RealGM

Just throwing this out there, but there seems to be some indications that we are goingg to sort of shut things down a bit during the stretch run. I'm very much opposed to this. If you you want to cut minutes fine but I want our guys seeing consistant minutes where they are playing full force into the playoffs.

I don't want to repeat the mistake that Dallas made last year in taking easy and sitting players losing their mojo in the process. We seemed to see a similar thing in the NFL pre playoff weeks this year with all the idle-ing teams losing early.

I could be overreacting but I' just don't feel comfortable taking that chance.

They aren't gonna take much time off, just some rest, especially Ray's ankles and give the iron men Pierce and Garnett some well deserved rest.

UGA, you're not overreacting at all. I feel the same way. I think tonight's game against the Bucks struck a pretty good balance, with the starters playing solid minutes throughout the first three quarters and then letting the bench get some burn in the fourth. With the exception of tomorrow's game against Washington, I see that continuing down the stretch.

5 games left.

I see the starters getting around 20 minutes in the next 3 games (maybe even sitting one of the back-to-back), and upped to ~30 minutes for the final two games to make sure they're sharp for the playoffs.

^^ Exactly. Let the starters get the lead up to 20+, and then give the bench time to mesh. Works for me.

cough, cough

Still questioning the strategy we are using down the stretch. Is it really beneficial to substitute in a half ass pattern whil still trying to win the game. Why mess with a good thing.

OMG, I'm so sick of hearing these stupid comparisons to the '07 Mavericks. Guess what people, the 2007 WORLD CHAMPION SAN ANTONIO SPURS sat their big 3 for the final two games of the season. The Mavericks lost because they got outplayed by a team that matched up well with them. Plain and simple.

CelticsWhat! wrote:OMG, I'm so sick of hearing these stupid comparisons to the '07 Mavericks. Guess what people, the 2007 WORLD CHAMPION SAN ANTONIO SPURS sat their big 3 for the final two games of the season. The Mavericks lost because they got outplayed by a team that matched up well with them. Plain and simple.

The Spurs are a team with years of experience with each other and much playoff experience, I dont really see how they can be compared to this years Celtics?

The Celtics will be fine sitting people, I dont see ATL or Indy winning a game in round 1

Tricky Ricky wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



The Spurs are a team with years of experience with each other and much playoff experience, I dont really see how they can be compared to this years Celtics?

I'm not comparing them to this years Celtics. I'm saying it's stupid to compare the Mavericks to this years Celtics soley on the basis of resting starters. Rust wasn't what lost them that series.

CelticsWhat! wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



I'm not comparing them to this years Celtics. I'm saying it's stupid to compare the Mavericks to this years Celtics soley on the basis of resting starters. Rust wasn't what lost them that series.

Ya I dont like comparing teams either, and like you said rust wasnt what lost them that series

Tricky Ricky wrote:The Celtics will be fine sitting people, I dont see ATL or Indy winning a game in round 1

Ahh, the voice of reason.

There is a difference between the starters playing 20-25 min and them sitting the whole game.

We're fine...