Tribune: Thibodeau stresses players should play if .....

[kyrv]

I have to say Rose didn't really look healthy (just my eye test).

I think it's become a bigger deal because several times a player has returned for one game then sat out.

People, also, PLEASE stop comparing Rose to Jordan. Rose is not too big and too strong. He's a small player by NBA players and he's too banged up.

Before the game Wennington, who like us is not a doctor, but is around the team and sees him up close, said he would absolutely rest Rose the next TWO games (well last night would have been one).

Unfortunately I don't think the OP is being alarmist. It is something to watch with Thibs, has been since his Boston days.

I'm curious - whose fault is it? Is this on Gar Pax? Is it on Thibs? Is it on Rose? Is it on the doctors? Rose wanted to give it a go. The doctors cleared him. How does Rose react if Thibs doesn't trust him when he says he wants to give it a go? Do you remember the huge fight between Jordan and the Bulls organization over him coming back after his broken foot in his 2nd year in the league? I'm not sure his relationship with the team ever fully recovered.

A lot of people that are looking at the schedule and saying "look at who they are playing", they can beat NO or CHA without Rose. What do those arm-chair QBs say if Thibs sits Rose and the Bulls lose one of those games? I really don't think you can base your decision on the quality of the opponent. Maybe it should go the other way, play him in games that you have to win against the softies and sit him during tough games on the road against the top teams that they might lose anyway. That probably doesn't work either as fans might claim they would have won a game that they lost because they sit him.

It's easy for Wennington to say they should sit him. He won't suffer any consequences if they lose the game and end up missing out on the #1 seed by a game. More power to Bill if he can convince a team to actually put him in position to make these types of decisions. Good luck going against your star player if he is ever in such a spot.

By the way, have you seen any reports that state that Rose's recovery is going to take longer because he played 20 minutes against NO last night? Some posts are acting like this is the case. If it is merely that there was an unrealized risk that recovery might be longer, I think the argument is even more tenuous.

Great points. I'm not here to assign blame, and I think it's a group decision so I guess I'm assigning group blame so never mind not assigning blame. ;p

It is easy for Wennington to say, and it's easy for me to say after the blowout. I don't really know enough about the injury, but Rose didn't appear to be 100%. And we have the issue of several times someone coming back for just one game.

Having said this, this comment isn't about Rose playing last night, it's about Thib's philosophy with a season like this and a team that let's be honest, has players that suffer from injuries, it's a concern.

I agree with the premise that the healthiest contender standing has the best chance to win the title.

So to me it's a concern and something to keep an eye on. I'm not making any claims one way or the other. I don't know. I'll probably only know the results. I wish I could say there is zero chance a Bull plays when he should be resting and gets injured worse, but I don't see evidence to support that, in fact I see the opposite.

But again you ask good questions and make good points. Hopefully it will all be fine.

[DuckIII]

this thread tells me there must be no point to ever resting your players when they get banged up. Ever. Even in blowouts and even against bad teams when you can beat them by 20 without said player.

Actually, the majority of this thread is telling you that guys need to rest like nobodies business, and we should assume we won't get upset by lesser teams since evidently that never happens, and if it does, who cares.

The point is that it is obviously situational, and depends largely on internal information that we do not possess. The further point is that what Thibs is doing is not notably unconventional and that, moreover, no one seems to be concerned or crediting Thibs with his statement that he does take the rest part seriously, but addresses it on off days rather than in game minutes.

Doc Rivers agrees with everything Tom Thibodeau thinks as well.

Doc Rivers coaches a bunch of grandpas with chronic injuries.

[Illyria_United]

if a player can physically play and be effective (the way Deng is now) then there is no doubt that player should play.

[DuckIII]

Rose was moving like his back was stiff as a board. Cant believe anyone could defend playing him against freaking NO or CHA.

Yeah, those god damned doctors. Buncha quacks, they are.

I've never had back spasms. But I've seen dozens of NBA players over the years play with them, even getting in game treatment. Can you definitively tell me that someone with back spasm should absolutely not engage in physical activity? That this act inflames the problem and limits recovery? That advising an athlete to play limited minutes as a facilitator (which is clearly what Rose was doing last night) might actually help loosen up the muscles better than sitting idle?

I don't know the answer to any of these questions. They involve sports science and medicine. And require pointed and specific knowledge of the first hand information known internally.

I'm not defending it. I'm operating on the presumption that the Bulls medical staff is not committing malpractice with regard to the franchise player to win a regular season game against the Hornets.

[northbrookrich]

Great points. I'm not here to assign blame, and I think it's a group decision so I guess I'm assigning group blame so never mind not assigning blame. ;p

It is easy for Wennington to say, and it's easy for me to say after the blowout. I don't really know enough about the injury, but Rose didn't appear to be 100%. And we have the issue of several times someone coming back for just one game.

Having said this, this comment isn't about Rose playing last night, it's about Thib's philosophy with a season like this and a team that let's be honest, has players that suffer from injuries, it's a concern.

I agree with the premise that the healthiest contender standing has the best chance to win the title.

So to me it's a concern and something to keep an eye on. I'm not making any claims one way or the other. I don't know. I'll probably only know the results. I wish I could say there is zero chance a Bull plays when he should be resting and gets injured worse, but I don't see evidence to support that, in fact I see the opposite.

But again you ask good questions and make good points. Hopefully it will all be fine.

I think the next question to ask is the importance of the #1 seed. With an apparent injury prone team, perhaps the philosophy should be to make sure the players are healthy and rested vs. getting the #1 seed. That is a perfectly rationale philosophy. I just don't think people should expect to get it both ways. For those that are concerned that the team will be gassed or that they are more likely to be injured based on Thibs' philosophy, would you be critical if conservative usage of players led to a record that gives the Bulls a 3rd or 4th seed?

Personally, I think that is a great strategy if you are coaching verterans like the Celtics or Spurs (maybe even the Lakers). Those teams clearly need the rest and have the savvy veterans that (perhaps) could pull off an upset without home court advantage in a particular series. I'm not sure it is the strategy I would prefer for the Bulls - however, in hindsight it might prove to be the better choice if guys don't get healthy and they falter in the playoffs.

[kyrv]

Rose was moving like his back was stiff as a board. Cant believe anyone could defend playing him against freaking NO or CHA.

Yeah, those god damned doctors. Buncha quacks, they are.

I've never had back spasms. But I've seen dozens of NBA players over the years play with them, even getting in game treatment. Can you definitively tell me that someone with back spasm should absolutely not engage in physical activity? That this act inflames the problem and limits recovery? That advising an athlete to play limited minutes as a facilitator (which is clearly what Rose was doing last night) might actually help loosen up the muscles better than sitting idle?

I don't know the answer to any of these questions. They involve sports science and medicine. And require pointed and specific knowledge of the first hand information known internally.

I'm not defending it. I'm operating on the presumption that the Bulls medical staff is not committing malpractice with regard to the franchise player to win a regular season game against the Hornets.

I've had tons of back spams. OUCH. But, for me, there was a grand canyon sized area if I could play a sport or not.

I think what people are talking about is that there is a gap between cleared to play and close to 100%, myself I'm not talking about this injury but just a general philosophy.

I trust that Rose was cleared to play, and it was mentioned by allucryts that Rose may just not have been going balls to the wall because he didn't need to. People also noted last night that he did make several athletic moves and didn't scream afterwards. ;p

I'm kind of torn and in the middle, I think it's a concern but not questioning Rose playing.

And, the medical staff clearing a player and the player saying he can play, that does have to count for something.

[fleet]

Actually, the majority of this thread is telling you that guys need to rest like nobodies business,

could have fooled me Duck. I havent counted the posts pro and con, but I thought it was leaning your way.

and we should assume we won't get upset by lesser teams since evidently that never happens, and if it does, who cares.

Ha! But seriously, not that nobody cares. But thats an outcome that has to be accepted. Pro Sports has long been a place where athletes often push things too far, and are encouraged to do so often as well. The Bulls coach has gotten his point across to Derrick Rose I'm sure. Rose wants to please him. Its natural

The point is that it is obviously situational, and depends largely on internal information that we do not possess. The further point is that what Thibs is doing is not notably unconventional and that, moreover, no one seems to be concerned or crediting Thibs with his statement that he does take the rest part seriously, but addresses it on off days rather than in game minutes.

There is no rest like rest. There is no substitute for bed rest or inactivity to heal up. My doctor is telling me this each month I visit him while I am recuperating. He doesn't tell me that I can just get extra treatment when I'm not exerting myself. He tells me to shut it down.

Doc Rivers coaches a bunch of grandpas with chronic injuries.

something of a point that was lost on Tom Thibaaa. Which comports with his never say sit attitude here in Chicago.

[kyrv]

Great points. I'm not here to assign blame, and I think it's a group decision so I guess I'm assigning group blame so never mind not assigning blame. ;p

It is easy for Wennington to say, and it's easy for me to say after the blowout. I don't really know enough about the injury, but Rose didn't appear to be 100%. And we have the issue of several times someone coming back for just one game.

Having said this, this comment isn't about Rose playing last night, it's about Thib's philosophy with a season like this and a team that let's be honest, has players that suffer from injuries, it's a concern.

I agree with the premise that the healthiest contender standing has the best chance to win the title.

So to me it's a concern and something to keep an eye on. I'm not making any claims one way or the other. I don't know. I'll probably only know the results. I wish I could say there is zero chance a Bull plays when he should be resting and gets injured worse, but I don't see evidence to support that, in fact I see the opposite.

But again you ask good questions and make good points. Hopefully it will all be fine.

I think the next question to ask is the importance of the #1 seed. With an apparent injury prone team, perhaps the philosophy should be to make sure the players are healthy and rested vs. getting the #1 seed. That is a perfectly rationale philosophy. I just don't think people should expect to get it both ways. For those that are concerned that the team will be gassed or that they are more likely to be injured based on Thibs' philosophy, would you be critical if conservative usage of players led to a record that gives the Bulls a 3rd or 4th seed?

Personally, I think that is a great strategy if you are coaching verterans like the Celtics or Spurs (maybe even the Lakers). Those teams clearly need the rest and have the savvy veterans that (perhaps) could pull off an upset without home court advantage in a particular series. I'm not sure it is the strategy I would prefer for the Bulls - however, in hindsight it might prove to be the better choice if guys don't get healthy and they falter in the playoffs.

...and I think the Bulls think the #1 seed is huge. And that's hard to argue.

As I said I'm kind of in the middle. I don't want the players treated like fragile snowflakes or like old geezers, but, just, let's have the big picture in mind.

Having a player cleared by a doctor, the coach, and the player, if he can play, yes that's kind of hard to argue to just sit him. Probably big picture also have to be careful of the culture that creates. I guess we have to trust them to be medically sound and Thibs and the player use common sense when a player is better suited not playing.

So, hard to argue the points of yourself and Duck. I am probably a little paranoid about injuries and Rose being banged up much of the time is worrisome.

[Ron Harper]

here is the quote...he's a stanley cup winning coach btw


John Tortorella: “I have a tough time seeing players in the trainers room every day getting rubbed, and they’re sore, and they’re getting this done, that done. I think athletes can create more problems for themselves than there really is. I think that’s part of a mindset.”

And that's why basketball players have longer careers now than they did twenty years ago -- they spend less time taking care of their bodies in the training room.

Twenty years ago they were all like, ice this, stim that . . . have to take care of your knees.

Now days players are much smarter and steer clear of trainers.

Or is it the opposite of that?

Not sure what you are trying to say here. I'm thinking you didn't understand the quote though.

[DuckIII]

Ha! But seriously, not that nobody cares. But thats an outcome that has to be accepted. Pro Sports has long been a place where athletes often push things too far, and are encouraged to do so often as well. The Bulls coach has gotten his point across to Derrick Rose I'm sure. Rose wants to please him. Its natural

Speculation. The existence of a medical staff is in place to mitigate against this. And we know that they will hold players out, because many, many Bulls players (including Rose) have been held out this year.

Granted, the unfortunate saga of Luol Deng's leg gives me pause, but by all accounts that appears to have been a sincere misdiagnosis rather than an intentional effort to force Deng to play against medical advice.

There is no rest like rest. There is no substitute for bed rest or inactivity to heal up. My doctor is telling me this each month I visit him while I am recuperating. He doesn't tell me that I can just get extra treatment when I'm not exerting myself. He tells me to shut it down.

Back spasms is what Rose has.

something of a point that was lost on Tom Thibaaa. Which comports with his never say sit attitude here in Chicago.

So now we need to rest him so he doesn't get chronic injuries in his mid-30s?

[fleet]

Speculation. The existence of a medical staff is in place to mitigate against this. And we know that they will hold players out, because many, many Bulls players (including Rose) have been held out this year.

Granted, the unfortunate saga of Luol Deng's leg gives me pause, but by all accounts that appears to have been a sincere misdiagnosis rather than an intentional effort to force Deng to play against medical advice.

I'm not saying he is being encouraged to ignore medical advice. The medical advice in this case appears to be to defer to the players own judgement. And I'm saying the Bulls coach has a great deal of influence over that judgement if he chose to excercise that influence. Actually, I'm thinking Coach Thibs has gotten his message across to Rose, and Rose has been very keen to accept it. And many players are known to push things to far, and have admitted that if they had to do things over again they would have taken it more easy. Which is easier said than done under the pressure to play in pro sports. My point is, take your chances to heal against the bad teams. Don't push to play up by 20 in the 4th.

Back spasms is what Rose has.

Thats nothing to sneeze at. That kind of thing can indeed become a chronic problem

So now we need to rest him so he doesn't get chronic injuries in his mid-30s?

Well sure, but no, we need to rest him mainly so that he is fresh free and easy for the stretch and playoffs

[kyrv]

I'm not saying he is being encouraged to ignore medical advice. The medical advice in this case appears to be to defer to the players own judgement. And I'm saying the Bulls coach has a great deal of influence over that judgement if he chose to excercise that influence.

Ah, you have nailed my concern. While I'm in the middle and default to trusting the medical staff, there seem to be just an odd amount of times this season where it is up to the player.

Which, maybe we shouldn't care about, but I think players don't always make the best decisions, because they want to play. They frankly aren't objective.

Very good summary of what to me seems like it's happening a freaky amount of times. Now granted maybe in those cases, we can say, well the player HAS been cleared. Still, I don't know. If they tell a player it's up to him, that seems very different from "you are fine and should play".

[Rerisen]

Thibodeau disagreed with his own head coach in Boston about how long to run their main guys in the regular season. The story has been recounted numerous times. Thibs wanted to go all out for regular season wins, HCA, what have you, and Doc, having an older team, wanted to scale back with more of a Popovich approach (who has actually sat guys entire games for no reason other than more rest- is he just a moron?).

As we know the Celtics went on to lose in the Finals in the final game, while being without Perkins. We can't say Doc's prevailing strategy caused them to do better for sure, but I think most reviews of the situation paint him as having made the right call.

Now the Bulls are a much younger team, and thus we can argue such rest matters less. Or we can take each game and situation on it's own merits, (I thought Rose's use was fine last night, have not liked others such as guys in very late up 20+).

But with the Boston account in hand, it would be silly to argue that Thibs is just doing what any other coach would and does do. By example, we can see that coaches don't always have the same philosophy.

[blumeany]

NBA Executive Vice Presidents, General Managers, Coaches, Trainers, Medical Staff, Agents - people whose jobs could be adversely effected by endangering their franchise player through overplaying him and playing him while he is hurt. These people are all in 'the know' and know exactly what is going on. They have looked at all the information and have helped determine whether your favorite player goes out onto the court night after night and for how long.

RealGM posters, sportscasters, pundits, radio hosts, blog writers - people whose lives are minimally impacted by whether their favorite/star player is playing injured or playing too much. These people are generally NOT in the know. They do NOT have detailed information on the players condition. They have not spoken with the player in private or hung around them long enough to fully evaluate their condition. At worst, these people will be mentally crushed should their favorite/star player go down to injury or not be able to take their team to the championship.

Who am I to trust? To believe?

[kyrv]

Thibodeau disagreed with his own head coach in Boston about how long to run their main guys in the regular season. The story has been recounted numerous times. Thibs wanted to go all out for regular season wins, HCA, what have you, and Doc, having an older team, wanted to scale back with more of a Popovich approach (who has actually sat guys entire games for no reason other than more rest- is he just a moron?).

As we know the Celtics went on to lose in the Finals in the final game, while being without Perkins. We can't say Doc's prevailing strategy caused them to do better for sure, but I think most reviews of the situation paint him as having made the right call.

Now the Bulls are a much younger team, and thus we can argue such rest matters less. Or we can take each game and situation on it's own merits, (I thought Rose's use was fine last night, have not liked others such as guys in very late up 20+).

But with the Boston account in hand, it would be silly to argue that Thibs is just doing what any other coach would and does do. By example, we can see that coaches don't always have the same philosophy.

Well stated. It's something that we can ignore but it's a 'thing'.

Granted, what Thibs said is what he should say to the paying public, but, it's very possible if not likely that he's being 100% honest. Something to keep an eye on.

[fleet]

Thibodeau disagreed with his own head coach in Boston about how long to run their main guys in the regular season. The story has been recounted numerous times. Thibs wanted to go all out for regular season wins, HCA, what have you, and Doc, having an older team, wanted to scale back with more of a Popovich approach (who has actually sat guys entire games for no reason other than more rest- is he just a moron?).

As we know the Celtics went on to lose in the Finals in the final game, while being without Perkins. We can't say Doc's prevailing strategy caused them to do better for sure, but I think most reviews of the situation paint him as having made the right call.

Now the Bulls are a much younger team, and thus we can argue such rest matters less. Or we can take each game and situation on it's own merits, (I thought Rose's use was fine last night, have not liked others such as guys in very late up 20+).

But with the Boston account in hand, it would be silly to argue that Thibs is just doing what any other coach would and does do. By example, we can see that coaches don't always have the same philosophy.

with the Boston account, and now the Chicago account, we can see that Thibs might be 180 degrees different from some other coaches with regard to situationally playing certain guys. Recognize that possibility. Many coaches have one blind spot or another. Its questionable, and reasonable to wonder about it.

[Rerisen]

Should add, if Thibs priority is Home Court Advantage vs the Heat (even vs Thunder, who knows), I'm in total agreement with him as to it's importance.

If the choice is HCA throughout the playoffs at the cost of 100 more minutes for Derrick and Deng, give me the HCA.

But I think you can do both, and that so far, that hasn't been the choice being disagreed over in most cases. Where I find myself disagreeing with Thibs at times, is at the point at which some games are effectively won.

[Trm3]

Rose only played 22 minutes.

But Rose's mentality is like MJ's, he will play if he can. How many games did MJ play in his career that other players would have sat for?

No one can tell Derrick Rose how hurt he is, if there is nothing medically preventing him from playing. Only he knows how he feels and if he is capable.

The best Thibs can do is perhaps give Derrick a light minutes night if he suspects Derrick is being over eager. Well last night at least, he had a light night.

Plus, if anyone really paid attention they would have seen Rose taking it easy in last nights game. The guy WANTS to play..

Back spasms are what they are..they'll flare up only to go away, it's not like by playing he's gonna break his back.

[kyrv]

NBA Executive Vice Presidents, General Managers, Coaches, Trainers, Medical Staff, Agents - people whose jobs could be adversely effected by endangering their franchise player through overplaying him and playing him while he is hurt. These people are all in 'the know' and know exactly what is going on. They have looked at all the information and have helped determine whether your favorite player goes out onto the court night after night and for how long.

RealGM posters, sportscasters, pundits, radio hosts, blog writers - people whose lives are minimally impacted by whether their favorite/star player is playing injured or playing too much. These people are generally NOT in the know. They do NOT have detailed information on the players condition. They have not spoken with the player in private or hung around them long enough to fully evaluate their condition. At worst, these people will be mentally crushed should their favorite/star player go down to injury or not be able to take their team to the championship.

Who am I to trust? To believe?

I think there a couple different topics here.

There has been a rash of medical treatment posts here latey. A ton. I don't agree with those. Saying on Tuesday Rose should not play for 5 days. Kind of crazy.

I think a lot of good points have been made in this thread (without pretend medical knowledge), by Duck and nycrich on one side for example and Re and fleet on the other.

[fleet]

Thibodeau disagreed with his own head coach in Boston about how long to run their main guys in the regular season. The story has been recounted numerous times. Thibs wanted to go all out for regular season wins, HCA, what have you, and Doc, having an older team, wanted to scale back with more of a Popovich approach (who has actually sat guys entire games for no reason other than more rest- is he just a moron?).

As we know the Celtics went on to lose in the Finals in the final game, while being without Perkins. We can't say Doc's prevailing strategy caused them to do better for sure, but I think most reviews of the situation paint him as having made the right call.

Now the Bulls are a much younger team, and thus we can argue such rest matters less. Or we can take each game and situation on it's own merits, (I thought Rose's use was fine last night, have not liked others such as guys in very late up 20+).

But with the Boston account in hand, it would be silly to argue that Thibs is just doing what any other coach would and does do. By example, we can see that coaches don't always have the same philosophy.

Well stated. It's something that we can ignore but it's a 'thing'.

Granted, what Thibs said is what he should say to the paying public, but, it's very possible if not likely that he's being 100% honest. Something to keep an eye on.

He certainly knows what he is supposed to say.
I don't want to question the veracity of his statements. Like George Costanza would say, Tom, its not a lie if YOU believe it. His interpertation of his own terms is what could be a little weird or extreme.