By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostI'm not the only one that understands it, but considering Gaby has never once shown an understanding or illustrated that he gets it, it's safe to assume he doesn't. I may be wrong, but nothing so far that he's posted suggests that.That's not a safe assumption at all. Just a conceited one.
By PSYCH! Go To PostGun Safety Ad that will air during Christmas dayfor new page
holy shit at that mother's line 11 seconds in
fuck
By PSYCH! Go To Postfor new pageOof. Rough.
The NFL doing that commercial would be nice, but their country bumpkin right wing fan base might actually react poorly enough that it affects viewership
By DY_nasty Go To PostSpurs in December: 11-1, No. 1 offense, No. 1 defense, +22.2 NetRtg.
final boss shit
By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostI attack people when I'm attacked, but that's the extent of me acting like a jackass to people.
I'm not the only one that understands it, but considering Gaby has never once shown an understanding or illustrated that he gets it, it's safe to assume he doesn't. I may be wrong, but nothing so far that he's posted suggests that.
And the "Michael Jordan" argument is one of the laziest ever and not worth a response to. But if Gaby thinks removing the Triangle and instituting a different offense would make them much better, or fuck, good enough to beat Cleveland on the road without Melo, he deserves to be trolled.
the MJ argument is a fair one tho... the pure triangle has never been ran really successfully without a MJ/Kobe... the NBA is copycat league...but yet the triangle has never really been copied.
you play that you dont know the triangle or have not seen enough games alot
would the knicks be better under a different offense? maybe they would... Can they get better under the triangle? I believe so but they need different players
By blackace Go To Postthe MJ argument is a fair one tho… the pure triangle has never been ran really successfully without a MJ/Kobe… the NBA is copycat league…but yet the triangle has never really been copied.
you play that you dont know the triangle or have not seen enough games alot
would the knicks be better under a different offense? maybe they would… Can they get better under the triangle? I believe so but they need different players
By blackace Go To Postthe MJ argument is a fair one tho… the pure triangle has never been ran really successfully without a MJ/Kobe… the NBA is copycat league…but yet the triangle has never really been copied.
you play that you dont know the triangle or have not seen enough games alot
would the knicks be better under a different offense? maybe they would… Can they get better under the triangle? I believe so but they need different players
Here's why it's a poor argument. The triangle didn't "succeed" with Jordan/Kobe. It dominated two decades of NBA basketball. And it dominated two decades of NBA basketball despite only being run by one or at most, two teams at a time. That has literally never been done before by a single NBA playbook or offensive system.
People act as if the "success" of other offenses is in the same stratosphere, let alone the same league, as this one. It's not, at all. The teams that ran it unsuccessfully (in the traditional sense of the word, as in having a winning record and making the playoffs) had objectively shitty talent - and when their offense was replaced, didn't do much better. Minnesota was shit for those years with or without the triangle and Brian Shaw didn't even employ it in Denver.
The team that have won since, using all different offensive systems, have had Lebron, Dirk and TD and now Curry. 4 guys who go down as top 10-20 players when it's all said and done probably.
Women's UCONN runs it and dominates, the most dominant coach in the Phillipines runs it. The triangle doesn't succeed in the way that other offenses succeed, it dominates the competition and spits it out despite only being used by one or two teams in each league. That does not mean it's for everyone, or for every team. Obviously.
By Moris Go To PostOKC aren't ready for SA or GS.Yea I said they looked suspect but they somehow got Spurs number. I don't think this time though. I cant see KD leaving, where would he go? Not Cavs,Spurs or Warriors. No one else will be good enough.
KD Gone confirmed.
By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostHere's why it's a poor argument. The triangle didn't "succeed" with Jordan/Kobe. It dominated two decades of NBA basketball. And it dominated two decades of NBA basketball despite only being run by one or at most, two teams at a time. That has literally never been done before by a single NBA playbook or offensive system.
People act as if the "success" of other offenses is in the same stratosphere, let alone the same league, as this one. It's not, at all. The teams that ran it unsuccessfully (in the traditional sense of the word, as in having a winning record and making the playoffs) had objectively shitty talent - and when their offense was replaced, didn't do much better. Minnesota was shit for those years with or without the triangle and Brian Shaw didn't even employ it in Denver.
The team that have won since, using all different offensive systems, have had Lebron, Dirk and TD and now Curry. 4 guys who go down as top 10-20 players when it's all said and done probably.
Women's UCONN runs it and dominates, the most dominant coach in the Phillipines runs it. The triangle doesn't succeed in the way that other offenses succeed, it dominates the competition and spits it out despite only being used by one or two teams in each league. That does not mean it's for everyone, or for every team. Obviously.
but why doesn't anyone run it at the NBA level?
and Pop has dominated for two decades almost as well with the same core and different playbooks...
so it comes down to triangle needs certain type of player or it doesn't matter what you run as long as you have the best player on any given year...
I tend to believe the former
So if the Knicks want to be decent/good/or in contention for a single chip - Melo with talent around him will do just fine. They don't need Jordan. The sans-Jordan Bulls won 55 games and were a couple seconds away from an ECF in 94.
Edit: because the nuances are really really hard to teach and it takes a lot more time to develop than most coaches have the luxury to wait. It's super easy to give the ball to your PG and just run high PnR for him.
Dude Duncan is the best PF of all time. There are multiple HoFer's on that team. EVERY OFFENSE needs a certain kind of player, look at the Sixers and Pels ineptitude for what not having a good PG does to modern offensive systems
Edit: because the nuances are really really hard to teach and it takes a lot more time to develop than most coaches have the luxury to wait. It's super easy to give the ball to your PG and just run high PnR for him.
Dude Duncan is the best PF of all time. There are multiple HoFer's on that team. EVERY OFFENSE needs a certain kind of player, look at the Sixers and Pels ineptitude for what not having a good PG does to modern offensive systems
By unknown Go To PostYea I said they looked suspect but they somehow got Spurs number. I don't think this time though. I cant see KD leaving, where would he go? Not Cavs,Spurs or Warriors. No one else will be good enough.telling you... Boston
By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostSo if the Knicks want to be decent/good/or in contention for a single chip - Melo with talent around him will do just fine. They don't need Jordan. The sans-Jordan Bulls won 55 games and were a couple seconds away from an ECF in 94.
Pippen is a top 15 player of all time tho ... and a top 3 or 4 player of that era when MJ retired...
where would you rank Melo now?
Kd2la
Kobe hands torch over
Stern calls silver to call in lakers Simmons pick
Byron realizes he'd rather golf and quits
Kobe hands torch over
Stern calls silver to call in lakers Simmons pick
Byron realizes he'd rather golf and quits
By blackace Go To Posttelling you… BostonCould be nice if they get another piece.
By PSYCH! Go To PostLmaobest fit
Nah.
By unknown Go To PostCould be nice if they get another piece.
They have the picks to make trades. They could get pieces.
Fuck, he would look terrible in green though
By blackace Go To Postbest fiti just don't see it, That's in the same realm of KD going to Toronto or Miami, I just don't see it.
I think it'll be Houston, OKC or DC. It's gonna be a one year deal though.
By Omzz Go To Postnah the torch is being handed to this guyLMAO
By Fenderputty Go To PostThey have the picks to make trades. They could get pieces.they have the cap. They won't need to trade.
Fuck, he would look terrible in green though
and they have mad picks and a good core
he looked his best in green
By blackace Go To PostPippen is a top 15 player of all time tho … and a top 3 or 4 player of that era when MJ retired…
where would you rank Melo now?
I don't know, but there's a middle ground between Jordan/Kobe and the Minny Timberwolves in 2011. If the ceiling is "dominate a decade" - there's plenty of room underneath for "pretty good team"
By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostI don't know, but there's a middle ground between Jordan/Kobe and the Minny Timberwolves in 2011. If the ceiling is "dominate a decade" - there's plenty of room underneath for "pretty good team"they are a better team but that as much due to the fact that they have NBA players on the roster now
By blackace Go To Postthey have the cap. They won't need to trade.
and they have mad picks and a good core
he looked his best in green
My father in law would be insufferable
By blackace Go To Posttelling you… BostonBoston would still be terrible even with KD.
The team needs a lot of complimentrary pieces to turn them from "talent" to "team".
A lot of their pieces don't fit together, they're just talented.
By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostDude Duncan is the best PF of all time. There are multiple HoFer's on that team. EVERY OFFENSE needs a certain kind of player, look at the Sixers and Pels ineptitude for what not having a good PG does to modern offensive systemsThe Pels had the ninth best offense in the league last season despite relying on Tyreke as lead ball-handler for most of the time (with Jrue missing half the season, and Rivers, Jimmer, Norris Cole, and Gordon being the next in line for those duties).
Unless I'm misunderstanding something.
By blackace Go To Postthey are a better team but that as much due to the fact that they have NBA players on the roster now
No I mean, if the ceiling of the triangle is "dominate a decade" if you have a top 10 all time player, there's plenty of success you can have without one. There's plenty of room underneath that level. So Melo and good pieces should be able to become a good team with this system.
When people go "you need Jordan". You need Jordan to piss excellence. But you can be good without him.
The triangle takes several smart and talented players. It has higher minimum requirements than most other offenses, imo, but gives the most options to teams with the ability to pull it off.
By giririsss Go To PostBoston would still be terrible even with KD.If you add KD and say Jaylen Brown to their roster next season they are really good
The team needs a lot of complimentrary pieces to turn them from "talent" to "team".
A lot of their pieces don't fit together, they're just talented.
By Kibner Go To PostThe triangle takes several smart and talented players. It has higher minimum requirements than most other offenses, imo, but gives the most options to teams with the ability to pull it off.
Motherfucking bingo!
By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostMotherfucking bingo!which the Knicks do or do not have?
By blackace Go To Postwhich the Knicks do or do not have?I think there is a very short list of teams that would excel in the triangle as currently constructed and most of them are already running offenses that are very successful. I'm thinking GSW, SAS, DAL, maybe MEM.
By Fenderputty Go To PostI don't like the triangle with Steph. Seems like it would neuter his abilitiesI wouldn't change what the Warriors are already doing, either. Just saying that they have the players necessary to be effective in the triangle.
i love it when its a blowout. Makes coach papangus clown look like a straight fool.
byron scott's rotation is the most idiotic thing i've ever seen.
byron scott's rotation is the most idiotic thing i've ever seen.