Moderators: fatlever, JDR720, Diop, BigSlam, yosemiteben
bws94 wrote:Starters have to build lead, not leave it up to the bench. It's a concerning pattern. It didn't happen yesterday but yesterday wasn't the normal lineups. Starters seem flat in the 1st and play from a deficit, Kemba starts bringing them back, bench slowly builds lead and then it's trade baskets into the half. 3rd starters are usually much better. That needs to stop happening.
spaceballer wrote:[tweet]https://twitter.com/hornets/status/677976292705222656[/tweet]
https://twitter.com/hornets/status/677976292705222656
Sauce_Castillo wrote:bws94 wrote:Starters have to build lead, not leave it up to the bench. It's a concerning pattern. It didn't happen yesterday but yesterday wasn't the normal lineups. Starters seem flat in the 1st and play from a deficit, Kemba starts bringing them back, bench slowly builds lead and then it's trade baskets into the half. 3rd starters are usually much better. That needs to stop happening.
I think this will correct itself when Jefferson comes back.
sidestep wrote:Sauce_Castillo wrote:bws94 wrote:Starters have to build lead, not leave it up to the bench. It's a concerning pattern. It didn't happen yesterday but yesterday wasn't the normal lineups. Starters seem flat in the 1st and play from a deficit, Kemba starts bringing them back, bench slowly builds lead and then it's trade baskets into the half. 3rd starters are usually much better. That needs to stop happening.
I think this will correct itself when Jefferson comes back.
Actually, the 3Q starters are not "usually much better" than in the 1Q -- the starters have regularly stunk it up in the 3Q for much of the season.
These are the quarter splits for the first 24 games (and excludes the recent Raptors game because Lin was moved to starters, which is irregular):
NetRtg across quarters:
1Q: +2.7
2Q: +14.6
3Q: -8.3
4Q: +10.5
http://stats.nba.com/team/#!/1610612766/stats/advanced/?Season=2015-16&SeasonType=Regular%20Season&Period=1&DateFrom=10%2F28%2F2015&DateTo=12%2F16%2F2015
The pattern has been that the starters, who play most of the 1Q, do not achieve much positive separation. Then in the 2Q, the 2nd unit is largely responsible for a huge +14.6 NetRtg. Then the starters play most of the 3Q and leave a significant deficit, resulting in a NetRtg of -8.3. (Even when the deficit keeps growing in the 3Q, Cliff is rigid with his rotations and will stick with them for too long, regardless of how flat they are playing.)
The 4Q is hard to analyze because the closing lineups are varied and mixed, and the 4Q includes garbage time.
This is probably the only winning team in the league in which the bench often outperforms the starters, and the bench makes many of the comebacks.
It is difficult to play from behind, because you have to take more risks to "make something happen." Hero-balling, along with chucking early in the shot clock, happens more often when the team is behind because players want to bring the team back ASAP. And if the shots miss, then the sense of urgency increases and it becomes a vicious cycle, and they have to keep forcing the issue, especially when they must play at a pace that is faster than they are used to, and faster than they can execute properly, in order to cut the deficit.
It is really important to get significant separation in the 1Q, because it's tough to play from behind. Good teams don't win by being 'clutch' in the 4Q but rather by not needing to be clutch at all, because they achieved separation before the endgame.
sidestep wrote:Sauce_Castillo wrote:bws94 wrote:Starters have to build lead, not leave it up to the bench. It's a concerning pattern. It didn't happen yesterday but yesterday wasn't the normal lineups. Starters seem flat in the 1st and play from a deficit, Kemba starts bringing them back, bench slowly builds lead and then it's trade baskets into the half. 3rd starters are usually much better. That needs to stop happening.
I think this will correct itself when Jefferson comes back.
Actually, the 3Q starters are not "usually much better" than in the 1Q -- the starters have regularly stunk it up in the 3Q for much of the season.
These are the quarter splits for the first 24 games (and excludes the recent Raptors game because Lin was moved to starters, which is irregular):
NetRtg across quarters:
1Q: +2.7
2Q: +14.6
3Q: -8.3
4Q: +10.5
http://stats.nba.com/team/#!/1610612766/stats/advanced/?Season=2015-16&SeasonType=Regular%20Season&Period=1&DateFrom=10%2F28%2F2015&DateTo=12%2F16%2F2015
The pattern has been that the starters, who play most of the 1Q, do not achieve much positive separation. Then in the 2Q, the 2nd unit is largely responsible for a huge +14.6 NetRtg. Then the starters play most of the 3Q and leave a significant deficit, resulting in a NetRtg of -8.3. (Even when the deficit keeps growing in the 3Q, Cliff is rigid with his rotations and will stick with them for too long, regardless of how flat they are playing.)
The 4Q is hard to analyze because the closing lineups are varied and mixed, and the 4Q includes garbage time.
This is probably the only winning team in the league in which the bench often outperforms the starters, and the bench makes many of the comebacks.
It is difficult to play from behind, because you have to take more risks to "make something happen." Hero-balling, along with chucking early in the shot clock, happens more often when the team is behind because players want to bring the team back ASAP. And if the shots miss, then the sense of urgency increases and it becomes a vicious cycle, and they have to keep forcing the issue, especially when they must play at a pace that is faster than they are used to, and faster than they can execute properly, in order to cut the deficit.
It is really important to get significant separation in the 1Q, because it's tough to play from behind. Good teams don't win by being 'clutch' in the 4Q but rather by not needing to be clutch at all, because they achieved separation before the endgame.
Flip Murray wrote:sidestep wrote:Sauce_Castillo wrote:
I think this will correct itself when Jefferson comes back.
Actually, the 3Q starters are not "usually much better" than in the 1Q -- the starters have regularly stunk it up in the 3Q for much of the season.
These are the quarter splits for the first 24 games (and excludes the recent Raptors game because Lin was moved to starters, which is irregular):
NetRtg across quarters:
1Q: +2.7
2Q: +14.6
3Q: -8.3
4Q: +10.5
http://stats.nba.com/team/#!/1610612766/stats/advanced/?Season=2015-16&SeasonType=Regular%20Season&Period=1&DateFrom=10%2F28%2F2015&DateTo=12%2F16%2F2015
The pattern has been that the starters, who play most of the 1Q, do not achieve much positive separation. Then in the 2Q, the 2nd unit is largely responsible for a huge +14.6 NetRtg. Then the starters play most of the 3Q and leave a significant deficit, resulting in a NetRtg of -8.3. (Even when the deficit keeps growing in the 3Q, Cliff is rigid with his rotations and will stick with them for too long, regardless of how flat they are playing.)
The 4Q is hard to analyze because the closing lineups are varied and mixed, and the 4Q includes garbage time.
This is probably the only winning team in the league in which the bench often outperforms the starters, and the bench makes many of the comebacks.
It is difficult to play from behind, because you have to take more risks to "make something happen." Hero-balling, along with chucking early in the shot clock, happens more often when the team is behind because players want to bring the team back ASAP. And if the shots miss, then the sense of urgency increases and it becomes a vicious cycle, and they have to keep forcing the issue, especially when they must play at a pace that is faster than they are used to, and faster than they can execute properly, in order to cut the deficit.
It is really important to get significant separation in the 1Q, because it's tough to play from behind. Good teams don't win by being 'clutch' in the 4Q but rather by not needing to be clutch at all, because they achieved separation before the endgame.
Sounds like the only solution is to play the bench 48 minutes per night. Either that or petition the league to remove the third quarter from games entirely
fatlever wrote:Maybe, just maybe, the bench unit wouldn't have a net positive rating if they played against the other team's starters every night. I know that's an crazy theory, but one worth considering. And even crazier than that, perhaps if the starters played against the other team's bench every night they might have a better positive rating. Again, just spit-balling theories here...
Seriously, not sure why this is a conversation. The strength of the team is our depth. We don't have any superstars or franchise players, but we have great depth and chemistry. Our starters are average compared to other starting groups around the league. Our bench is above average compared to other bench groups around the league. Makes sense that our bench would have a better net rating.
fatlever wrote:Maybe, just maybe, the bench unit wouldn't have a net positive rating if they played against the other team's starters every night. I know that's an crazy theory, but one worth considering. And even crazier than that, perhaps if the starters played against the other team's bench every night they might have a better positive rating. Again, just spit-balling theories here...
Seriously, not sure why this is a conversation. The strength of the team is our depth. We don't have any superstars or franchise players, but we have great depth and chemistry. Our starters are average compared to other starting groups around the league. Our bench is above average compared to other bench groups around the league. Makes sense that our bench would have a better net rating.