Rotten Apple wrote:thebuzzardman wrote:rammagen wrote:I am so tired of readning this, so a tall defensive ball distributing P is a triangle pg? really ? I think Frank fits this team because of the type of player he is. A player like i described will be good with any team with decent big man....14 ppgs 7 to 8 apg and 3 steals is not a bad state line for any type of pg
I wish the "Triangle Point Guard" mythos in general would die a horrible death.
They will now that Phil gone but the point still stands.
No, actually the point falls over.
For the 3,000th time. There is NO SUCH THING AS A TRIANGLE POINT GUARD. Phil was lucky enough to have teams, that had, in pair, or even 3's, MJ and Pippen, MJ, Pippen, Kukoc, or Kobe and Odom. Those were the "Points" of the offense. IF you have have such players, then at that open positional slot you are thinking less about a penetrating guard and more about a guy who can knock down the open looks that the previous pairs of players are generating. The GM and coach aren't wasting $ and assets to find a penetrating "pure point/scoring point". So they went for shooters like Paxson, BJ Armstrong, Kerr and Fisher. Yet, they also had Harper, who was like MJ before he hurt his knee, and he's a completely different player than those guys. If MJ was the worlds greatest spot up shooter and did nothing else well but defend and Pippen was the same guy, the Bulls would have been all over a "traditional PG".
Frank was drafted because he'll participate in system basketball, meaning he's team oriented first, individually oriented 2nd. Like KP. It's why Phil picked KP, it's why he picked Frank. Oh, that and then defense and then of course offensive potential.
why the **** would he think that that's okay.
Now I hate your approach!!! 
RIP mags
