You can overreact anytime you want. I was just posting part of an article from last night that directly addressed your concerns.
I have been on Stotts to shorten the minutes (as a whole)... but it's still just one game, and 37 minutes this game (Especially with Lillard barely playing this preseason) I can let this slide. So, while I agree in principle to the idea, one game in the preseason is not going to be the reason they might get an injury later. Lets be realistic here.
When was this forum ever great? The minutes they played last night were to get the guys in shape for the regular season. Hopefully they average less minutes per game than last season and I think they will.
I agree wholeheartedly. I point, as usual not well made by me, was that he said he wanted to get the guys used to playing normal minutes, as posted by Sly, earlier. 37 and 36 minutes a night as a norm for those two is a poor idea, IMHO
Odd yet valid. It's one preseason game where a reason to the extended minutes was given before the game both by Coach Stotts, and the players stating why THEY WANTED to play extended minutes. I agree with what you were trying to get to, I think everyone here will. But a failed delivery means a failed message. You should have just gone straight to your point. I do have concern that Stotts is going to do the same thing again and even though we have a bench who has played well, he doesn't give them run. I'm not going to over react until it happens on a regular basis or he just won't pull the starters in a 12 point game which we saw last year. Until that happens im goi to be an optimist and believe that Stotts will go 12 deep.
If you start a topic that people disagree with, be prepared to have people voice their disagreement towards you. Otherwise don't post the topic in the first place. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I get the concern, but I'll worry when it's game 45 and they're averaging 38+. All of it comes down to whether or not the bench is going to be worth a damn, or at least able to hold serve. Something to watch I guess.
I don't think disagreement was what was voiced. Looked more like snarky, insulting, targeted condescension to me.
There's nothing in the rules about snark or condescension. You use plenty of it yourself. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
All you need to do is look at the lack of basketball conversation being made after the initial post. Look at which responses are garnering reaction. That should tell you all you need to know about the intentions for this thread.
What I took from the Denver game was maybe our first glimpse of Stotts bench favorites until CJ hurt his own cause. Kaman, Freeland, Wright, Barton and Blake are locks to get in the rotation. CJ was but I think Will took his spot for the time being. Leonard, Robinson, Claver and Crabbe are on the outside looking in. CJ will get 3 more shots at the 6man role. He'd better play like an NBA player before regular season kicks off
