Would you want Phil Jackson coaching this team next year?

[Errntknght]

>>Is it that Winter is one of the few who understands it, or is it that he's one of the few who has it more or less memorized?<<

Tex Winter invented the triangle offense and has published a book about it, "The Triple Post Offense". He has been an assistant to Jackson since the latter took over in Chi.

 

[elindholm]

Tex Winter invented the triangle offense and has published a book about it, "The Triple Post Offense". He has been an assistant to Jackson since the latter took over in Chi.

That doesn't answer the question.

 

[BC867]

I've always compared Phil Jackson to be the NBA's equivalent to Joe Torre... Would Jackson have achieved such greatness without the likes of Michael Jordan, Pippen, Kobe, and Shaq?

Paul Westhead coached a Lakers team filled with superstars . . . and failed.

Pat Riley came in and turned them into a dynasty.

Phil Jackson has done the same with groups of super-stars.

That takes a certain skill. Not every Coach can turn a collection of all-stars (or potential all-stars) into a dominating, cohesive unit.

Cotton tried his best to do the same with Franchise and Franchise, Jr. It didn't result in a championship or an annual contender.

 

[newfan101]

Paul Westhead coached a Lakers team filled with superstars . . . and failed.

Wrong. He led them to a championship in 1980. Magic wanted him out, and got his wish ... one year later.

Cotton tried his best to do the same with Franchise and Franchise, Jr. It didn't result in a championship or an annual contender.

Wrong. Cotton only coached Barkley and KJ for half a season ... Barkley's last. An "annual contender" can't be the result for a coach who's running the show less then one year. BTW, they WERE an annual contender during Westphal's first three years.

 

[George O'Brien]

I had forgotten about Westhead. He "failed" because he wanted to run a slow down offense and Magic wanted, how shall we put it, "Show Time". The irony is that it would be Pat Riley who would run it even though that is not his style. Later on, Westhead went to the ultra fast offense that put Loyola Marymount on the map but failed at Denver.

Go figure.

 

[Errntknght]

>>Tex Winter invented the triangle offense and has published a book about it, "The Triple Post Offense". He has been an assistant to Jackson since the latter took over in Chi.

That doesn't answer the question. <<

I think the evidence is overwhelming that he understands the triangle but, heck, read the book and decide for yourself...

 

[elindholm]

I think the evidence is overwhelming that he understands the triangle but, heck, read the book and decide for yourself...

Come on, Errntknght, don't be dodgy. The question wasn't whether Winter understands the offense; that can obviously be stipulated. The question was what you (and the rest of the world) mean by saying that he's "one of the very few who understands it." Is it that the rest of the world simply can't fathom Winter's genius -- or is it that they haven't memorized the entire tree of reaction-counterreaction relationships?

 

[Errntknght]

Dodgy? You seemed to be in the dark about Winter's level of understanding and I enlightened you as best I could, which you said didn't answer the question. I guessed you meant the question I was replying to, oddly enough. Never crossed my mind you were feigning ignorance, you did it so convincingly.


>>Is it that the rest of the world simply can't fathom Winter's genius -- or is it that they haven't memorized the entire tree of reaction-counterreaction relationships?<<

The answer to this, in my opinion, is that neither of your conjectured possibilities is close to the mark. I opined in an earlier message that the reason others had difficulty implementing the triangle was that they had no experience to draw on, which Winter does, so they had difficulty pruning the "tree" down to a workable level and knowing what parts best fit their players. Not surprisingly, I still think this is the answer to the question of why installing the triangle is a thorny undertaking and, ultimately, what leads to the belief that it is too complex to understand.
If you pose the question yet again, I will probably repeat my opinion a third time.

 

[elindholm]

You seemed to be in the dark about Winter's level of understanding and I enlightened you as best I could

Jeez, I must really have hit a nerve. You've never been this patronizing before, at least not to me. See if I answer any more of your puzzles.

Perhaps you misinterpreted my question, but I wasn't "in the dark about Winter's level of understanding." I was questioning what his unique quality is that distinguishes him from the rest of the world.

I opined in an earlier message that the reason others had difficulty implementing the triangle was that ... they had difficulty pruning the "tree"

I remain unconvinced that this problem is categorically different from what is encountered with any other offensive scheme. Any coach has to make adjustments to his basic approach in order to accommodate his personnel. (Okay, any thinking coach.) If you have a play that involves your center shooting a 15-footer, and your center can't make a 15-footer, you take that option out. I'm sure that properly "pruning" any offense requires experience with the larger scheme and a solid understanding of the abilities (and smarts) of one's players.

The media make the triangle out to be unfathomable to anyone who isn't Mensa-eligible. It is described with such awe and mysticism that the casual fan might even conclude that telepathy is involved. Jackson reinforces such speculation, because he loves the idea of been perceived as smarter than everyone else.

I guess it's possible that someone could design a basketball offense worthy of a MacArthur grant, and that one peerless guru could be qualified to communicate its essence to a select few NBA players. But that all strikes me as fairly unlikely, and the hard evidence in favor of such an assertion is, to this point, unconvincing.

 

[Errntknght]

>>I'm sure that properly "pruning" any offense requires experience with the larger scheme and a solid understanding of the abilities (and smarts) of one's players.<<

Indeed, so imagine a complex offense with which a coach has no experience - he'd have a hard time implementing it in the time frame within which NBA coaches are expected to produce. IMO, that accounts for other coaches failing to make the triangle work in the NBA. Winter and PJ succeeded because of Winter's long experience with a scheme he invented. This unique success sets the stage for the mystique...

>>The media make the triangle out to be unfathomable to anyone who isn't Mensa-eligible. It is described with such awe and mysticism that the casual fan might even conclude that telepathy is involved.<<

You expect the media to get the details right?

>>Jackson reinforces such speculation, because he loves the idea of been perceived as smarter than everyone else.<<

PJ is smart enough to use any edge he can get.

>>I guess it's possible that someone could design a basketball offense worthy of a MacArthur grant, and that one peerless guru could be qualified to communicate its essence to a select few NBA players. But that all strikes me as fairly unlikely, and the hard evidence in favor of such an assertion is, to this point, unconvincing.<<

It strikes me as highly unlikely... but that's no reason not to have fun with the myth.

 

[BC867]

Wrong. He led them to a championship in 1980. Magic wanted him out, and got his wish ... one year later.

Wrong. Cotton only coached Barkley and KJ for half a season ... Barkley's last. An "annual contender" can't be the result for a coach who's running the show less then one year. BTW, they WERE an annual contender during Westphal's first three years.

You responded to a couple of my paragraphs, newfan. I'm curious how you feel about the main point I posted:

Pat Riley came in and turned them into a dynasty.

Phil Jackson has done the same with groups of super-stars.

That takes a certain skill. Not every Coach can turn a collection of all-stars (or potential all-stars) into a dominating, cohesive unit.

Would the Lakers or Bulls have dominated automatically under Frank Johnson, Scott Skiles, Danny Ainge, or Paul Westphal. 'Might be an interesting point to discuss.

 

[George O'Brien]

Some guys are not very good as coaches. Some guys are always good no matter where they coach. But most coaches are successful when they are the right "fit" and fail when they aren't.

One of the reasons I rank Pat Riley amoung the best is that he was able to win with a running team even though he prefers a slow down, defensive style. None the less, I'm not convinced Riley is especially good at developing young players, which is why I think he would be a bad fit for the Suns even if he was willing to develop a running team.

I think Larry Brown is one of the best coaches in the NBA, but he is even worse when it comes to developing young players. You bring in a Larry Brown when you have all the pieces and want to make a push to win it all.

Not many coaches are all that good at developing young talent. Part of the problem is that young players lose games for the team and make the coach look bad. Many of the coaches that have been fired or are in "trouble" are in constant conflict with their GM over winning versus player development. Guys who may lose their jobs over this include: Bzdelik in Denver, Musselman in Golden State, and McMillan in Seattle. Jim O'Brien quit in Boston over his conflict with Ainge over playing young players.

Most Suns fans agree that Frank Johnson was not a very good coach, but his refusal to play Carbakapa and Barbosa did not help his cause. D'Antoni had the advantage of lowered expectations, but even he did not play his rookies as much as he might have.

I'm not sure a big name coach would want to take over the Suns right now, since they still have a lot of player development to do. I think D'Antoni has done an admirable job under the circumstances and I would hate to screw that up on the illusion that a big name coach would speed up the process.

 

[Joe Mama]

I honestly can't wait until the NBA has a minimum age. I like the young Phoenix Suns players, but I would much prefer that guys came into the NBA was at least some fundamentals. Teams in the lottery right now should not expect to get immediately better because of the players they are adding at the top of the draft. I know we can point out James and Anthony as examples of young players who have immediately improved their teams. Just imagine how much better than would have been in a couple years.

Joe Mama

 

[BC867]

I would much prefer that guys came into the NBA with at least some fundamentals.

Hasn't there been talk recently of an NBA Minor League system? If I remember right, each Minor League club would be shared by two NBA teams.

If so, that would certainly develop fundamentals in players before they reach the NBA.

Just as important is the effect it would have on choosing Head Coaches.

Imagine if Paul Westphal, Danny Ainge, Scott Skiles, and Frank Johnson had Head Coaching experience in the Pro's before being chosen to the high profile job of NBA Head Coach.

A chance for the potential Coach and the team to know his strong points, weak points, tendencies, etc. from experience. It's a great idea.

When the D'backs choose their next Manager, I'm hoping they choose Al Pedrique (who has something like 8 years experience Managing in the Minor Leagues), versus Mark Grace (who just began as an Announcer) or Robin Yount (with a few years as 1B Coach and now Bench Coach).

There's very little guesswork with someone who's done the same job at the Minor League level. I'm hoping the NBA adopts that approach, too.

 

[George O'Brien]

The minor league is certainly more appealing than having a guy on IR get to practice with the whole squad once very couple of weeks. It makes too much sense, which is why I suspect the NBA doesn't do it.

 

[F-Dog]

I honestly can't wait until the NBA has a minimum age. I like the young Phoenix Suns players, but I would much prefer that guys came into the NBA was at least some fundamentals. Teams in the lottery right now should not expect to get immediately better because of the players they are adding at the top of the draft. I know we can point out James and Anthony as examples of young players who have immediately improved their teams. Just imagine how much better than would have been in a couple years.

Joe Mama

That seems like flawed logic to me. (Not that the NBA won't jump on age limits as a panacea in the next few years.)

Just because the NBA keeps a player out for two more years, doesn't mean he's going to pick anything up in the meantime. There are plenty of players who go to college, even, and wind up as weak fundamentally as they were coming out of high school.

A minor league is the real solution, but it's going to take a while to get there, and I'm not sure what it will look like. Maybe it's as simple as allowing NBA teams to 'farm' their draft picks out to European or NBDL teams.

 

[George O'Brien]

I think the big problem with using colleges as a cheap farm system is that their game is not very good preparation for the NBA. There are two major probles:

1. Defense rules that permit guys to just stand under the basket (the same problem holds true in Europe by the way). The defensive 3 second rule means that big static centers will struggle to get into position to stop guys from driving the basket.

2. The very short three point line means college teams emphasize shooting three over pounding the ball into the paint and discourages players from developing a mid range game. Look at how many upsets were made that came from teams hitting a huge number of three point shots.

3. Inadequate practice time. The NCAA has strict rules about how much time players are expected to spend practicing. They didn't have those rules in "the old days" and guys spent more time in the gym.

4. Refs call the games differently. The NBA permits more physical contact than in college. Things that would be called as fouls are simply described as "good defense" in the NBA. This means that players can be effective without weight training. In the NBA, only the strongest players can score while some guys is hanging all of him.

If I had my way, I'd put the NBA three point line at about 27 feet so it would not be used except in despirate situations. In any case, I hope they move the college arc back to at least the NBA distance.

 

[Joe Mama]

Here's the problem with the farm system as I see it.

The biggest reason to have an age limit IMO is to help the lottery teams. Right now all of these teams that need to help the most are drafting on potential. I do believe another year or two of amateur status would help these lottery teams to see who is really going to help. More importantly the players would be better prepared to make an immediate impact.

With a minor-league system goes players would be drafted AND THEN go to the minor leagues. Well, that doesn't help the Orlando Magic to get better the next season. I also doubt that operated players would be willing to go down to the minors and teams would be willing to send their best prospects down there.

Joe Mama

 

[George O'Brien]

This year's draft is a perfect example of a draft that ties to having a minor league. The guys who are "ready" for the NBA do have much upside while the most talented athletes are not ready. Last year's draft had several guys who were ready to contribute right away, but some like Darko and many of the guys in the second ten have not done much.

Would they be more ready if they were not eligible for the draft? You would think, but the fact is that college is not doing a great job of training players.

The situation is a bit different in Europe where players develop certain kinds of skills, but not others. Most Euro big men are adverse to contact and the longer they play in Europe, the harder it is to get them to change because the game is played differently over there.

This year the Suns are looking at a choice between a limited role player or a project who won't play. Maybe they will get lucky, but it is not a sure thing. Wouldn't it be nice if a guy like Ramos or Biedrins could actually play every day and be coached by NBA coaches rather than sit on the banch?

 

[Joe Mama]

This year's draft is a perfect example of a draft that ties to having a minor league. The guys who are "ready" for the NBA do have much upside while the most talented athletes are not ready. Last year's draft had several guys who were ready to contribute right away, but some like Darko and many of the guys in the second ten have not done much.

Would they be more ready if they were not eligible for the draft? You would think, but the fact is that college is not doing a great job of training players.

The situation is a bit different in Europe where players develop certain kinds of skills, but not others. Most Euro big men are adverse to contact and the longer they play in Europe, the harder it is to get them to change because the game is played differently over there.

This year the Suns are looking at a choice between a limited role player or a project who won't play. Maybe they will get lucky, but it is not a sure thing. Wouldn't it be nice if a guy like Ramos or Biedrins could actually play every day and be coached by NBA coaches rather than sit on the banch?

I'm sorry. I just don't see any evidence to support 90% of the above. How do you figure that college is not doing a great job of training players? What evidence is there that is true? It appeared to help Chris Bosh. How about Carmelo Anthony?

I would also like to hear your examples to support your theory that European big men become adverse to contact the longer they stay in Europe.

If you think Darko would have seen a day in a minor league this season if one existed you are crazy.

Joe Mama

 

[George O'Brien]

I'm sorry. I just don't see any evidence to support 90% of the above. How do you figure that college is not doing a great job of training players? What evidence is there that is true? It appeared to help Chris Bosh. How about Carmelo Anthony?

Both Anthony and Bosh were considered great HS prospects before going to school. I'm not saying it didn't help, but maybe not as much as it should.

Look at the poor fundimentals of guys in the draft even after three or four years. How many guys have a solid mid range shot? How many can handle the ball, block out on rebounds, set a pick without moving, move their feet on defense, move without the ball, or shoot foul shots? Today's players are far more athletic than players of twenty or thirty years ago - but they are no where near as well coached.

Take a look at the big men (6'9" or taller) in this year's draft. Only one of them played on a team that made the NCAA's - Okafor. The other guys who get mentioned like Araujo, Bogut, and Harrison all played for fairly weak teams. Araujo is big, but doesn't really rebound all that well or block out even after four years of college. Harrison is so poorly developed after three years that he is likely to be taken after one of the HS players. Bogut is less well though of than he was a year ago when he competed on the international level out of Austrailia.

My theory is that most college coaches know very little about coaching big men. In a sport with a very close 3 point arc, why should they bother teaching guys how to play the post? They're paid to win, not develop inside guys for the NBA. A few coaches know something about teaching big men, but most don't.

In any case, a well organized minor league could work on fundimentals for players who are just not getting that training in college. What they learn is how to shoot threes - from a short arc.

I would also like to hear your examples to support your theory that European big men become adverse to contact the longer they stay in Europe.

Do you remember "the Serbian center" the Suns signed during training camp who spent about three weeks with the team before returning to Europe? He had been on the Serbian national team and supposedly played pretty well against the US team - but he was beat out by Robert Archibald. The most common explanation was that just could not adjust to the physical style of the NBA.

If you think Darko would have seen a day in a minor league this season if one existed you are crazy.

I may be crazy. I've wondered about that at times.

Seriously, I don't see why a European would find the minor league that hard to understand. All of them started with minor league teams. Lampe spent most of his time with the minor league team for Real Madrid prior to coming to the NBA.

 

[Joe Mama]

George, come on man. You are talking about Harrison and Arujio. The reason they are the top college big men is that most of the good big men in basketball their age already made the jump to the NBA.

There's little doubt in my mind that a player like Dwight Howard would get better coaching and improvement in a minor-league system. I just don't believe for a second that a high-profile draftee like him would ever see the minor-leagues. It has nothing to do with Darko being a European player.

The lottery teams need guys that are going to contribute immediately. A couple seasons of work in the college ranks or Europe would make these players better, so they are more likely to contribute in their first NBA season. A guy isn't helping his NBA team in his first season if he spends it in the minor league.

Joe Mama

 

[George O'Brien]

Joe, you're confusing two issues. One is that lottery teams need help now. Second is whether a real minor league would be a useful tool for guys who aren't ready to contribute right away.

Why are teams drafting guys who can't help? Upside. They think that taking a Dwight Howard or a Josh Smith MIGHT get them a super star a few years down the road. By contrast, no one thinks Devin Harris is going to be a super star.

In theory a bad team can afford to wait because they aren't going to win anyway; while top teams need role players to get to the next level. In practice, bad teams need immediate help and the better teams can afford to have a guy sit on the bench and not produce.

 

[Joe Mama]

Joe, you're confusing two issues. One is that lottery teams need help now. Second is whether a real minor league would be a useful tool for guys who aren't ready to contribute right away.

Why are teams drafting guys who can't help? Upside. They think that taking a Dwight Howard or a Josh Smith MIGHT get them a super star a few years down the road. By contrast, no one thinks Devin Harris is going to be a super star.

In theory a bad team can afford to wait because they aren't going to win anyway; while top teams need role players to get to the next level. In practice, bad teams need immediate help and the better teams can afford to have a guy sit on the bench and not produce.

no, I'm not confusing two issues. I'm talking about one issue. That issue is that the most talented players in the draft, the ones being taken by the teams that need help the most, are not as prepared as they should be to contribute in the NBA. That is a problem solved by an age limit better than a minor-league IMO.

Joe Mama