verse -- The triangle is only as good as the players running it. I'd take the Rockets inside-out team of '94-'95 against last year's Lakers any day! Look at the Mavericks -- under Clemons, with Kidd, Mashburn, and Jackson, how good were they with the almight triangle? LA won because Shaq, who is in his prime, was the best player in the league not named Duncan, and Bryant was able to play off that. Jackson also got them to play a little defense. The triangle on its own is just another offense. Hakeem and Rudy's inside-out in '94-'95 would destroy it! ------------------ "All these white guys running onstage making believe they're in gangs...Gangs would chew 'em up and spit them out. They'd put peas and carrots alongside them. 'Yo wussup! My name is Eminem.' Really? I'd like to see you walk down the streets alone in Harlem at night and see where that Eminem stuff gets you." - Gene Simmons Metal Sludge
verse: maybe you should try and actually READ what I posted before you reply to it.... ------------------
considering i referenced your "points" (and i use that term very loosely right now) via direct quote, you might want to reconsider that last blurt. ------------------ miles ahead of the rest
you'll get no argument from me on the 1st point. i mean, you're right. i can't just throw 5 scrubs (or even decent players) out there, strap the triangle offense to them, and expect them to win. you do need the correct parts. all i'm saying, thefreak, is that the team la had last year would not have won w/o the triangle offense & phil jackson. would 94/95 houston have beaten the la team of last year? if you ask me, yea. because the game ain't all about offense. no one in the nba, then or now, had an answer for that "dream" run. shaq would have been in serious foul trouble against that dream. as a matter of fact, we've already seen what shaq did against that dream of 94/95. it was disgusting. of course robert horry would have quite the predicament trying to figure out what team to guard in the words of archie & edith "those were the daaaaaaaays!" i do disagree with one thing, though. i think you're oversimplifying last year's results. it wasn't as simple as shaq being the best player in the league (save duncan) and kobe playing off of it. it took them buying into a "team oriented offense". speaking of kobe, i really think shaq succeeded IN SPITE OF kobe on many occasions. kobe, IMO, is the one reason on the lakers why they may not repeat next year. it took shaq making his teammates better. he developed into one of the premier PASSING big men in the nba last year. does he do that without the triangle? maybe, but i'd bet that the type of offense they ran had a lot to do with that development. and the teammates were able to perform because they were put in positions (on the court) were they felt most comfortable. not every offense does that. speaking of kobe, i really think shaq succeeded IN SPITE OF kobe on many occasions. kobe, IMO, is the one reason on the lakers why they may not repeat next year. lemme put it this way. i think you have some valid points. the lakers were a gr8 team w/o phil & the triangle. but they were never winners until they adopted the plays and the mentality that the tri requires. if they adopted a different offense which put everyone in their most comfortable/dangerous position, and helped them to trust their teammates...they probably would have won anyway. the problem is...i don't see another offense which affords them that outcome. ------------------ miles ahead of the rest
Any mental midget can quote somebody without understanding what that person was trying to say. If you're not going to read (or perhaps that should read not understand) what people are trying to say and then quote things and make up meanings then it's going to be very difficult for you to actually ever learn anything! If you want to have a debate with yourself then surely there's no need to come on a BBS is there??? ------------------
