win win situation. 1. We don't wear our starters down to nothing and injuries 2. We see what these guys got, a few are bound to improve, perhps a lot 3. we are going nowhere this yr so why the fuk not? 4. we perhaps create value for trades or keep a few, what is the risk? the only risk is not doing what we did tonight So Stotts - PLAY THE FUKKIN BENCH every night!
I'm not against playing the bench, but there are possible negative consequences. The more the bench plays, the more likely the blazers lose games. The more loses pile up on one another the more more likely A) Aldridge sees the Blazers as a losers organization and leaves in two years or demands a trade. B) The players we want to build around lose their fire. C) Lillard and the other rookies learn the wrong lessens and become accustomed to losing. D) more losses equal fewer fans at the games, making Portland an even less alluring to NBA players. And more, but those jump to mind first.
Responses: A: see B B. The players will lose "their fire" a lot faster playing huge minutes in an 82 game schedule and losing whether the bench is played significant minutes or not. In addition the chances of injury increase significanlty having your starters playin so many minutes and that ultumately equals more losses. IMO playing the bench might cause some losses initially, but will likely result in more wins later in the season. C.See B D. see B
I take the credit! Stotts started playing his other bench guys after one of my oregonlive comments was published, asking why he didn't play guys like Barton/Freeland to develop them in the NBA rather than sending them to D-League. Looks like he's changed his strategy. Why bother playing guys that probably won't be here next year anyway. It's not like they are producing anything. Enough Jefferies and Pavlovich already.
Agree, when I say playing the bench it for the most part means guys like Freeland-Barton-Nolan (did I really say that?), and Claver. Obviously Meyers is already getting solid minutes.
