you see more passes leading up to scoring opportunities. Their famous Hammer Play is an example of that Style which isn't a direct Spread PnR Early Attack but still opens up a great 3 PT shot.

martin wrote:And not for nothing but shouldn't MDA be the father of modern basketball, not Pop?

MDA and 7 Seconds or Less made it rain!

Saw a stat today...Houston players who end up taking a shot have had the ball for an average of about 2 seconds. Can't remember where I saw it.

mlby1215 wrote: ppl didn't want to use it even in its heyday. It is not about W/L or anything. Ppl just wanted it to go away as fast as it can after Phil retired.

The reason it didn't work or ppl didn't want to use it, I thought, is not because of anything on-court but it is against the business world we are in. For example,

The ppg of star players have to be down as they have to share the ball.
The assist tends to be shared among players so someone Rondo must not like it.

Well, in short. Players have to sacrifice himself for the greater good.
I mean, who would do so in Capitalism world? Really? Someone would stop to shoot 3 in order to pocket 500k more, this kind of dudes must not like to play triangle.

If a team's superstar doesn't want to use it, of course the team would not use it.
Yeah, triangle actually would help you win. It would help your TS% or something, but who cares? adv. stats would not get you into NBA all-star selection. It would not help you to get a great contract. When it comes to money, only the holy triangle a.k.a. points, rebounds and assists count.

Second, triangle can be very complex, but the idea is that it looks like five players moves at the same time, just like 5 guys dancing together. If one of them doesn't go to the place he is supposed to, it screws up everything. Well, again, you have to ask your star players to use it even though it would hurt his earning and then you want to him to practice hard? please. Mostly they move to their best spot and then camp here and wait for the pass.

Triangle doesn't work just like Communism doesn't work. Most ppl would not want to sacrifice their earning for anything. I often said, if superstars REALLY wants to win, they can take 5 mil or vet mins to join together. This super-team would win every year.

But they would not. They are like us. We all have to work, and we all like money.

Kobe and Jordan never reduced their scoring in the triangle. Matter of fact they superstar lead the league in scoring on numerous occasions.

WaltLongmire wrote:Is there a self-fulfilling prophecy going here?

Stats show that post play is not as efficient today...but bigs are not learning to play in the post in college and HS, just finish on the pick and roll and take 3s.

In HS bigs probably just overpower smaller players and we know that more and more are working on their 3 pt shooting.

The numbers in the post are therefore going to be poor, since bigs are not taught to play in the post as much as they once were.

Add to this the fact that rules seem to favor the high pick and roll, as refs allow moving picks in those situations and hand check rules favor the offensive player. You also have to consider that many of today's stars such as Curry, Westbrook, and Harden benefit from this style of play.

Exactly. If you don't have an efficient post player, than it would make sense to rely on guard penetration to get an open shot. That's just intuitive basketball. If I have a Duncan, Barkely or Shaq in the post, I'm going to dump it inside, wait for the double, hope the offensive player passes it out quickly, and try to get an open shot that way. It's all about personnel. Didn't have a post player on those Phoenix teams, so he compensated by relying more on his HOF pointguard.

WaltLongmire wrote:Is there a self-fulfilling prophecy going here?

Stats show that post play is not as efficient today...but bigs are not learning to play in the post in college and HS, just finish on the pick and roll and take 3s.

In HS bigs probably just overpower smaller players and we know that more and more are working on their 3 pt shooting.

The numbers in the post are therefore going to be poor, since bigs are not taught to play in the post as much as they once were.

Add to this the fact that rules seem to favor the high pick and roll, as refs allow moving picks in those situations and hand check rules favor the offensive player. You also have to consider that many of today's stars such as Curry, Westbrook, and Harden benefit from this style of play.

Here's an interesting article.
http://grantland.com/the-triangle/how-ef...
Basically, shots in the post are inefficient but post moves can be used to draw double teams and create efficient shots for teammates.

I'm not sure if players used to convert shots more efficiently in the post than they do now. That seems to be what you're saying but I haven't found info. on that.

Bonn1997 wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:Is there a self-fulfilling prophecy going here?

Stats show that post play is not as efficient today...but bigs are not learning to play in the post in college and HS, just finish on the pick and roll and take 3s.

In HS bigs probably just overpower smaller players and we know that more and more are working on their 3 pt shooting.

The numbers in the post are therefore going to be poor, since bigs are not taught to play in the post as much as they once were.

Add to this the fact that rules seem to favor the high pick and roll, as refs allow moving picks in those situations and hand check rules favor the offensive player. You also have to consider that many of today's stars such as Curry, Westbrook, and Harden benefit from this style of play.

Here's an interesting article.
http://grantland.com/the-triangle/how-ef...
Basically, shots in the post are inefficient but post moves can be used to draw double teams and create efficient shots for teammates.

I'm not sure if players used to convert shots more efficiently in the post than they do now. That seems to be what you're saying but I haven't found info. on that.

I think this sums it up what lots are saying, from the article:

But as we’ve seen with Anthony, a player hell-bent on finishing for himself off a post-up (or isolation) can drag down an entire offense, even if he’s converting a high percentage of his own shots. Anthony is brilliant when it comes to creating clean looks for himself, and that prompts double-teams or shifts from an opposing defense. The problem is that Anthony falls into the trap of not using those double-teams to create better looks for his teammates nearly as often as he could.

I think that directly talks to the sticky portion of Melo that we all wish he could change.

Bonn1997 wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:Is there a self-fulfilling prophecy going here?

Stats show that post play is not as efficient today...but bigs are not learning to play in the post in college and HS, just finish on the pick and roll and take 3s.

In HS bigs probably just overpower smaller players and we know that more and more are working on their 3 pt shooting.

The numbers in the post are therefore going to be poor, since bigs are not taught to play in the post as much as they once were.

Add to this the fact that rules seem to favor the high pick and roll, as refs allow moving picks in those situations and hand check rules favor the offensive player. You also have to consider that many of today's stars such as Curry, Westbrook, and Harden benefit from this style of play.

Here's an interesting article.
http://grantland.com/the-triangle/how-ef...
Basically, shots in the post are inefficient but post moves can be used to draw double teams and create efficient shots for teammates.

I'm not sure if players used to convert shots more efficiently in the post than they do now. That seems to be what you're saying but I haven't found info. on that.

Post play has become inefficient as the players are less and less skilled at it. A turn around jumper Is nonexistent in today's NBA. You can go games without seeing one. If your a Knick fan that shot was Bernard Kings and Pat Ewings bread and butter. What center / PF has that in their in their game in today's NBA. I always felt that a good post game makes for great kick out three, but today's NBA is basically jack as many threes as you can.

Vmart wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:Is there a self-fulfilling prophecy going here?

Stats show that post play is not as efficient today...but bigs are not learning to play in the post in college and HS, just finish on the pick and roll and take 3s.

In HS bigs probably just overpower smaller players and we know that more and more are working on their 3 pt shooting.

The numbers in the post are therefore going to be poor, since bigs are not taught to play in the post as much as they once were.

Add to this the fact that rules seem to favor the high pick and roll, as refs allow moving picks in those situations and hand check rules favor the offensive player. You also have to consider that many of today's stars such as Curry, Westbrook, and Harden benefit from this style of play.

Here's an interesting article.
http://grantland.com/the-triangle/how-ef...
Basically, shots in the post are inefficient but post moves can be used to draw double teams and create efficient shots for teammates.

I'm not sure if players used to convert shots more efficiently in the post than they do now. That seems to be what you're saying but I haven't found info. on that.

Post play has become inefficient as the players are less and less skilled at it. A turn around jumper Is nonexistent in today's NBA. You can go games without seeing one. If your a Knick fan that shot was Bernard Kings and Pat Ewings bread and butter. What center / PF has that in their in their game in today's NBA. I always felt that a good post game makes for great kick out three, but today's NBA is basically jack as many threes as you can.

The GREAT post players of the past are not prevalent in today's game. As much as we may love KAT he's no Olajuwon in the post.

crzymdups wrote:

Uptown wrote:

crzymdups wrote:More importantly - let's talk about the Knicks.

Knicks

2010-11 - MDA. Melo's first half season. Playoffs
Three point shots made per game: 9.3 made shots, 1st in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 2nd in league

2011-12 MDA. Lin. Melo. Playoffs.
Three point shots made per game: 7.6 made shots, 5th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 2nd in league

2012-13 Woodyball. Playoffs
Three point shots made per game: 10.5 made shots, 2nd in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 2nd in league

2013-4 Miss playoffs by one game due to Bargs being present and Tyson breaking leg
Three point shots made per game: 9.3 made shots, 6th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 3rd in league

2014-15 ▲ 17 wins
Three point shots made per game: 6.8 made shots, 20th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 21st in league

2015-16 ▲ 32 wins - Knicks acquire generational 7'3" 3pt shooter... continue to shoot fewer threes relative to league
Three point shots made per game: 7.4 made shots, 24th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 22nd in league

2016-17 ▲ 31 wins
Three point shots made per game: 8.6 made shots, 24th in the league
Three point rate per 100 possessions: 25th in league

Great find....lol at the triangle

The interesting thing is - the number of 3s the Knicks made this year would have been good for third in the league in 2010-11. This year it's good for 24th... kinda insane.

The league is evolving at a rapid rate in this regard.

I don't think analytics is just about threes, but any analytical approach to shot distribution obviously tells teams that taking a lot of threes is better. You really have to gear your offense to be able to match it AND you defense to be able to guard it. Long, quick players with close out speed.

I wonder if Phil's resistance to the three ball also includes a resistance to admitting you need to tailor your roster to GUARD teams that shoot 30 threes a game? That's not a Phil slam, just an honest question. We need to improve our personnel to be able to take and make more threes... but also to be able to close out on shooters and cover defensive ground more quickly.

It's definitely where the game is and where its still going...I coach middle school boys and help out from time to time with the High School boys....When I tell you, Every Team on the High School and Middle School level plays some type of 5-Out open paint offense or a 4-Out 1-in spread offense. The idea is to spread the defense across the court for dribble-drives and kicks for the open 3 (if the help defender helps) or dribble drive all the way in for a lay up, a dump off to the big in short corner if they are playing a 4 out 1 in and the paint defender helps on the drive, or seek contact for a foul. Spread offense also leaves the defense vulnerable for give-and-goes and back door cuts.

In practice, we emphasize conditioning, individual skills particularly dribbling to beat their man off the dribble, early offense, tons of 3's, and PNR-offense-and-defense.

In todays game, you need Players who can defend multiple positions, because when defending the spread offense you have to be able to switch...Most of these players aren't tied down to traditional positions. For example, Golden State does not have a traditional Pg, Nor do they have a traditional PF. What they have is what you need to win in todays NBA. Multiple 3 point shooters (KD, Steph, Klay) multiple players that can defend multiple positions (Draymond, Klay and Iggy)...They also have length or court coverage which is also impeccable in today's game.

The formula to win in todays games is there for all to see...Just watch the winning teams...None of them run a traditional triangle....It's a new game...

Kobe and Jordan never reduced their scoring in the triangle. Matter of fact they superstar lead the league in scoring on numerous occasions.

Sorry I don't know how to quote

Yes, they did very good in triangle, but no one could know who would happen to their PPG if they played in different systems. History can only run once. However, it is logical to assume that "Give him the ball then go away from his path" or something similar MUST make the superstars have more chance to score. At the end, winning side should have better stats just because they score more. If a system must success, who wouldn't want to use it?

Triangle would not guarantee anyone to success but it is pretty sure to take away the shot attempt star players normally would have. The ball has to be shared. It is going to be some kind of game theory. if everyone is unselfish, the pie is much bigger, but if you are selfish, you are guaranteed to have your share. At last, it is just everyone for himself.

On paper, triangle has to be the best system. It won 11 times out of 20, it just has to. But it has to have the leader who can convince everyone to buy into it.