Why keep the triangle?

I have been wondering about the need for the new Bulls team to keep the triangle offense. Tim Floyd has stated that while he added some screening type offense to the existing triangle, he will not totally abandon the hard to learn triple post offense.

I thought this will be the year they could dump the triangle with all the new faces and a young athletic team. Both Mercer and El-Amin had thrived when they used the screen offense. Jamal Crawford looks like he is shackled by the set triangle offense. He seems like a Jason Williams like flashy pass type guard. While he seems to throw the ball away at times like Jason, I think he will thrive in an up tempo game. The team may also get more recognition just like Sacramento got during Jason's rookie year.

Besides, the Bulls don't have Tex Winter anymore to teach all the nuiances of the triangle. It seems like a half hearted attempt anyway, when Floyd and the team is committed to learn it from old tapes and even using it mixed with other offenses. Comments?

I think they should have dumped it last year. It isn't doing anybody any good with the youngest team in the league trying to learn it on top of all the other things they are being force fed. It's just too mcuh for a team of youngsters.......

The triangle needs to go. To make it work you need a lot of good shooters and a team that knows how to, and is used to playing together. You have to know who is going to be open and who can make shots. This team is too young and too unfamiliar with each other. It looks like much of their scoring will come from the paint with Brand, Fizer and probably Miller which doesn't fit the triangle well. With so many new players Floyd should set up a basic offense with a few goto plays that everyone can learn before advancing to anything more complex. In my opinion the triangle was overrated anyway. It worked for one reason - great players. Besides, when it came down to crunch time MJ took the ball and the triangle was thrown out the window. It hasn't worked for the bulls lately nor other mediocre teams. I remember Dallas trying it a few years back. I think when Jim Cleamons was there. It was a miserable failure. Yes, the Lakers have won with it, but once again great players. Does anyone think they would have lost using any other other offense that spoon fed Shaq the ball also?

ANY offense would have been too much for these last two teams to execute so it really didn't matter much one way or the other. It seems triangle or no Crawford isn't a big fan of getting the ball into the post.

I think after the team gels a bit this season they will start running a scheme that fits more readily with the talent on the team and Floyd will say that it is all 'flowing from the triangle'. They really ditched it a lot last year.

I don't think there is a lack of understanding among fans in the Bulls ng regarding how the triangle works, generally.

The question is whether or not the learning curve is worthwhile considering the tough road we have ahead of us anyway. I guess the further question is whether or not there is enough talent on this team currently to effectively run any offense.

I agree that most Bull's fans should see that the triangle offense is a good system. I believe it would be worth while to keep the triangle if the players we have now, the organization plans on keeping for the long haul. However, the triangle makes no sense if you are going to have a major overhaul again next year and the year after. To teach the triangle offense is a long term investment, that will not show immediate dividends in the 1st year of a young team. So if the Bulls feel that Brand, Artest, Fizer, Crawford, El-Amin, Ruffin, Mercer, Bagaric etc. are going to be the core players for this team long term, then and only then does the triangle make sense this year.