Okay, so Stotts is basically running our starters into the ground. Why? The most obvious reason would be that he wants to win (like any coach) and our bench is shitty. BUT: He has to have been hired with the idea that this was a rebuild... right? And, while Matthews, Lillard and Batum should be okay with 40+ mpg, how does Aldridge feel about being run into the ground and still losing? Of course, Aldridge is conserving his strength by just shooting jump shots rather than posting up... And: has Stotts just decided that Freeland, Barton and Claver are just beyond hope, or is he just bringing them along slowly? But what's the point of that? Freeland and Claver are grownups. They've played international basketball. They're not going to make huge improvements just by practicing. Or, if you really want to confine your bench to Pavlovic, Price, Jeffries and (God help us) Babbitt, then why not send Freeland, Barton and Claver to Idaho? (And waive Nolan, for God's sake.) If I were Olshey, I think I'd want to intervene. It must be hard to watch this.
Why? Because the season starts out with everyone tied for first place. When you're tied for first place, you don't tank. I also think Lillard would develop a lot faster and better if he's playing with seasoned NBA players instead of with guys who might give up easier baskets and not finish so well on the offensive end.
Hey, "seasoned" is not necessarily "good". And besides, that wouldn't explain why Leonard is getting more minutes than, say, Jeffries. Or Freeland, who is older and has played at a higher level.
So what changes? I guess it could be that Stotts is just sort of extending training camp for some players and working them in slowly. But then, why put Claver on the inactive list instead of sending him to Idaho?
Leonard is a pretty high draft pick with decent upside. I assume he's earned his playing time and that the coach wants to see him go against real NBA competition.
I think the come back in the third had a lot to do with the minutes. Do you take out certain players when they are on a role? Didn't we all complain when Nate did that? They are playing every other day at home. 5 extra minutes won't kill them. The fact that they exhausted so much energy in the third trying to catch up was the issue of them running out of steam. Actually it was one of the starters who should of gotten more minutes. JJ only played 22. 5 more minutes for him in place of LMA would have been fine.
I do think Stots is trying to do his best to win some games early because instilling a winning attitude into a team is the best thing you can do. I expect him to continue to do everything to win until it gets to a point where we are several games under .500 then we will see a more focus on developing our young talent (Freeland/Barton/Claver/....Smith)
But overplaying the starters might lower our early-season win percentage, not increase it. We look tired late in games, just like the McMillan post-Roy era.
He's thinking he wants to win just like anyone else. I get that they are rebuilding, but I don't want to see them playing the game to lose. Why would you pay Aldridge millions of dollars to sit on the bench? I'm not worried about him playing too much, he's a pro athlete not a child.
yet overplaying your starters could ultimately result in more losses with starters getting worn down and injured. Playing your key starters lets say an average of 35 mnutes vs 40 or more is not playing to lose, it's common sense as we do need to try to develop some of our bench guys for the future.
Maybe if they fall into a deep hole, but it's way too early in the season to give up. If they can hover close to .500 to the halfway point of the season all they need is one big trade to make them a playoff threat. I'd agree if they were benching guys that were obvious talents, but Claver and Freeland aren't exactly that. Anyhow, there's other ways to build a team than tanking a season for a high pick.
no one is talking about "tanking". this is a development year, does it really matter if we win 32 or 37 games?
Not really, but it's just 2 hours of entertainment to me and I'd rather watch our best players play. Those five wins would be a lot funner to watch than five losses.
my comment on that is it's fun either way for me, and you are focused on short term gratification (which is ok) vs the bigger picture which is enhanced if you at least give some development time to the bench guys and don't overuse and possibly injure the starters
I'm all for looking at the big picture as well, but my points are: We aren't saving the starters for a post season run so there's no reason to limit minutes. The team is young (including Aldridge) so there's no reason to limit their minutes. The guys not getting playing time right now aren't huge building blocks for the future anyway. Winning and extra 5 games isn't going to kill our drafting potential (we got the second best player at pick 6). I don't want to watch Freeland play when a healthy Lamarcus could be in there. Injuries aren't something you can control.
