The Trouble with the Triangle

[Vash]

Donnie didn't fail, Dolan stepped in

Came here to lure Lebron: failed!

Signed D'Antoni as coach: huge fail!

Gave Amar'e a 5 year contract, when Phoenix doctors said he can only play 3: epic fail!!!



Should I even mention his draft results?

No way Donnie Walsh failed.

He cleared out all those horrible contracts and gave us a legitimate chance in 2010 to sign two MAX CATS.

If the Knicks actually built a team around D'Antoni instead of undermining him and getting Carmelo Anthony, I think we would be a singing a different tune.

Same story i heard. I am not sure why people believe otherwise? I just think people cannot handle honesty. Dolan shafted the fansand Walsh, the media led fans astray also and then reports surfaced about Isaiah and Dolan undermining Walsh.

[MR IB4TL]

If we did that, we'd have Deron Williams right now.

Let that sink in

Deron Williams would have been a perfect fit under D'Antoni. I don't see the problem.

Besides being fat, injured, and generally cooked by now?

The point that I am alluding to is the following: The Knicks from 2008-2010 were rebuilding with Mike D'Antoni as their coach. Once they got Stat and had nice pieces around him, the Knicks traded their entire team and future for Carmelo Anthony, who is the antithesis of a D'Antoni player. After 3 coaches, the Knicks are worst team today than they were in the 2010-2011 season. Had they added Deron Williams to a team that included Stat and possibly Gallo and continued building, I think we would be in situation today than we currently are.

[GONYK]

Deron Williams would have been a perfect fit under D'Antoni. I don't see the problem.

Besides being fat, injured, and generally cooked by now?

The point that I am alluding to is the following: The Knicks from 2008-2010 were rebuilding with Mike D'Antoni as their coach. Once they got Stat and had nice pieces around him, the Knicks traded their entire team and future for Carmelo Anthony, who is the antithesis of a D'Antoni player. After 3 coaches, the Knicks are worst team today than they were in the 2010-2011 season. Had they added Deron Williams to a team that included Stat and possibly Gallo and continued building, I think we would be in situation today than we currently are.

But Deron has been terrible during that exact same span. He would have cost just as much, never played at a high level, and then we'd be on the hook for him.

Couple that with Amare's injuries, and it's an ugly picture. Especially to just cater to D'Antoni.

Melo, for the same assets, is the better player.

[ozwizard8]

Thats why we should have a 21 year old age limit. Start developing basketball players young again instead of showing off their athleticism on the basketball court until they get paid.

But I agree the NBA needs fundamentally sound players.

FTFY

I have a better shooting form then half the players in the NBA...and I have tips on.

Yes, this is also true.

It's not like the Triangle is making these players worse. A lot the players on our team were stupid or limited beforehand.

I bet the Clippers or the Warriors could run the hell out of this system.

no one uses triangle.

most suited squad for triangle is memphis.
if warriors run triangle they'll get 8-12 rather than 18-12.

plot twist: triangle sucks as no one uses this.

[prophet_of_rage]

We're taking a wider look at the triangle in general though. Phil's coaches have never succeeded in implementing the triangle. It failed in Dallas, the Bulls got worse under Cartwright's triangle. Shaw's Denver team ended a run of 11 playoff appearances with Shaw's triangle principles. Rambis' Wolves were terrible in the triangle. Hamblen's Laker's were an abomination as well.

And all these coaches tried to force the triangle on the wrong players. We can't fix the Knicks ineptitude on defence because that is a matter of ability. There are no great defenders not playing up to par.

[nykballa2k4]

FTFY

I have a better shooting form then half the players in the NBA...and I have tips on.

Yes, this is also true.

It's not like the Triangle is making these players worse. A lot the players on our team were stupid or limited beforehand.

I bet the Clippers or the Warriors could run the hell out of this system.

no one uses triangle.

most suited squad for triangle is memphis.
if warriors run triangle they'll get 8-12 rather than 18-12.

plot twist: triangle sucks as no one uses this.

Not going to miss not reading your posts...

Idiots in the media keep talking about "the triangle" and "the triangle" is failing. Until the Triangle is re-purposed as a defense and rebounding scheme it has NOTHING to do with our problem.

People were talking about the triangle as if it were the panacea. Shock. Our defense still sucks as does our rebounding. That's why we lose. Enough blaming platitudes. Fan up.

[duetta]

Can't believe that we're still debating Donnie Walsh. Walsh tried, but in hindsight, made plenty of mistakes - some of which struck some of us as mistakes from the get-go. But maybe no one can withstand the pressure of working for D-hole.

[N8isScofield]

Thats why we should have a 21 year old age limit. Start developing basketball players young again instead of showing off their athleticism on the basketball court until they get paid.

But I agree the triangle needs fundamentally sound players.

If college athletes were finally paid as such, I think this could work.

I have always been against college athletes getting paid. Until I found out how much the schools make off of them. The numbers were shocking for me to see.

Now I feel like the rules are very outdated. Cable came out like 31 years ago. Sports in general have seen a HUGE hike in income sense cable. And now with internet. The NCAA im sure has been making even more money off these kids now. But still applying the same rules to the kids.

It would be better for the NCAA and the NBA if these kids got paid a little something and were forced to stay at least 3 years. NBA gets better players. NCAA can develop players and profit even more because they actually get build around a kid for a few years. Besides, schools have trained professionals that deal with these kids for a living. Teaching them. They can learn important things like money management.

And I feel the biggest benefit of all is being one year from a degree!!

I agree with you completely Kane, the problem beyond NCAA greed is that it would be a technical nightmare to figure out who gets paid what. Say you have a school like Miami or Penn State. The overwhelming majority of their sports based revenue is coming from one sport; football. Now you run into a whole host of problems. That money is already dispersed to fund the other teams. So something like say girls lacrosse or soccer or whatever (and I mean no disrespect to female athletes at all and that will become clear in my next point) which doesn't generate very much revenue because it's not marketable to a broad audience is going to be heavily dependent on that football money. Now you run into a whole gamut of issues. If you're paying everyone the same, those kids who are currently making all the money and getting nothing whatsoever are not really any better off because most of the revenue they earn is still going to have to go to pay for other programs. And is it really fair to pay people who aren't actually making the school any money? Could you really justify paying say a female shot putter that nobody has ever heard of the same as Reggie Bush at USC? Then where does TITLE IX fit in. Now you've got questions of gender equality to answer. Conversely, at a school like UCONN where BOTH genders have programs that are extremely lucrative, can you justify paying the no name male lacrosse player what you'd pay a Maya Moore or Diana Taurasi? It just opens up a whole **** of issues and it's why I think we're a long way away from any sort of direct compensation from the NCAA to the players. Now they could just do the simple thing and get rid of all the ridiculous restrictions on things such as being able to sell memorabilia and accept gifts and endorsement offers. That would be one solution but even that would have its own issues.

[kane2021]

If college athletes were finally paid as such, I think this could work.

I have always been against college athletes getting paid. Until I found out how much the schools make off of them. The numbers were shocking for me to see.

Now I feel like the rules are very outdated. Cable came out like 31 years ago. Sports in general have seen a HUGE hike in income sense cable. And now with internet. The NCAA im sure has been making even more money off these kids now. But still applying the same rules to the kids.

It would be better for the NCAA and the NBA if these kids got paid a little something and were forced to stay at least 3 years. NBA gets better players. NCAA can develop players and profit even more because they actually get build around a kid for a few years. Besides, schools have trained professionals that deal with these kids for a living. Teaching them. They can learn important things like money management.

And I feel the biggest benefit of all is being one year from a degree!!

I agree with you completely Kane, the problem beyond NCAA greed is that it would be a technical nightmare to figure out who gets paid what. Say you have a school like Miami or Penn State. The overwhelming majority of their sports based revenue is coming from one sport; football. Now you run into a whole host of problems. That money is already dispersed to fund the other teams. So something like say girls lacrosse or soccer or whatever (and I mean no disrespect to female athletes at all and that will become clear in my next point) which doesn't generate very much revenue because it's not marketable to a broad audience is going to be heavily dependent on that football money. Now you run into a whole gamut of issues. If you're paying everyone the same, those kids who are currently making all the money and getting nothing whatsoever are not really any better off because most of the revenue they earn is still going to have to go to pay for other programs. And is it really fair to pay people who aren't actually making the school any money? Could you really justify paying say a female shot putter that nobody has ever heard of the same as Reggie Bush at USC? Then where does TITLE IX fit in. Now you've got questions of gender equality to answer. Conversely, at a school like UCONN where BOTH genders have programs that are extremely lucrative, can you justify paying the no name male lacrosse player what you'd pay a Maya Moore or Diana Taurasi? It just opens up a whole **** of issues and it's why I think we're a long way away from any sort of direct compensation from the NCAA to the players. Now they could just do the simple thing and get rid of all the ridiculous restrictions on things such as being able to sell memorabilia and accept gifts and endorsement offers. That would be one solution but even that would have its own issues.

I have no idea how it would get split up. Im not even qualified to say. My guess would be to pay the athletes in the programs that make the most money. If its a basketball school, pay the basketball players a little something.

I cant come up with a plan for the concept. But I think someone should. The money these schools make from athletics is astonishing. I mean everyone could go to the school on a scholarship, live on campus and eat free. Even more so if the school could hold onto a star athlete for 3 years. I have no idea but the money is there.

Its not just about professional sports getting better players either. Its also about the world getting more educated people. Education is the key. Times are hard and we are falling off because its just a bunch of spoiled dummies crying about changing the rules to make it easier. Why not motivate more young people to get educated? One year from a degree? You got so many options.

[thebuzzardman]

I can't believe people are bashing the triangle, or honestly, supporting it, based on it being some mythical system.

Jackson himself says it's a simple system designed to facilitate sharing the ball.

It's not the only one, just one that puts some motion into a spacing system and asks players to make reads.

Which is what a ton of other plays/systems do, other than those team that rely mostly on P&R and spread the floor, which is boring as hell. And it's not like the pick and roll isn't an option in the triangle.

I can see some here love to be contrarian by bashing it, but whatever.

Talent is the most important thing in the NBA and the Knicks lack it.

[Chuck Everett]

The league is all based on athleticism and flash. System basketball has been dying a slow, painful death for the last decade. People will disagree with me, but that is why we see all these noob coaches with no experience being brought on instead of guys with pedigrees such as Sloan, Karl, and JVG. The young stars are effectively player/coaches now, look no further than LeBron and Blatt.

Dallas, San Antonio, Memphis, Golden State and Portland debunk this immediately. All those teams I listed put a premium on efficient basketball, with low turnovers. Memphis is the only one of the five who truly play inside-out as well. Lee and Aldridge prefer to face up and step out, ala Dirk.

[N8isScofield]

I have always been against college athletes getting paid. Until I found out how much the schools make off of them. The numbers were shocking for me to see.

Now I feel like the rules are very outdated. Cable came out like 31 years ago. Sports in general have seen a HUGE hike in income sense cable. And now with internet. The NCAA im sure has been making even more money off these kids now. But still applying the same rules to the kids.

It would be better for the NCAA and the NBA if these kids got paid a little something and were forced to stay at least 3 years. NBA gets better players. NCAA can develop players and profit even more because they actually get build around a kid for a few years. Besides, schools have trained professionals that deal with these kids for a living. Teaching them. They can learn important things like money management.

And I feel the biggest benefit of all is being one year from a degree!!

I agree with you completely Kane, the problem beyond NCAA greed is that it would be a technical nightmare to figure out who gets paid what. Say you have a school like Miami or Penn State. The overwhelming majority of their sports based revenue is coming from one sport; football. Now you run into a whole host of problems. That money is already dispersed to fund the other teams. So something like say girls lacrosse or soccer or whatever (and I mean no disrespect to female athletes at all and that will become clear in my next point) which doesn't generate very much revenue because it's not marketable to a broad audience is going to be heavily dependent on that football money. Now you run into a whole gamut of issues. If you're paying everyone the same, those kids who are currently making all the money and getting nothing whatsoever are not really any better off because most of the revenue they earn is still going to have to go to pay for other programs. And is it really fair to pay people who aren't actually making the school any money? Could you really justify paying say a female shot putter that nobody has ever heard of the same as Reggie Bush at USC? Then where does TITLE IX fit in. Now you've got questions of gender equality to answer. Conversely, at a school like UCONN where BOTH genders have programs that are extremely lucrative, can you justify paying the no name male lacrosse player what you'd pay a Maya Moore or Diana Taurasi? It just opens up a whole **** of issues and it's why I think we're a long way away from any sort of direct compensation from the NCAA to the players. Now they could just do the simple thing and get rid of all the ridiculous restrictions on things such as being able to sell memorabilia and accept gifts and endorsement offers. That would be one solution but even that would have its own issues.

I have no idea how it would get split up. Im not even qualified to say. My guess would be to pay the athletes in the programs that make the most money. If its a basketball school, pay the basketball players a little something.

I cant come up with a plan for the concept. But I think someone should. The money these schools make from athletics is astonishing. I mean everyone could go to the school on a scholarship, live on campus and eat free. Even more so if the school could hold onto a star athlete for 3 years. I have no idea but the money is there.

Its not just about professional sports getting better players either. Its also about the world getting more educated people. Education is the key. Times are hard and we are falling off because its just a bunch of spoiled dummies crying about changing the rules to make it easier. Why not motivate more young people to get educated? One year from a degree? You got so many options.

I agree completely. It's just that all of these athletic directors making millions of dollars every year prefer to pocket the money or pay coaches millions than help the kids making them all this income. Those poor kids are basically indentured servants but then I guess that goes for a large portion of the population when you really think about it.

[nykballa2k4]

Can't believe that we're still debating Donnie Walsh. Walsh tried, but in hindsight, made plenty of mistakes - some of which struck some of us as mistakes from the get-go. But maybe no one can withstand the pressure of working for D-hole.

Just the fans really.... This is the first season that we sucked with a purpose. All you hear is the media and idiot fans who don't get it.

Enjoy the team, enjoy the learning. IF it fails, it fails, but our "plan" doesn't start until next season. You can thank Dolan for thinking like the average fan here (quantity wise, we have MANY posters who are insightful and intelligent) and tossing everything on a platter for Melo.

Mosgov was not a deal breaker for Denver. If it was then F!CK THEM!

Phil is doing what needed to be done: STOP SPENDING. If his entire tenure as GM is known for only one thing, and that one thing is never trading away a 1st round pick, he will be my hero.

[Isiahthomass]

Can't believe that we're still debating Donnie Walsh. Walsh tried, but in hindsight, made plenty of mistakes - some of which struck some of us as mistakes from the get-go. But maybe no one can withstand the pressure of working for D-hole.

Just the fans really.... This is the first season that we sucked with a purpose. All you hear is the media and idiot fans who don't get it.

Enjoy the team, enjoy the learning. IF it fails, it fails, but our "plan" doesn't start until next season. You can thank Dolan for thinking like the average fan here (quantity wise, we have MANY posters who are insightful and intelligent) and tossing everything on a platter for Melo.

Mosgov was not a deal breaker for Denver. If it was then F!CK THEM!

Phil is doing what needed to be done: STOP SPENDING. If his entire tenure as GM is known for only one thing, and that one thing is never trading away a 1st round pick, he will be my hero.

I don't get why Walsh gets so much flak on this board. Wasn't his job to get us under the cap for 2010? He succeeded. Lebron didn't sign, that wasn't Walsh's fault. Obviously Wade and Bosh weren't coming as well. Who was next to sign after that? Freakin Boozer? Joe Johnson? Once Lebron went to Miami, it was over.

And lets all be honest here. We all know darn well that Dolan undermined Walsh and threw the entire farm at the Nuggets in typical Dolan fashion. Why everyone sits and blames Walsh, the man with the reputation for saviness and respect throughout the league for that move, when it reeks of the exact opposite M.O., which happens to be that of Dolan, is beyond me.

[nykballa2k4]

Can't believe that we're still debating Donnie Walsh. Walsh tried, but in hindsight, made plenty of mistakes - some of which struck some of us as mistakes from the get-go. But maybe no one can withstand the pressure of working for D-hole.

Just the fans really.... This is the first season that we sucked with a purpose. All you hear is the media and idiot fans who don't get it.

Enjoy the team, enjoy the learning. IF it fails, it fails, but our "plan" doesn't start until next season. You can thank Dolan for thinking like the average fan here (quantity wise, we have MANY posters who are insightful and intelligent) and tossing everything on a platter for Melo.

Mosgov was not a deal breaker for Denver. If it was then F!CK THEM!

Phil is doing what needed to be done: STOP SPENDING. If his entire tenure as GM is known for only one thing, and that one thing is never trading away a 1st round pick, he will be my hero.

I don't get why Walsh gets so much flak on this board. Wasn't his job to get us under the cap for 2010? He succeeded. Lebron didn't sign, that wasn't Walsh's fault. Obviously Wade and Bosh weren't coming as well. Who was next to sign after that? Freakin Boozer? Joe Johnson? Once Lebron went to Miami, it was over.

And lets all be honest here. We all know darn well that Dolan undermined Walsh and threw the entire farm at the Nuggets in typical Dolan fashion. Why everyone sits and blames Walsh, the man with the reputation for saviness and respect throughout the league for that move, when it reeks of the exact opposite M.O., which happens to be that of Dolan, is beyond me.

I think that this board has an urge to polarize. Either you are a "Walsh praiser" or a "Walsh hater" Either you are "team Gallo or team Wilson" are you a "Sprewell fan, or a Houston fan?" It's truly a microcosm of America Rep/Dem issue.

In reality I am sure most of us are moderates who appreciate the nuance of it all.

What I liked about the Walsh era was again, that there was a plan and the plan didn't involved every season trading every asset in the cupboard for "disgruntled star on the downturn of career". we had your name sake, I would be terrified that we would have given up value for Eric Gordon and Josh Smith by now (and certainly paid in picks for McGee)
Maybe I do a bit of what I am accusing others with, but at least I look in the mirror haha.

[knicks94]

The trouble with the Triangle is that it is as overrated and fallible as the system that D'antoni was running.You cannot force a group of players who are limited in talent to play a certain style of basketball that only works for teams that have at least two hall of famers.Someone needs to tell Phil Jackson that we are not the '96 Bulls or the '01 Lakers, but a team that finished having a 37 win season and will barely win 10 games this season.If Derek Fisher continues running the Triangle Offense he is not going to last very long in NY.

[andrewww]

The triangle needs not only fundamental players which many have already pointed out, but you are all overlooking one big aspect...post up scorers.

MJ, Shaq, Kobe, and Gasol were all elite go-to scorers in the post.

Memphis would be most suited to run it at the moment, and I have my doubts that good teams like the Warriors, OKC, etc would be able to run it because their best scorers are not post threats (Durant, Westbrook, Curry, Thompson).

The Spurs are running a variation of the triangle offense if you really think about it because it's not like Parker is the one initiating the offense even tho he is the point guard. They obviously run a ton of PNR but that's a by product of taking what the defense gives you and that's essentially what the purpose of the triangle is for.

[Fat Kat]

Good article on the problems the Knicks are having

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2295 ... rt-top-178

[mrcalzone]

Problem has nothing to do with the triangle itself.

The problem is the lack of execution and talent that is running the triangle.

[NYKAL]

Thats why we should have a 21 year old age limit. Start developing basketball players young again instead of showing off their athleticism on the basketball court until they get paid.

But I agree the triangle needs fundamentally sound players.

been wanting a 21year age limit for many years now.