Rubio/Triangle

[RCG] · Post #1 » by **[RCG]** » Sat Jun 5, 2010 4:24 pm

How would Rubio fit in the triangle offense? I know he's a great passer but does the triangle fit his strengths?

twix2500 · Post #2 » by **twix2500** » Sat Jun 5, 2010 4:32 pm

[RCG] wrote:How would Rubio fit in the triangle offense? I know he's a great passer but does the triangle fit his strengths?

The triangle offense does not favor ball handling, passing point guards. Point guards who have struggle in the triangle were Jason Kidd, Jayson Williams, Gary Payton The triangle offense favors slashing shooting guards and spot up shooters. It doesnt allow point guards to create offense off the dribble. Point guards that have succeeded in the triangle offense were basically shooting guards running the point or spot up shooters. Derrick Fisher, John Paxson, BJ Armstrong, Hodges, Derek Harper, Brian Shaw. I never seen Rubio play, but if he is a classic point guard then NO its not a good fit, it will limit his game.

Esohny · Post #3 » by **Esohny** » Sat Jun 5, 2010 4:39 pm

I expect that the team would focus on the showtime laker style of offense with Rubio, considering he'd be put in the Magic role.

People keep getting hung up on the elements of the "triangle" that the team used less than 20% of the time.

Krapinsky · Post #4 » by **Krapinsky** » Sat Jun 5, 2010 4:39 pm

Kahn wants to play a much more open, running style of offense. Much more like Golden State than the Lakers. When we can't run, we have to flow into some sort of offense, and for us that's going to be the triangle. Right now we don't have the personnel for that kind of game. Our bigs don't run the court and our wings can't dribble or shoot. Once you see the rest of the roster overhaul, it will begin to make much more sense, and the can Rubio fit in the triangle won't even be a question any more. Love for randolph is a good start.

Vega06 · Post #5 » by **Vega06** » Sat Jun 5, 2010 4:47 pm

Yeah, we'll be a running team. And Rubio plays off the ball a bit for his team in Spain where he is pretty effective. I don't worry about it. Plus, he isn't a finished product. He has a ton of room and time to grow.

Post #6 » by **Klomp** » Sat Jun 5, 2010 4:51 pm

Esohny wrote:People keep getting hung up on the elements of the "triangle" that the team used less than 20% of the time.

Winner!

Post #7 » by **Worm Guts** » Sat Jun 5, 2010 4:54 pm

Klomp wrote:
Esohny wrote:People keep getting hung up on the elements of the "triangle" that the team used less than 20% of the time.

Winner!

Either Sessions and Flynn suck or they struggled because of the system. Which would you rather have?

Krapinsky · Post #8 » by **Krapinsky** » Sat Jun 5, 2010 5:01 pm

Worm Guts wrote:
Klomp wrote:
Esohny wrote:People keep getting hung up on the elements of the "triangle" that the team used less than 20% of the time.

Winner!

Either Sessions and Flynn suck or they struggled because of the system. Which would you rather have?

I think my post addresses this. Right now the system doesn't have players that fit it, on the wings, or in the front court. It's a broken system. When it's fixed, everything we'll be cool runnings.

Post #9 » by **Worm Guts** » Sat Jun 5, 2010 5:19 pm

It sounds like spin to me. Phil Jackson has never had an important point guard, and that concerns me.

Dewey · Post #10 » by **Dewey** » Sat Jun 5, 2010 6:08 pm

Rubio plays both ends of the court very well, and once he gets physically stronger the next 1-3 years, he will develop a nice jump-shot and improve 1-on-1, defensively. His ball-handling and passing are already there.

Rubio will not physically develop until he's 22+ years old ... 3 more years. I think that's something many overlook and could impact expectations if he actually comes over next year.

horaceworthy · Post #11 » by **horaceworthy** » Sat Jun 5, 2010 6:19 pm

Worm Guts wrote:It sounds like spin to me. Phil Jackson has never had an important point guard, and that concerns me.

Pippen played the point for the Bulls, he was pretty important. There wasn't much need for anything other than a spot up shooter or a big defensive guard with him and MJ on the roster. The Lakers also haven't really invested at the PG position while Jackson was there. Tough to take too much from that.

I do think Rambis will have to adjust in order to have a successful team with either Rubio or Flynn on the roster. Not running more P-n'-R would just seem like purposefully shooting himself in the foot. The triangle was originally implemented because Jackson wanted to find a way to force Jordan to share the ball, that shouldn't be a problem with Rubio. The whole read-react aspect is nice, theoretically it provides an option for every situation, but if Rubio comes over he should be the primary decision-maker on the court. It would be a bit of a waste to run so much offense through the wings and bigs.

Post #12 » by **Worm Guts** » Sat Jun 5, 2010 6:29 pm

Pippen was a point forward, but they also always played a guy like Kerr or Armstrong, I think that makes it tough to compare. Pippen was so versatile that he wasn't required to be strictly a point. I'd feel better if at some point Phil Jackson had used a point guard more comparable to Rubio.

horaceworthy · Post #13 » by **horaceworthy** » Sat Jun 5, 2010 6:36 pm

Pippen defended the toughest matchup on defense and played the point on offense. Sort of a bizarro Magic Johnson role (PG on offense, weakest matchup on defense). I don't think you can express worry about Jackson never having a Rubio-like PG without attempting to take into account the reasons he didn't have one.

Post #14 » by **Worm Guts** » Sat Jun 5, 2010 6:45 pm

Considering Jackson is only coach in my lifetime to have success with the triangle, and that he's never had a comparable point guard to Rubio I think there's room for worry. You could also add in the lack of success of our point guards last year, and even that Jason Kidd played in the triangle under Jim Cleamons and that team sucked.

horaceworthy · Post #15 » by **horaceworthy** » Sat Jun 5, 2010 6:57 pm

Jackson's also the only coach in your lifetime to use the triangle for a team with championship caliber talent. Cleamons coached a crappy team (and Kidd only played 22 games for him, that roster was turned over way too much that year to have any success) and so did Rambis last year.

The system is much less of a concern to me than the talent.

I'm not saying don't worry, I'm just saying that Pippen played the point and was important, and the Lakers haven't made bringing in a PG a priority. Both should be taken into account if you're going to gripe about Jackson never having a Rubio.

Dewey · Post #16 » by **Dewey** » Sat Jun 5, 2010 7:27 pm

horaceworthy wrote:Jackson's also the only coach in your lifetime to use the triangle for a team with championship caliber talent. Cleamons coached a crappy team (and Kidd only played 22 games for him, that roster was turned over way too much that year to have any success) and so did Rambis last year.

The system is much less of a concern to me than the talent.

I'm not saying don't worry, I'm just saying that Pippen played the point and was important, and the Lakers haven't made bringing in a PG a priority. Both should be taken into account if you're going to gripe about Jackson never having a Rubio.

bingo ... and not to mis-interpret your post, but it's simply a players game.

Rambis has stated may times that he wants basketball players that are coachable ... I don't think he's overly concerned who his PG is as long as he has good players. His quick liking to Rubio is likely due to the fact he is a good basketball player, plus, coachable and values team structure.

Post #17 » by **Klomp** » Sat Jun 5, 2010 8:03 pm

Another point that rev has brought up before is that this is not the same triangle offense that the Lakers run and the Bulls ran. I don't remember all of whats different, but it had to do with it being a one guard set here rather than a two guard set, or something along those lines.

No matter what it is, its clear that Rambis is willing to adapt the system for his players.

horaceworthy · Post #18 » by **horaceworthy** » Sat Jun 5, 2010 8:16 pm

Klomp wrote:No matter what it is, its clear that Rambis is willing to adapt the system for his players.

Not sure about that one.

Krapinsky · Post #19 » by **Krapinsky** » Sat Jun 5, 2010 8:29 pm

I guess I can only go by what Kahn is saying and that is that he and Rambis (Rambis and him?) are attached at the hip with their vision of the team. They want to be an open court, running offense first and foremost. I think of the triangle is just a way to set up the offense. You can run plays for the point guard every time if you want, if you just call that play. When you have Kobe or Jordan, you're probably not going to call plays for Steve Kerr and Fisher. Rather, you're probably going to want spot up shooters next to them since their games are tailored to driving and scoring/dishing. I don't see why in our offense Rubio can't be the initiator and the SG/SF be the spot up shooter.

Dewey · Post #20 » by **Dewey** » Sat Jun 5, 2010 9:37 pm

The triangle offense, like any other offense, is merely space management (organization) ... Your point (guard, forward, or whoever) indentifies matchups and initiates ball movement. Most any offense looks to exploit player matchups and they often will change throughout the game. I think Rubio does this well. This next year I feel he will get stronger and start to step up his game.

I agree (Krapinsky) that we have to assume Kahn/Rambis know what they're looking for ... they haven't made any monumental mistakes yet, so I guess I feel they deserve some slack.

IMO, these past few weeks have allowed a fact-finding mission for Kahn and Rambis (their meetings with Rubio). Point-blank, they HAD to know if and when he's coming to the NBA and had to clarify that MN is the team that should expect to roster him for 2011-12 and beyond ... from the information provided, the relationship between the Wolves and Rubio is good and the Rube will be a Wolf next year.