That strategy really limits your options when it comes to rotation in the 2nd half. It would be a shame to need a guy like Greg Oden near the end of the game (or overtime), but he fouled out with 10 minutes left in the 4th quarter because we wanted to let him get in a rhythm in the 1st quarter. I think Greg's power game is more effective when he's fresh and opposing centers are tried in the 2nd half (see last night).
That implies some minutes matter than others. I disagree with that. It's just as much a shame not to have Oden in the first or second quarter, when we need him, as to not have him in the fourth quarter or overtime, when we need him. The points, rebounds and defense matter the same all throughout the game (except garbage time). I think it's more important to get as many minutes per game out of him, than to artificially limit them in an effort to have him on the floor at specific times in the game. As I said, I'm not looking to take this to an extreme and willing to let him foul out in the first half if he has a tough start with fouls. I agree with rocketeer's proposal of letting him play normally until he has 3 fouls, and then allowing him only 4 total fouls by halftime and 5 total fouls by the end of the third quarter. That ensures that he'll make it to the fourth quarter and also makes it likely that he'll play close to as many minutes as 6 fouls will allows. I'm sure that's true for everyone. If Roy didn't play the first half, I'd bet he'd be even more effective slashing past tired perimeter defenders in the second half. But that marginal gain in second-half effectiveness isn't worth losing his production in the first half. I feel the same way about Oden or pretty much any valuable, important player.
you don't think that there is something to the commonly held theory that the officials try to keep the games close? I've subscribed to that one for decades now and Donaghy confirmed it. I'd rather have my best players available for winning time. STOMP
There's that, and there's also the issue that Oden is a young and growing talent. If we were renting Oden for a year and didn't care how he eventually developed then maybe you follow Minstrel/rocketeer's path. But maybe Nate is thinking beyond one season. Maybe this year Nate is trying to break him of the habit of fouling so that for the next decade we never have to worry about it again. Get him to take each chippy first quarter foul seriously in a boring regular season game against Memphis, and you won't have to worry about his foul situation in the final minutes of a conference finals game against the Lakers somewhere down the road. An analogy is shooting shotguns. When I was a kid, my dad made me shoot a single shot shotgun for my entire first season. It was infuriating as hell, because my older brothers got off far more shots and were much more successful hunters. But it taught me to take every shot seriously. I'd only get the one shot in, so I had to make it count. I'm probably a much more accurate shooter today, 23 years removed, because of the discipline my dad forced on me in that first season. If it costs us some wins along the way for Oden to learn the discipline of avoiding fouls, well, it's all part of the sizable investment Portland is putting in his future.
at the same time, isn't learning to play through fouls an important lesson for the future as well? if he picks up two quick fouls in a conference finals game against the lakers, he's not going to the bench for the rest of the half, is he? if not, him having experience playing through foul trouble seems like it would help.
Not really, since I've seen plenty of games where one team breaks well ahead early and cruises to victory or just keeps piling on.
That seems like a stretch to me. When he has a four foul quota for the first half and five for the first three quarters, he still can't foul indiscriminately without hitting pre-defined limits. Both the idea rocketeer had and McMillan's have the foul quota for periods of time...the difference is that rocketeer's plan front-loads the fouls (allows Oden to use more early) and McMillan's back-loads them (leaves Oden more fouls late). To me, the main result of this difference is that McMillan's plan makes it more likely that Oden will finish the game with "fouls to give" and, thus, minutes unplayed. I don't think that instilling foul discipline is a difference between the two. I think both force Oden to be cognizant of fouls.
I've seen plenty of games like that, wild comebacks too, but of course like you I've literally watched thousands of games. The norm is for NBA games to be very close at the end, especially playoff games... so thats when I want my best players available. STOMP
