We're fighting for home-court advantage in the first round, with every game crucial, and yet Stotts chose to rest some key players for the NJ game, which we ended up losing. Will this decision come back to haunt us?
No. There are 82 games in a season. During a game you don't play the scoreboard. During the season you don't play the standings. There were plenty of games that were both won and lost this season. Even more so. During the Playoffs you play a series but you play one game at a time. Never worry about the series standings.
Interesting perspective. And I think it has some validity. Look at how energized LA/Nic/Kaman looked last night. They looked completely different and it was exactly what they needed. Now Dame needs to get that similar rest someway somehow.
Home court advantage has never meant less than it has in the last three seasons. I'd rather have less mileage on Kaman and LA and Batum.
If we win 4 games by 20 and he rests the fourth every time, he'll have rested a full game without missing one.
I think the game tonight figured heavily in the decision to rest Aldridge, Batum and Kaman against BRK. Yep, we gave away that game in BRK, but I think the staff probably figured we'd lose to GSW tonight anyway, especially if LA, Nic and Kaman had made the cross country trip and back for one game on Monday and then had to play a home and away back-to-back on Wednesday and Thursday. So, I think the staff probably figured we wouldn't get HCA anyway so might as well rest some guys against BRK. Of course, at the time, GSW looked invincible. Now that they've lost two in a row, it may be GSW that decides to start resting some of their guys. It would be cruelly ironic if the staff threw in the towel against BRK, assuming we'd lose to GSW, only to beat GSW and lose out on HCA due to the BRK loss. BNM
If you have a lead you don't let up. If you are behind you don't give up. If you players are not playing well because they are tired it might be worth it to rest a game and win the next 3. In a playoff series the team with HCA only has to lose one home game for them to no longer have HCA. a team that is down 2-0 and going home for game 3 is not at any more of a disadvantage than when they were 0-1. You do not play the games differently. You still play the game to win and make adjustments accordingly.
I think the staff figured we'd need to win out to get HCA and that the odds of that were very slim. Since we are locked into the 4 seed, and one loss would likely prevent us from getting HCA, they probably figured there isn't any difference between losing one (GSW) or losing two (BRK, GSW). That thinking could come back to bite us if we actually beat GSW tonight, win out and don't get HCA because of the game we gave away in BRK. And yes, I think we win that game in BRK easily with Aldridge, Batum and Kaman. BRK couldn't stop Meyers Leonard on the low block. Aldridge and Kaman would have killed them. BNM
If I can be so bold as to interpret what you are trying to say, the above statement seems to suggest that you think it is important to win every game--which was sort of my original point.
If they had made the trip and not played, it would have been a HUGE mistake. But the rest for those three will make much more of a difference in the playoffs than one extra home game in the first round.