We have too many one-way players

@WesleyMatthews .....I'm guessing that those "egos" are a good part of what makes the players who and what they are.

 

Oh I'm not offended, just trying to point out that I thought the idea was preposterous and the reason why no one does it has nothing to do with egos. I was trying to be fairly obvious that I was overreacting to the fact that I disagreed with the idea, it was as someone else pointed out kinda snarky and I apologize for that. I actually think that we should always get our best players to play together for the most amount of time possible, ideally players that are our most talented five and who compliment each others games.

I agree that when you play your other rotation players, those players need to play staggered minutes with some of your starters. I had said in a previous post that it was weird that a lot of people in here would talk about a second unit. That being said, I am a traditionalist in the sense that I feel strongly that you start the game with your absolute best lineup. I know that in the NBA everyone makes runs but imposing your will on your opponent early on can have a serious effect on the rest of the game and the other team's belief that they can beat you even if that isn't fully conscious to the entire opposing team. You can break another team's will early on and I would never give up that opportunity by playing anything but my best lineup.

The Ginobili reference isn't effective in making your argument. Ginobili did not sit on the bench to play with and take bench players' games to another level because the Spurs normal rotation at that time was to bring Ginobili in after two minutes to play with the starters. I think that was about a show of confidence, I think it was about Pop fucking with opponents and above all I think it was about setting Ginobili apart to get him recognition. I don't think sitting Dame for the first two minutes would kill our game, I just don't see the advantage in any way. It's also important to understand that as good as Ginobili was he was never close to as good as Dame so those two minutes weren't as big of a sacrifice to those Spurs' teams initial momentum and did have a better chance to create mismatches because teams' entire game plans weren't geared toward Ginobili the way they are toward Dame.

The only logical thing I see is that you are giving the team more minutes without the terrible combination that Dame and CJ are in the back court but Dame is not the guy out of those two that should play with the guys at the bottom of our rotation. If you made that choice, you bring CJ off the bench.

Also the idea that another team would allow us to dictate who they play against Dame, who is well inside the top ten players in the league, is really funny. If Dame didn't start, the other team would still make sure they played their most stifling defense possible when Dame was on the court, Dame just wouldn't have our best guys around him to help him get through that defense. I just find your idea so incredibly flawed, not to the point of being offended but to the point of finding it ridiculous... honestly, no offense meant.

 

"CJ and Dame play 95% of the PG minutes" and he implied theyd stagger them like theyve almost always done.

 

Again. Taking "95%" of minutes literal is kind of tough. There are 48 available. Lillard played 37.5 of those minutes last season. 10 mins left is just under 20%. 1M played 20 mins a game last season. When he is on the court with CJ what does he play? SG or PG? What exactly defines a PG? Is he always the player that brings the ball up the court? How many minutes does Lillard play that he is not considered the Point Guard?

Honestly this conversation has run it's course. Lillard, CJ, 1M, maybe even Trent will all pick up the role at times. Even the All-Star game doesn't define PG or SG. Doesn't define SF or PF or even Center for that matter.

Simons will play when he is playing well and matched up well. He shouldn't see the court if he isn't. It's that simple. I expect that he will have improved and will continue to improve this season.

 

There’s nothing to bitch about this off-season, it’s easily the best one we have had since the early 2000s. I’m excited to have the depth to hopefully ease some of the regular season min on Dame. We are also in good shape for a consolidation trade if the right one presents itself.

 

Dame is a special human; he’d revel in entering the game at minute 7. And if he were to do so, Melo could be persuaded to come into the game with him. No damage to anyone’s ego!

And we’d kick some serious ass because other teams would have no answer for what’s about to hit them. Then simply let Dame play the rest of the game - shoot, it would cut his minutes to below 40 and extend his career too boot

 

When you're a soccer Mom there's always something to bitch about, justified or not.

 

Especially the coaching rotations.

 

I mean, they've staggered almost constantly every season before last. There's not enough minutes for better players if Simons plays backup PG.

 

I honestly cant tell if you're trolling or serious.

 

Sorry, but I am calling BS on this.

People aren't bitching about the Kanter and Roco signings. They are questioning the signing of a guy who is constantly hurt and a guy who appears to be a terrible match for Stotts' offense. How can you argue those questions are unjustified?

 

Personally i felt Simons was going to be too green last year but i feel he actually improved in things maybe that don't come out on a stat line.
I just am not willing to give up on him yet. I think he can continue to improve and make an impact. But then i stuck with Meyers longer than most so maybe i'm the one who is delusional here?

 

What's funny about it is last year he wasn't ready but we had to play him due to a lack of depth.
This year he may be ready, but we shouldn't play him because we have so much depth.

He's the 12th best player on the roster, 13th if you think Nas is better. His time will come, it just shouldn't be this year unless he becomes a top 10 player on this roster.

 

As long as we don't have too many no-way players, I'm OK with it.

 

We already have Collins out. Who knows if Hood is effective, Simons could possibly outplay him. Other guys will miss games, or someone could be in a slump, or a bad matchup.

I wouldn't put Simons in my 9 man rotation on opening night... but he could easily play significant minutes if he now has the ability to make useful contributions.

 

I'm thinking he'll get his chance. Might not be a lot of time but he will see the floor. If he has improved and shows flashes maybe Stotts will need to use him? I know we are talking "Robo Stotts" but i can dream right?
Simons is gonna have to earn his time or make the most of minutes due to injuries? Maybe rightfully so? I want them to play to win every night and play like the Championship is within reach this year. That may mean Simons sits a bit?

 

You said that better than i did.
And of course i read it after posting what i posted....

 

He'll definitely get a chance, I just dont expect it to be regular. And yes, win-now > develop players at this point.

 

Yep, like always there will be some injuries and missed games so there will be opportunities for him. He just needs to step up to the plate and earn his minutes. I think people forget how young he is still.