It's October 08, 2025, 07:18:06 AM
So if the triangle is a good system that makes teams winning and players succeed, do those players actually suck because they are executing a system that is designed that way?
im not saying that there stats wernt overblown, of course they were. If a team plays at a higher pace and has more possesions than an avergae team then of course there stats are going to be somewhat inflated. Prime example of this is nash assist numbers this year compared to years past. But i think as a team they were still a bloody good team, making the playoffs in the west over the last 5 years is hard enough but making the west finals and knocking on the door of the finals was impressive IMO. They played some downright good bball at times and as a fan of the whole NBA i feel privalged to watch a team like that over the last couple of years, very pleasing on the eye. and i maintain that if it wasnt for some unlucky injuries (joe johnson eye injury in 2005 i think it was) and of course the bench fracas I really believe that phoenix would of won a championship. but of course they didnt so everyone will say how bad they were at x, y and z. at the end of the day only 1 team can win a championship every year, that not only takes determination but there is luck inolved too. So i think making the playoffs and getting as far as they did in the last 5 years is an achievement in itself and should be praised and not disected like they didnt have what it takes, because you know what 29 other teams didnt have what it takes either.
Quote from: 7even on December 08, 2008, 09:40:26 AMSo if the triangle is a good system that makes teams winning and players succeed, do those players actually suck because they are executing a system that is designed that way?Are you retarded? The triangle is a real basketball system...it doesn't inflate stats, because it's traditional basketball, not some bullshit excuse for streetball on an NBA level. D'Antoni's system not only made the players within the system look better (to dudes who judge basketball by stats aka the majority of this board), but it also made the opposing players look better as well. You ever check the average stats of Phoenix opponents over the past few years? Their stats are ALWAYS much higher. Golden State and New York are doing the same shit right now. Fast-pace offense with no defense has always been and will always be a fluke...comparing it to the triangle shows me how much simple basketball knowledge you lack.
Quote from: Now_I_Know on December 08, 2008, 02:24:06 PMQuote from: 7even on December 08, 2008, 09:40:26 AMSo if the triangle is a good system that makes teams winning and players succeed, do those players actually suck because they are executing a system that is designed that way?Are you retarded? The triangle is a real basketball system...it doesn't inflate stats, because it's traditional basketball, not some bullshit excuse for streetball on an NBA level. D'Antoni's system not only made the players within the system look better (to dudes who judge basketball by stats aka the majority of this board), but it also made the opposing players look better as well. You ever check the average stats of Phoenix opponents over the past few years? Their stats are ALWAYS much higher. Golden State and New York are doing the same shit right now. Fast-pace offense with no defense has always been and will always be a fluke...comparing it to the triangle shows me how much simple basketball knowledge you lack.I'm not saying it's anything like the triangle. I just apply your twisted logic to show you how full of shit you are, retard.1) There's a good chance that the Suns win the title if Horry doesn't bump Nash2) The Suns were better with D'Antoni. I'm not talking about their individual stats, I'm talking about the success of the team. 3) The Knicks are better with D'Antoni. Again, as a team. Everybody knows that the system was based on not running out the clock, therefore having many possessions, while focusing on offense and therefore playing softer defense. Do you honestly think it's just you figuring that stuff out, dumbass? So if that system made Phx and NY better, how is D'Antoni wrong while using it? And more importantly, how do the Suns players suck because they executed it really well?
Quote from: 7even on December 08, 2008, 02:36:12 PMQuote from: Now_I_Know on December 08, 2008, 02:24:06 PMQuote from: 7even on December 08, 2008, 09:40:26 AMSo if the triangle is a good system that makes teams winning and players succeed, do those players actually suck because they are executing a system that is designed that way?Are you retarded? The triangle is a real basketball system...it doesn't inflate stats, because it's traditional basketball, not some bullshit excuse for streetball on an NBA level. D'Antoni's system not only made the players within the system look better (to dudes who judge basketball by stats aka the majority of this board), but it also made the opposing players look better as well. You ever check the average stats of Phoenix opponents over the past few years? Their stats are ALWAYS much higher. Golden State and New York are doing the same shit right now. Fast-pace offense with no defense has always been and will always be a fluke...comparing it to the triangle shows me how much simple basketball knowledge you lack.I'm not saying it's anything like the triangle. I just apply your twisted logic to show you how full of shit you are, retard.1) There's a good chance that the Suns win the title if Horry doesn't bump Nash2) The Suns were better with D'Antoni. I'm not talking about their individual stats, I'm talking about the success of the team. 3) The Knicks are better with D'Antoni. Again, as a team. Everybody knows that the system was based on not running out the clock, therefore having many possessions, while focusing on offense and therefore playing softer defense. Do you honestly think it's just you figuring that stuff out, dumbass? So if that system made Phx and NY better, how is D'Antoni wrong while using it? And more importantly, how do the Suns players suck because they executed it really well?YOU ARE AN IDIOT AND YOUR ANALOGY MAKES NO SENSE.TRIANGLE DOES NOT INFLATE STATS, BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT GOING AGAINST THE BASKETBALL LOGIC OF MAXIMIZING YOUR POSSESSION BY SHOOTING WITHIN 7 SECONDS OF THE SHOT CLOCK.1.Suns woulda never won the title with that system, regardless of what you claim. 2.Suns overachieved in D'Antoni's system IN THE REGULAR SEASON, because it's designed to throw teams off-guard, but teams slow down in the playoff atmosphere...Terry Porter isn't a top-tier coach and their roster is much weaker than it's been in past years. common sense, my dude.3.Again, the system makes your team look better in the REGULAR SEASON. I know this theory isn't groundbreaking, but how come people aren't coming out and saying "oh, Boris Diaw is garbage, that system made him look good" or "oh, Nash shoulda' never won those MVPs, he's a 2nd option on any other team"...again, you are the idiot.D'Antoni is wrong for using it because it's not real basketball and because it wont win shit against teams with a true game-plan. Any player placed within that system will look better, it's not about how well they execute it.7even...I am highly disappointed in you. I honestly thought you were one of the better ones on here.
It's your ridiculous mind-set that anything less than the championship makes you worthless. Probably because you are a spoiled ass Laker-Fan.
Phoenix beat teams in the playoffs. They even gave the Spurs a run for their money, no argument there. So, I'd say they "won shit". Didn't those teams have a true game plan? The Lakers, under Phil Jackson, with the triangle offense, no true game plan? If you say so.Certain players fit more in certain systems than in others. That's just normal. Butler looks way better with the Wizards than with the Lakers. Davis looked way better with Golden State than with the Clippers. Nash looked better with the Suns than with the Mavs. Not anything crazy about that.And I'm no longer behaving like "one of the better ones" because you absolutely don't deserve it.I'm not going to be a nice guy towards assholes. And for the record, with all the biased ass bold and twisted statements you made on here, you should not ask so many people if they are retarded, or call them "genius", "idiot" or "dumb", especially not when you are talking to me.
Amare Stoudemire was never a 1st Team All-NBA caliber player
It's just a faulty system and there's no way any team can ever win a championship with pure offense. no matter how "close" they came, the team overachieved in the regular season and was defeated by tactical coaches come playoff time EVERY SINGLE TIME...clearly, your example is not the same...D'Antoni's unique system unquestionably boosted stats, which caused players on the team to be ranked much higher than their worth by ignorant fans. James Jones, Tim Thomas, Jim Jackson, Kurt Thomas...more muthafuckaz who's career diminished after leaving Phoenix. It's happening all over again in New York.
Quote from: Now_I_Know on December 08, 2008, 04:36:37 AMAmare Stoudemire was never a 1st Team All-NBA caliber playerI dont care about the rest cuz that is the truth...but Amare is a top player...dude still gets about 8 rebounds a game and is top 10 in scoring and FG% so yes...he's 1st Team All NBA caliber player