clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

How Brooklyn Nets roster might fit the Triangle


Back in December, after Avery Johnson was fired and rumors of Phil Jackson surfaced, Jackson confidante Charley Rosen wrote of how the Nets roster was "an almost perfect fit" for the Triangle.

Now, with Brian Shaw seen as a leading candidate for the head coaching job and the Triangle back in the news, here's what Rosen wrote, breaking down the Nets then-roster, which isn't likely to change much.

"...the current roster is almost a perfect fit for the triangle.

"Unlike Pau Gasol, Brook Lopez has the strength and the mass to hold his position in the low post. This means that the offense could always start with a pass into Lopez, who has his limitations, but can score and make appropriate passes. With the ball so close to the hoop, the defense is compelled to make major adjustments, which leads to other options being available.

"Gerald Wallace is a slasher with 3-point range as well as a top-notch defender. In other words, he’s Scottie Pippen 2.0.

"Deron Williams functions best in a "read" (as opposed to a patterned grind-it-out) offense that also demands spontaneity.

"If the triangle fails to generate a makeable shot and the shot clock is down to 5 or 6 seconds, it’s necessary to give the ball to a player (like Michael Jordan or Kobe Bryant) who can create his own shot.

"While Joe Johnson isn’t in the same class as MJ or Kobe, he’s still extremely creative in one-on-one situations.

"What the Nets do lack, though, is a power forward who can make a 15-foot jumper under minimum pressure.

"Unfortunately, Kris Humphries can only hit do this on a consistent level if he’s alone in the gym. And, for all his ferocious defense and rebounding, Reggie Evans can’t shoot himself in the foot.

"It says here that under Jackson’s (Shaw's?) tutelage, Andray Blatche would eventually make the grade."

There are of course issues with the analysis. Gasol is a much better passer than Lopez and Johnson is neither Kobe nor MJ, to say the least. But it's an interesting analysis.