Zombie Fire Olshey

Zing!

 

The coach doesn't agree with you. If Layman, or any other player were outplaying guys in the rotation, they'd earn a spot.

Ths team wasn't supposed to be sub .500, let alone so far under. I don't agree the idea should have been to tank from the start, or even tank at all. The object is to win, not to accumulate draft picks.

 

He's alread getting ~26. You think he can play 60 minutes a night?

 

Who said anything about tanking?

Re your first sentence: I find it hard to believe that you can't agree that upon occasion, certain players are given playing time based partially on their contract status rather than solely based on merit. However, I never said that Layman is outplaying anyone. I said that it's arguable that with the same amount of PT this year, Layman might conceivably be better now than Crabbe is. It's an unknown hypothetical, so there's obviously no way to prove it one way or the other, but it's certainly not out of the realm of possibility.

 

My position is we should play our best players to try and win. If that's Layman, fine. But it clearly isn't.

I don't see why Stotts would risk his job by playing guys who won't help us win. He did a little by playing Vonleh last year, even starting. But very limited minutes, and ultimately not when we were in the playoffs chase.

Last year at Christmas, we were 12-20, I do believe.

Crabbe is shooting .427 from 3pt, Layman .227.

 

You don't try to discuss the same thing that the person to whom you're replying is discussing, so I (much like tester) am also not going to waste my time replying any further.

 

I directly addressed what you wrote.

Stotts started Vonleh last year. Not due to his salary, or even merit . We had a much worse record at Christmas than we did at the end, after benching him. How is this not replying to, "I find it hard to believe that you can't agree that upon occasion, certain players are given playing time based partially on their contract status rather than solely based on merit." ?

I am drawing the parallel between Vonleh last year and your suggestion we play Layman more this year, and from game 1.

Reply or not, but don't make it out I didn't give you a direct and honest response.

 

I never made this suggestion, therefore your entire response is invalid.

Your posts are the very definition of the strawman, but I should expect nothing less.

 

I must be misreading you saying it's conceivable he might get Crabbe's ~30 minutes/game, and that we might be better off.

I said that it's arguable that with the same amount of PT this year, Layman might conceivably be better now than Crabbe is. It's an unknown hypothetical, so there's obviously no way to prove it one way or the other, but it's certainly not out of the realm of possibility.​

It's conceivable, sure. Likely? I don't think so. The evidence is how well the same idea worked with Vonleh last season.

The guy was 47th pick, a 2nd rounder. Not a bad flyer at that spot, but a 30MPG guy this year? Unless he's showing it in practice (we don't see that), he's not getting PT.

My observation is that 2nd rounders can develop into contributing players or even stars. The stars show it right away and earn minutes. The others develop by getting increased minutes over several seasons - see Crabbe. At least Crabbe shot .400 from 3pt as a rookie, a precursor of things to come. His minutes: 7/game, 13, 26, now 29.

Layman is shooting.227 from 3, the worst PER on the team, lowest TS%, poor DRtg, etc. If he showed he's good at any one thing that helps win games, please explain it to me.

If he were CJ, a highly regarded 1st round pick, acclaimed to be another Lillard, there might be a good case for big minutes right away. CJ was kind of buried behind Wes, who was a proven 2-way player with good size for a SG. He also missed a lot of games due to injury. He showed on the court, and in practice, he is more than good enough to start.

NO was willing to dump the starters and hand the starting spot to CJ, with the expectation he'd rise to it. I don't imagine a scenario where he's going to hand the job to Layman in a similar manner.

That's my analysis.

 

No.

I couldn't stand the Bulls owner and management anymore. No real commitment to winning, it was about being good enough to fill the seats and make money. Firing Thibs and badmouthing him on the way out was the last straw.

The Blazers are the opposite. Great owner, awesome management, players who are obviously good people, and they want to win.

Like it or not, with 20-20 hindsight, a move like trading for Aflallo is something the Bulls never would consider. Adding a quality player at a position of need to a contending team. That's trying to win. If the team tries to win, but fails, it's all in good faith.

I'm no fair weather fan. I made my allegiance right as LMA and the others left.