2013-2014 NBA Thread - IND @ WAS and OKC @ LAC on ESPN

Status
Not open for further replies.
Have Butler and Thabo been better though? The numbers say other wise.

Jeremy Lamb: 13.4 PER, 3.3 WS, 43% from the field
Perry Jones: 10.1 PER, 1.5 WS, 46% from the field
Caron Butler: 11.9 PER, 1.6 WS, 39% from the field, 34% in the playoffs
Thabo Sefolosha: 10.4 PER, 3.0 WS, 41% from the field, 33% in the playoffs

There have proven at worst to be just as good, so why not give them a chance and see what they have given the offensive struggles this team is going through.

He had no problem giving a young Reggie Jackson a chance when Russ went down last year over the vet Fisher, don't know why he won't now. Reggie played 14 min a game that season before jumping to 33 min in the playoffs and performed quite well.

I agree. I'm just saying that's why Brooks is probably rolling with the vets because despite the numbers, the vets have "experience" and that can't be quantified. And for all the hate brooks gets, his track record suggest that for the most part his rotations work.

Jackson was the clear cut back up PG which is why he had to make Jackson the starter when Fisher went down. He (nor any other coach) would feel comfortable starting fisher this late in his career i'm sure :lol:
 
I have no idea why people are focused on the play, we have no idea what play Scott Brooks drew up.


He didn't foul, down 2, with sub 3 second shot clock differential.


TWICE.


That is just flagrantly incompetent.
 
laugh.gif
  Honesty.

I missed this because I was doing the same thing they were doing:

 
I agree. I'm just saying that's why Brooks is probably rolling with the vets because despite the numbers, the vets have "experience" and that can't be quantified. And for all the hate brooks gets, his track record suggest that for the most part his rotations work.

Jackson was the clear cut back up PG which is why he had to make Jackson the starter when Fisher went down. He (nor any other coach) would feel comfortable starting fisher this late in his career i'm sure :lol:

Jackson was actually 3rd on the depth chart according to RealGM. I don't see how it was clear cut when he and Fish were both playing 14 minutes a game during the season. And if "experience" counts and can't be quantified why would he go with Reggie instead of Fish?
 
Jackson was actually 3rd on the depth chart according to RealGM. I don't see how it was clear cut when he and Fish were both playing 14 minutes a game during the season. And if "experience" counts and can't be quantified why would he go with Reggie instead of Fish?

Because out of those two, he probably felt more comfortable starting Reggie and giving him extended minutes, as opposed to Fisher. Much Younger, and to a degree mirrors Westbrook's impact on the team more than Fisher.
 
Because out of those two, he probably felt more comfortable starting Reggie and giving him extended minutes, as opposed to Fisher. Much Younger, and to a degree mirrors Westbrook's impact on the team more than Fisher.

So in not even giving extended minutes as a starter, just bench minutes, to the younger guys who could mirror the impact of the other guys Lamb-Caron (shooting) and PJ3-Thabo (defense) is out of the question? Just to see if they may be able to do better, I mean you were forced to give them opportunities in the season due to injuries and they proved to be somewhat serviceable, why not try them now. Maybe they can have an impact like Reggie did in a bench capacity. You won't know if you don't try.
 
So in not even giving extended minutes as a starter, just bench minutes, to the younger guys who could mirror the impact of the other guys Lamb-Caron (shooting) and PJ3-Thabo (defense) is out of the question? Just to see if they may be able to do better, I mean you were forced to give them opportunities in the season due to injuries and they proved to be somewhat serviceable, why not try them now. Maybe they can have an impact like Reggie did in a bench capacity. You won't know if you don't try.

Like I said, I agree with you man and maybe that's a part of his incompetence, his stubbornness. He probably should give them a try. Hell it's either now or never for them. I was just giving you his possible motives for why he sticks with his rotations and up until now, we couldn't really say it was an issue because it was working. When's the last time they lost in the postseason when when they weren't supposed to?

His bad rotations / Lineups are something that I agree with, they at times are bad but there hasn't been any traction with it because it's working but now, if they get ousted in the first round, this could be the primary culprit (even though I think it has more to do with Russell and KD's play / Tony Allen's impact on the game than rotations)
 
Last edited:
I have no idea why people are focused on the play, we have no idea what play Scott Brooks drew up.


He didn't foul, down 2, with sub 3 second shot clock differential.


TWICE.

Now this isn't good at all :lol: didn't see this part of the game though.

"Ok guys, we're down 2. Let's get a stop, call timeout, leaving us with 3 seconds left to get a shot up to tie."

"But coach, what if they score here..."

"Well there's always game 6!"

I imagine that's how a Scott Brooks huddle goes
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom