Winning Texas Triangle = Worst thing to happen for this team

[Bad-Thoma]

It was a shame that we opened up a can of whoop ass on Texas, are pretty much a lock for home court until the finals, and have a chance to try to incorparate the new veterans into the second unit. Yawn. Next I'm going to bitch about a free blow job.

[billfromBoston]

I think the gripe about "experimenting" is a legit one, and is more than just typical reactionary blabber.

Doc has definitely gone to some odd rotations recently, where he's playing 4 or 5 bench players at a time. I don't like it, because 1) it costs us games in the short term, and 2) doesn't build any chemistry, because the bench players aren't going to be playing with four other bench players should we reach the playoffs.

I think we need to mix the bench players -- especially Cassell and P.J. -- in with the starters, and use them situationally like we would in the playoffs. I think that's the best way to utilize them for the remainder of the season, rather than these odd-ball experimental lineups.

That being said, I don't blame the loss on Doc. It's just something he's doing in the games that I think is counter-productive.

...Hobbs, I think your making a great deal of assumption here about what is "good" and "bad" for the team..

Playing subs doesn't "cost games", the team lost to Philly, that's a one game sample and can't even be directly attributed to this with certainty..secondly, playing the subs extended minutes is the best way to maximize their time on the court against competition...the team runs the same offense and defense for all the players and the subs ARE playing with the starters at points even when they stay on beyond their expected usage...

Look at it this way...the team can go 7-5 the rest of the way and they've locked home court throughout...I think its far more valuable to rest the starters, get practice times in, and get minutes for the subs so they are sharper for the playoffs...

...the team isn't going to forget how to play and the starters are still going to be getting 25-30 mpg and playing with the subs they'll be working with in the playoffs...they will just sit longer..

[billfromBoston]

They shouldn't be coasting because they haven't clinched home court yet and Doc should be experimenting, but not with lineups he has no intention of using in the playoffs. Doc said that he won't be using 5 bench players at the same time in the playoffs, so why waste time experimenting with it. Experiment with lineups you intend to use so Sam and PJ can properly adjust and get used to the players that will actually be on the floor with them.

By not using all bench players and using Sam and PJ in proper lineups, you get the two guys integrated while still winning games until home court is clinched. After the clinching, Doc can throw out there whoever he wants.

I couldn't agree more. If this was Celticsblog, I'd give you a tommy point. This is exactly right.

...see, its not "exactly right" its what "feels" right to you because the team lost a game it "should have" won using unfamiliar rotation patterns...

...I'll tell you this right now...Brown, Powe, TA, House, and Cassell aren't going to get the time on the court they need playing 10 minutes a game...if execution in those 10+ playoff minutes is essential come playoff time, they are far more likely to accomplish that by getting more playing time now and getting into a flow...

Let's put it this way...if the Celtics lose home court over the next 12 games (6-6 with Detroit winning every game) and then they struggle in the playoffs and lose in the first round or get blown away in the 2nd or 3rd, then i'll agree it was a bad idea and that this was the cause..

..until then, can we agree that its a bit presumptuous to say concretely that its a negative?

[billfromBoston]

..i'd also like to add that the timing of the "experimental lineups" is also important...the starters played heavy minutes to start the game and they finished the game against Philly as well...the bench was playing very well into the 4th, that's the only reason they played that long to begin with...the benches success most likely added to the starters rust when they came in, but its unlikely that they'd sit en-mass that long in any other game..

Starters 1st and 4th

Bench 2nd and 3rd

Playoff rotations will be mixed in during the transitions in the 2nd and 3rd quarters...the bench time will just be longer on the court during that middle time...

[RoyHobbs]

Again, I'm not that worried about the loss to Philly; while Doc stuck with the crazy lineups too long, the starters had a chance to win that game, and they didn't.

However, to suggest that playing these lineups doesn't potentially cost us games is silly. We're giving increased minutes who aren't as good; that makes us more likely to lose. I'm not sure what the quibble is.

In regards to the bench, by all means, play them increased minutes, and rest the starters more. Just play the players in situations where they're going to contribute in the playoffs. Doc has admitted he's not going to be utilizing these combos in the playoffs, so I don't see the utility in emphasizing them now.

Get Cassell run with some of the starters, if you want him to learn to run the offense. I mean, it's brutal watching him out there with four guys who can't do much offensively for themselves. What's Cassell supposed to do? How do the increased minutes help him, playing with TA, BBD, Powe, and House? None of those guys play to Cassell's strengths. Playing with maybe two of them at the same time is to be expected; that's Cassell's role. But all four of them? It just seems counterproductive.

As for P.J., I'm getting a little tired of people using him as an example of the necessity of Doc's "experimenting". I agree, P.J. needs minutes. He needs minutes more than any player on the team. So why, pray tell, was he a DNP-CD last night, especially with Posey out?

I guess where the two sides differ is, those who support Doc's position seem to see things very much in black and white: it's either Doc's right, or you play the starters 40 minutes. Isn't there a middle ground, where you play the starters 25 - 30 minutes per night, but you mix their minutes with the bench? If you play the starters together the first 8 minutes of the game, and the last 8, that still gives you roughly 12 minutes per player that can be mixed and matched with the bench.

I'm of the personal belief that bench players perform better (both in terms of winning and individually) when they're surrounded by great players. I think over time, the numbers bear this out, especially in terms of winning percentage. Teams that play their bench in "lines" or "units" tend to get outscored more than their counterparts.

As far as me being too concrete, it's a message board; I give opinions. I fully concede that I could be wrong. However, after watching Doc pull the same stunt in preseason last year, and vividly remembering how little chemistry we had for the first couple weeks in the regular season, I'm a little more worried than I would like to be.

[billfromBoston]

Again, I'm not that worried about the loss to Philly; while Doc stuck with the crazy lineups too long, the starters had a chance to win that game, and they didn't.

However, to suggest that playing these lineups doesn't potentially cost us games is silly. We're giving increased minutes who aren't as good; that makes us more likely to lose. I'm not sure what the quibble is.

In regards to the bench, by all means, play them increased minutes, and rest the starters more. Just play the players in situations where they're going to contribute in the playoffs. Doc has admitted he's not going to be utilizing these combos in the playoffs, so I don't see the utility in emphasizing them now.

Get Cassell run with some of the starters, if you want him to learn to run the offense. I mean, it's brutal watching him out there with four guys who can't do much offensively for themselves. What's Cassell supposed to do? How do the increased minutes help him, playing with TA, BBD, Powe, and House? None of those guys play to Cassell's strengths. Playing with maybe two of them at the same time is to be expected; that's Cassell's role. But all four of them? It just seems counterproductive.

As for P.J., I'm getting a little tired of people using him as an example of the necessity of Doc's "experimenting". I agree, P.J. needs minutes. He needs minutes more than any player on the team. So why, pray tell, was he a DNP-CD last night, especially with Posey out?

I guess where the two sides differ is, those who support Doc's position seem to see things very much in black and white: it's either Doc's right, or you play the starters 40 minutes. Isn't there a middle ground, where you play the starters 25 - 30 minutes per night, but you mix their minutes with the bench? If you play the starters together the first 8 minutes of the game, and the last 8, that still gives you roughly 12 minutes per player that can be mixed and matched with the bench.

I'm of the personal belief that bench players perform better (both in terms of winning and individually) when they're surrounded by great players. I think over time, the numbers bear this out, especially in terms of winning percentage. Teams that play their bench in "lines" or "units" tend to get outscored more than their counterparts.

As far as me being too concrete, it's a message board; I give opinions. I fully concede that I could be wrong. However, after watching Doc pull the same stunt in preseason last year, and vividly remembering how little chemistry we had for the first couple weeks in the regular season, I'm a little more worried than I would like to be.

...that's exactly it though...the bench players DID play with the starters a bit last night, when the first subs were made they weren't made as a 5 man switch-up...there was a transition that saw both groups mixed, it happened again in the 2nd half:

http://www.popcornmachine.net/cgi-bin/g ... ame=PHIBOS

...the intervals are longer for the bench players and there are "experimenting" lineups throughout, but the rotation subs did indeed play with the starters and many, many "playoff possible" groups were used...

[RoyHobbs]

How long were those stints? Except for Powe, about two minutes a piece (both from memory and the game flow). I think that's much less significant than the two approximately 6 - 7 minute stints where the bench was on the floor as a 5-man unit.

Again, instead of mass-substituting, I think it makes more sense to break those stints up to the point where the bench is never playing more any significant amount of time without one of the starters in there. It's possible to both rest the starters and to make sure that the bench is getting minutes in game situations. In the last game (with the exception of Powe) that didn't really happen much.

[PPAW4Life]

I just think we proved we can put beat the best winning the texas triangle, but we gave 2 of those wins away with those losses to the Hornets and Sixers.

We had both games WON.

Giving games away is not a cause for applause.

[Texas Longhorns]

The Texas Triangle wins helped you guys a lot. Now you have proved and there are no arguments that you guys are the best team currently in the NBA. I continued to doubt you, but now you are a legit championship contender this year.

[billfromBoston]

How long were those stints? Except for Powe, about two minutes a piece (both from memory and the game flow). I think that's much less significant than the two approximately 6 - 7 minute stints where the bench was on the floor as a 5-man unit.

Again, instead of mass-substituting, I think it makes more sense to break those stints up to the point where the bench is never playing more any significant amount of time without one of the starters in there. It's possible to both rest the starters and to make sure that the bench is getting minutes in game situations. In the last game (with the exception of Powe) that didn't really happen much.

...so you're telling me that much more frequent substitutions would be favorable to long stints with the bench? I'm not understanding you...if you don't agree with the premise that getting the bench players longer stints of game action is a good idea, I can understand that. But I can't understand how you can accomplish both:

-Resting starters
-Increasing bench minutes

...without playing the bench players and sitting the starters for certain stretches in the game. The starters played with the bench guys, and these "2-3" minute stretches added up to the 10-12 minutes that they'd actually be used...Doc is determining what players are going to make the rotation for the playoffs and in what combos and for what amount of time...if he felt that there was nothing left to see he wouldn't be doing it, but clearly he has some un-answered questions he looking to answer before playoff time...

...as the game flow shows, they weren't "mass substitutions" but transition substitutions that eventually led to a group of bench players on the floor...

I'm just not seeing how you can play the starters reduced minutes AND avoid playing the bench players longer minutes...you'd have to designate a quarter for each "bench sub" lineup and allow on or two starters to sit the whole time while the other starters played extended minutes with the subs...this limits the amount of different combos and takes the starters out of their normal playing stint lengths, which is more important than sitting for longer stints IMO...

..won't matter, we'll have the "normal rotation" going on for today and tomorrow's games...the team needs a combination of 7 wins and losses the rest of the way and I don't see how they're not going to lock this up considering the paltry competition beyond these next two games...

[RoyHobbs]

I'm just not seeing how you can play the starters reduced minutes AND avoid playing the bench players longer minutes.

I've explained this previously, but if you want to get the bench increased minutes, while still mixing them with the starters, it's not that hard.

I'm speaking in generalities here, meaning it deviates on a game-to-game basis. Broadly, though, I like a situation down the stretch where the starters get around 28 minutes each, and five bench players in each game get 20 minutes (Doc should be able to settle on a 5 man bench rotation, and use the remaining 2 guys only situationally).

Play the starters for the first 6 minutes of each half. That leaves 16 remaining minutes, for each of the starters. Under that scenario, the rest of the game can easily be covered where at least on member of the "big three" is on the court at all times, with overlap where 2 of the big three is playing with the bench at times. That says nothing of the combined 32 minutes that Perk and Rondo could be getting with the bench guys, as well.

I'm not sure why so many fairly intelligent posters are having problems with the concept that you can play the bench increased minutes *and* play those players with some of the starters for a large percentage of their time in there. From the game flows you presented, at least 75% of the time any individual bench player (other than Powe) was on the floor, he was surrounded by 4 other bench players. There's no need for that. Play the guys in game situations, to prepare them for the playoffs.

..won't matter, we'll have the "normal rotation" going on for today and tomorrow's games..

I'm skeptical of this, based upon Doc's own words on how he intends to utilize the bench down the stretch. Still, we'll see.

[RoyHobbs]

..won't matter, we'll have the "normal rotation" going on for today and tomorrow's games...the team needs a combination of 7 wins and losses the rest of the way and I don't see how they're not going to lock this up considering the paltry competition beyond these next two games...

Good call, at least related to tonight's game.

[Truthiracy]

Worst thing for a team is winning?