[Sicky Dimpkins]

Robert Frost_(1874–1963).__Mountain Interval.__1920._

The Road Not Taken_

_ TWO roads diverged in a yellow wood,
And sorry I could not travel both
And be one traveler, long I stood
And looked down one as far as I could
To where it bent in the undergrowth;________

_ Then took the other, as just as fair,
And having perhaps the better claim,
Because it was grassy and wanted wear;
Though as for that the passing there
Had worn them really about the same,________

_ And both that morning equally lay
In leaves no step had trodden black.
Oh, I kept the first for another day!
Yet knowing how way leads on to way,
I doubted if I should ever come back.________

_I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood,
and I—
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.
=====================================
It seemed to me that this game:

Cleveland Game

defined 2 roads for Krause to take.

Either enhance

Rebounding
(They didn't listen "bussu" but thanks anyway.)

and stay with the triangle and JC/Rose and possibly Best as ball handlers.

Or obtain:

Andre Miller

(23 points; 16 assists; 7 steals)
and go with his experience and expertise and leave the triangle.

Either of these "roads" were favorable to me.

Krause; perhaps drunk from the World Cup(where height/length doesn't matter much) or stung by the criticism from last years brilliant but controversial Brand trade chose a third/safe/popular road.

No more talk of a big lineup with Ming or a tall "3". No more big guard backcourt: now the BULL get to react to other teams. Krause has made a mole hill out of a mountain.

No use for vet point leadership with Best (or Miller either).

At the margin, how much better is "Jay" than Travis? Take that "amount" and tell me is it greater than the other needs the Bull have and what they could've got for trading the rights to "Jay"? The Bull paid alot for Rose/Best to provide ball handling only to change yet again by drafting "Jay" to do the same thing. Wise use of a #2 given what else was needed and what else was here? I think not.

Instead Krause drafted the 2nd best point guard from Duke U. who hasn't run the point in a year. All hail "Jay". That means you Jalen and you too (or should I say two as in 2 guard) JC (I really hope you can learn your new position and play it well and do it with a smile on your face. Sorry to lower your value: a 6'6" 1 > a 6'6" 2 but we just HAD to have "Jay") and yes Travis you as well (Rose for Miller,Artest,Mercer is what it's looking like now). TC & EC you'd better be nice to "Jay" or he won't let you have the ball.
================================
Plan A: Sign big name FA's.
Plan B: Sign mid-level FA's.
Plan C: Get big(Brand trade).
Plan D: Get vet ballhandlers(Rose trade).
Plan E: Get small and an inexperienced ballhandler("Jay") with the #2 pick.
Plan F: Claim this is a step FORWARD?!
Plan G: Admit the $16 mil spent on 3's was for "O" only by searching for a 3 who can defend.
Plan H: Look for vet front court help.

That's credibility/stability/proper priorities?!
=================================
Well I hope the recent comparisons to Isiah come true and not my vision of Derek Fisher. My objection to drafting a point guard with the 2nd pick was that it wasn't necessary in the triangle.

You wanted him and you got him. "Jay" is here now so my question to the "Jay" crowd is this: Are you in favor of putting "Jay" to the test? I was in favor of turning the offense over to Andre Miller and scrapping the triangle. In for a little in for a lot. Why not go "all the way" with "Jay"? Do you have the same confidence in your choice? I'm sure nobody wanted to draft "Jay" to be a 2 right?

Why not let "Jay" loose and let his creative game be unhindered by the constraints of the triangle? Are you up for it?

 

[truebluefan]

jay! No middle ground. With the team we are putting together there is no reason why we can't run and run often. I am all for letting jay and jalen create!!

 

[Wishbone]

who says we need to abandon the Triangle?!

i'll admit, i don't know the intricacies of the Triangle offense, but my understanding was that it is a versatile scheme which can be adjusted for individual talents

MJ and Shaq are very different players, and they are put to good use within the structure of the Triangle

yes, naysayers will point out that it is Kobe, not Shaq being placed in a role similar to MJ's ... but if the player can play, that's all that really matters

maybe the Triangle can be adapted to some penetrate and dish

 

[Songcycle]

I can't vote because I like the middle ground and agree with Wishbone. I think the Triangle will work with Jay Williams and work well.

 

[johnston797]

Jay & Triangle - no problem

The triangle is an equal opportunity offence. JWill will have no problem. He worked very well with and off the ball at Duke. Hell, he was not even the'true' point guard and got 5 assists.

A couple more points:

a) If anyone suggest scrapping the triangle, I recommend that they suggest another NBA team's offence for us to use insted.
b) As far as this not maximize talent, it did fine for MJ, Pip, now Kobe and Shaq.

And for people that say the triangle limits a point guard or does not need a point guard, well ...

There is some debate whether the Kings run the triangle, but they certainly run an equal opportunicy offense. Bibby's assist numbers were down last year. Does this mean that he was less valuable. No way!!

 

[FJ_of _Rockaway]

Re: Jay & Triangle - no problem

Originally posted by johnston797


There is some debate whether the Kings run the triangle, but they certainly run an equal opportunicy offense. Bibby's assist numbers were down last year. Does this mean that he was less valuable. No way!!

Due to the fact that the big men ( Chris and Vlade )create so well out of the pivot - so Bibs is required if he is open to knock it down which he is totally adept at doing.

Points like Kidd, Andre Miller, Kenny Andersen , Eric Snow would not be that great for the triangle offensively as they all have streaky and suspect outside shots.

Franchise, Davis , Bibby , Payton and yes .. Jay Williams I think would be perfect for it .

In fact I think the ultimate Triangle point guard is Gary Payton

 

[Wishbone]

Payton makes perfect sense in the Krause idealized triangle

but that's not news... Krause's love affair for the big point who can defend has been documented more than anything since the bible.


back to JWill -- if he averages 5 apg, that should be plenty fine. because if Rose and Crawford also avg 3-5 apg each, that means the ball is getting around pretty good. plus you never know - Fizer or Curry MIGHT look into their own skills on passing out of the post (maybe that's a reach, but i can dream can't i?) -- which would mean, other teams really wouldn't be able to double team ANYONE without getting totally burned every time.

that coupled with the notion that Curry, Rose, and JWill should be able to beat most guys one on one = W

 

[Songcycle]

You bring up some good points Wishbone. As for possible passing skills from Curry and Chandler, stranger things have happebed and in this particular case, they will benefit from NBA coaching at an early age more so than if they had went to college (This is not a blanket statement for all HS'ers) and I would think passing is high on the course list.

 

[Sicky Dimpkins]

Re: Jay & Triangle - no problem

Originally posted by johnston797
The triangle is an equal opportunity offence. JWill will have no problem. He worked very well with and off the ball at Duke. Hell, he was not even the'true' point guard and got 5 assists.

A couple more points:

a) If anyone suggest scrapping the triangle, I recommend that they suggest another NBA team's offence for us to use insted.
b) As far as this not maximize talent, it did fine for MJ, Pip, now Kobe and Shaq.

And for people that say the triangle limits a point guard or does not need a point guard, well ...

There is some debate whether the Kings run the triangle, but they certainly run an equal opportunicy offense. Bibby's assist numbers were down last year. Does this mean that he was less valuable. No way!!

Everyone does get a chance in the triangle but some more than others depending on their skill.

There is nothing about the triangle that would suggest that he can't thrive in it. "Jay" can hit the "J".

a. I'm fine with the triangle but was interested in knowing what the "Jay" fans thought. I wouldn't mind running whatever San Antonio ran when they had Duncan and Robinson in the game at the same time. I really enjoyed the interior passing between the 2 bigs.

b. None of these players are point guards.

I don't think the triangle requires a "quarterback" type of point guard and I do think that it limits this aspect of a point guards game. I fail to see how it can be argued that it doesn't limit the point guards creativity and at the same time note how Bibby's assists were down almost 40%. The 2 seem to be at odds. Agree to disagree?

The King ran the triangle last year. No debate.

I have previously posted that another poster on Real GM mentioned that in the triangle, the point guard having fewer assists isn't necessarily a bad thing and may indeed be "normal". I agree and thank that poster for educating me.

I think it's great that a Bull fan doesn't devalue Bibby for having fewer assists in the triangle but wish that Bull fans in general would do the same for JC.

 

[BCH]

The triangle is a system of cuts that are situationally based.

The Kings ran a system of cuts based on the philosophy of Pete Carril, and it is something that is constantly being defined.

I don't really have a point, but I liked the post that started this thread.

 

[settinUpShop]

Running the point in the triangle set, as far as I can tell, really only requires the point guard to get the ball down the court, and once there, into the high post. Once in the triangle, having three shooters with ball handling skills and court vision at the 1,2,3 spots should be a thing of beauty to watch. Ofcourse, it'll be ugly until our young guns actually figure out how the hell the thing works. Rose's experience won't help in the regard either, bcs it's a new offensive system for him as well. It took several years for MJ and company to learn how to effectively run it - i expect the same to be true for our team, although LA picked it up pretty quickly.

The real value of having JWill, IMO, will be in pushing the ball down court and taking full advantage of our unparalleled team speed. That's not to say that JC can't run the break with as much success, but having two players like this will be awesome. Who ever starts at the 1, their biggest responsibilities will be:

- pushing the ball
- quarterbacking the D-fense
- setting up the triangle (when we run it)
- traditional point guard duties when we don't

It will be interesting to see how both JC and JWill handle the defensive responsibilities. BC has stressed his vision of a defensive preasuring point guard, and I know JC has been working his tail of to be that type of player. His goal this offseason is to become the teams best defender. If he does... Wow, that'll be awesome. I hope JWill puts alot of time into his defense as well. Sharing minutes with JC should alow him to keep his energy high whenever he's on the court.

Next season I expect the Bulls to be running and gunning at a break-neck pace. By mid-season it is my hope that our defense comes together, leading to more fast-break opportunities, and easy baskets. I don't see many teams out there that can match out team's speed.

 

[Cyanobacteria]

Excellent thread everyone, my favorite in months.

I would hope for Jay (and others) pushing the tempo every possesion followed by triangle if there's no good opportunity.

Settin, I agree. PGs job in the triangle is primarily advance the ball, make the first pass. The positions are fairly interchangable afterwards depending on where the passer cuts to and who fills for whom. Phils last book describes this well. I think that players with high bball IQ have a better time figuring out what opportunities the triangle affords them. I thnk Jay fits this mold, but have no proof whatsoever.

If I'm Curry or Chandler I'm shooting hundreds of 15-18 ft top of the key area jumpers and watching lots of Spurs championship season game film to make the high-low work. One cut to the box by the 4 and a face-up pivot by the 5 and the high-low is there out of the triangle. It worked so well with the Spurs because teams respected that jumper by both players. Good perimeter shooting and passing keep everybody honest. Sound like anything we're assembling? I hope so.

 

[Sicky Dimpkins]

This is G o o g l e's cache of


http://classic.sacbee.com/sports/kings/articles/2001/oct/20011028kings1.html.


G o o g l e's cache is the snapshot that we took of the page as we crawled the web.
The page may have changed since that time. Click here for the current page without highlighting.
To link to or bookmark this page, use the following url: http://www.google.com/search?q=cach...nto+kings+new+triangle+offense&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
Google is not affiliated with the authors of this page nor responsible for its content.
These search terms have been highlighted:_sacramento_kings_new_triangle_offense_
===================================
Kings will tri, tri again: Their triangle offense is an attempt to keep up with the Lakers.
By Martin McNeal
Bee Staff Writer
(Published Oct. 28, 2001)
If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.
It's not exactly that simple, but the Kings are borrowing an offense from the two-time defending champion Los Angeles Lakers.
The Kings will use a version of the Lakers' triangle offense, though the results aren't sure to produce a championship.
In the Lakers' case, it doesn't seem to matter what offensive sets are utilized. An offense featuring the superior and unique talents of center Shaquille O'Neal and swingman Kobe Bryant will always be potent, be it a triangle, a quadrangle or a pentagon.
But an offense featuring the likes of Chris Webber, Vlade Divac and Peja Stojakovic -- among other Kings -- can be difficult to defend.
Throw Mike Bibby, Doug Christie and Bobby Jackson into the mix, and defenses have to make tough decisions to stop the triangle when it's run with precision.
"It allows us to find an opening," Christie said. "And we have five guys who can make shots and make plays. (If) I'm trying to get the ball into C-Webb, and the corner (defender) is dropping in his lap, I throw it to the corner, and the corner guy happens to be Peja, so you kind of pick your poison."
The Kings' version of the triangle is called "corner," and it puts a player in the low post on either side of the lane. Another player will go to the corner, and another goes to the wing on the same side of the floor, establishing the strong side of the court.
The other two players can go to the corner and wing on the other side, or weak side, of the court.
The concept is not new to the Kings. They went to the corner last season when the Phoenix Suns, among others, jammed their post game by stationing a man between their post player and the passer (this is called fronting).
Kings coach Rick Adelman said the corner offense has been good to his team, when the players show the proper patience. They didn't in their final two exhibition games, when they tried jump shots before the offense had a chance to develop.
"We used it in the Phoenix series because they were fronting us every time," Adelman said, referring to last season's first round of the playoffs. "And every time we ran that, they couldn't front us, and we found out we were scoring out of it real easily."
Adelman says the corner is different from the Lakers' triangle in a couple of ways.
"It's not as intricate or as disciplined as the Lakers' is because their guys pass and go to spots, and two guys pretty much take shots," he said. "We kind of use it for all of our guys who have advantages to do things with it. Our guys all can be in different spots, and all can do different things."
Though O'Neal's presence and dominance give a defense a different set of problems, the triangle offenses of the Kings and Lakers nonetheless share some characteristics.
"A lot of things we do out of it are similar to the Lakers, except we don't have that big guy in the middle," Adelman said. "(For the Lakers) everything revolves around him. Eventually, it's going to come back into his hands. We're trying to take advantage of our perimeter people."
An offshoot of the corner offense is that when executed properly, the floor is spaced well.
That's a must, Christie said.
"If people are overloading a side and don't give that 15- or 20-foot spacing, then one guy can stick two guys and really take you right out of (the play)," he said. "(With) the Lakers, you've always got a guy deep in the corner to bring his guy down, a guy is flashing hard on the weak side, and you've got Shaq posting up."
Adelman says the Kings' version is less like the Lakers' now and more like that used by the Chicago Bulls when they won six championships with Michael Jordan, Scottie Pippen and Co. Their coach was Phil Jackson, now the Lakers' coach.
"It's real similar, I think, to what the Bulls did when Phil had them," Adelman said. "They were more of a perimeter jump-shooting team than a post team, and their big guys passed the ball."
Kings players believe in their version of the triangle. Any offense that has two skilled passers such as Divac and Webber in the low post, with active and timely cutters around them, has potential.
Stojakovic and Divac already have shown a special flair for getting layups off the corner. Moreover, when the corner defender drops into the post man's lap, Hedo Turkoglu, Stojakovic or Christie often can get that deep baseline shot.
That's the option that Lakers forward Robert Horry has used to make backbreaking three-pointers against the Kings in their past two playoff series.
"Shooters from the corner get shots," Stojakovic said. "If the post guy -- for us, Vlade or Chris -- can really pass the ball, it's going to be really tough to guard us.
"But don't put that in that newspaper, so everybody will know how to guard us."
Bobby Jackson says the offense must remain fluent to be effective.
"It works," Jackson said of the corner. "It's a hell of an offense. As long as we keep moving, nobody can guard us. When we start standing is when things start bogging down. We've got a lot of guys who can put the ball on the floor and shoot it, and we've got a lot of stand-still shooters."
Adelman said the team's current emphasis is to utilize its perimeter players, but Christie said that will change when Webber returns after rehabilitating his sprained left ankle.
"We want to get C-Webb shots where he's either in the post or we're running something off of him," Christie said. "Ours actually is kind of a double threat, because C-Webb is an inside-
outside player, whereas Shaq, even as aggressive and strong as he is, is only an inside player."

 

[settinUpShop]

Great post Sicky! (puke) There, I saved you the trouble of doing that yourself. I'm putting that article into my archives, because I don't know how many times I've tried to convince people that the Kings ran the triangle offense last season (or at least a version of it.) It's a good framework to build an offense off of, and my hope is that we'll find an assitant coach who's able to redefine it to utilize our player's skills. I'm also impressed with how quickly the Kings seemed to have picked it up. Maybe their version is more simplified (?).

Perhaps an interesting sidebar to this discussion could focus on our coaching staff - beginning with BillC. What's his b-ball IQ? I know his experience in the NBA is a great asset, but in terms of strategizing and seeing the mismatches, how would people rate him? Or have we even seen enough from last year to really judge him on such grounds? I don't have a problem with BillC being more of a figure-head as the Head Coach, as opposed to the one making all the calls. Rose said that while Indiana was coached by Larry Bird, he often defered to Rick Carlisle (then Indiana's assistant coach) to draw up the plays.

 

[BCH]

Any offense that overloads one side of the floor is a "triangle" offense. Whether it is Wing, High Post, Low Post or Corner, Wing, Low Post.

The Kings use more movement and more back cuts.

The Wizards run a pinch post offense, that is a version of the triangle, with cuts coming off the pinch post.