RealGM

No Wade or TJ.

The only other player on the injury report is Merrill with the neck injury he suffered on Sunday afternoon, doubtful for this contest.

Cavs should probably see what Niang + their first equals this summer.

jbk1234 wrote:Cavs should probably see what Niang + their first equals this summer.

Noooooo we need that to draft Bronny lol

Good W. If we beat the Pacers on Friday, we may end up resting all the starters on Sunday.

jbk1234 wrote:Good W. If we beat the Pacers on Friday, we may end up resting all the starters on Sunday.

If we win against the Pacers and Orlando wins out, we need to win Sunday to keep homecourt advantage. (Unless the Knicks lose three in a row.)

It's crazy that we could still end up anywhere from 2nd to 7th with two games left.

jbk1234 wrote:Good W. If we beat the Pacers on Friday, we may end up resting all the starters on Sunday.

In the sense that any win is good, sure, but down at half time against a team with 12 "injured" players on a back to back?

What the heck is going on? Why no sense of urgency?

You can't argue we're facing tougher opponents playing playoff-level ball against us in this case, just guys excited to be getting minutes like we have at the end of our bench.

JonFromVA wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:Good W. If we beat the Pacers on Friday, we may end up resting all the starters on Sunday.

In the sense that any win is good, sure, but down at half time against a team with 12 "injured" players on a back to back?

What the heck is going on? Why no sense of urgency?

You can't argue we're facing tougher opponents playing playoff-level ball against us in this case, just guys excited to be getting minutes like we have at the end of our bench.

The Grizzlies beat the Bucks a couple games ago. They're not talented, but they are athletic, strong, and as you noted, play with a ton of energy. They can defend at a level that our deep bench cannot.

That aside, the game wasn't particularly close after the middle of the 3rd quarter. We handled the Jazz rather easily (without Mitchell). We split with the Hornets (down Mitchell and others). Bad teams are bad and easy to beat.

At the end of the day, Merrill and CPJ are undersized and on a roster whose starting guards are neither tall nor great defenders. No amount of PT is going to change that. Niang and Morris are also poor defenders. Wade is unavailable. LeVert is a middling defender. There's only so much weight you can put in the boat. You can't hide everyone.

We'll see what happens this offseason. Maybe the roster looks different and you can work CPJ in more easily. But LeMar Stevens is on his third team since we traded him last summer. Diakate wasn't on an NBA roster last I checked. Sometimes guys are third-string for a reason.

toooskies wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:Good W. If we beat the Pacers on Friday, we may end up resting all the starters on Sunday.

If we win against the Pacers and Orlando wins out, we need to win Sunday to keep homecourt advantage. (Unless the Knicks lose three in a row.)

It's crazy that we could still end up anywhere from 2nd to 7th with two games left.

Does Philly own the tiebreaker?

jbk1234 wrote:

toooskies wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:Good W. If we beat the Pacers on Friday, we may end up resting all the starters on Sunday.

If we win against the Pacers and Orlando wins out, we need to win Sunday to keep homecourt advantage. (Unless the Knicks lose three in a row.)

It's crazy that we could still end up anywhere from 2nd to 7th with two games left.

Does Philly own the tiebreaker?

I think that if we lose out and they win out (the only situation where we tie them), they will win the tie-breaker due to conference record?

jbk1234 wrote:

JonFromVA wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:Good W. If we beat the Pacers on Friday, we may end up resting all the starters on Sunday.

In the sense that any win is good, sure, but down at half time against a team with 12 "injured" players on a back to back?

What the heck is going on? Why no sense of urgency?

You can't argue we're facing tougher opponents playing playoff-level ball against us in this case, just guys excited to be getting minutes like we have at the end of our bench.

The Grizzlies beat the Bucks a couple games ago. They're not talented, but they are athletic, strong, and as you noted, play with a ton of energy. They can defend at a level that our deep bench cannot.

That aside, the game wasn't particularly close after the middle of the 3rd quarter. We handled the Jazz rather easily (without Mitchell). We split with the Hornets (down Mitchell and others). Bad teams are bad and easy to beat.

At the end of the day, Merrill and CPJ are undersized and on a roster whose starting guards are neither tall nor great defenders. No amount of PT is going to change that. Niang and Morris are also poor defenders. Wade is unavailable. LeVert is a middling defender. There's only so much weight you can put in the boat. You can't hide everyone.

We'll see what happens this offseason. Maybe the roster looks different and you can work CPJ in more easily. But LeMar Stevens is on his third team since we traded him last summer. Diakate wasn't on an NBA roster last I checked. Sometimes guys are third-string for a reason.

Diakate signed a standard contract with the Knicks, he's playoff eligible.

jbk1234 wrote:

JonFromVA wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:Good W. If we beat the Pacers on Friday, we may end up resting all the starters on Sunday.

In the sense that any win is good, sure, but down at half time against a team with 12 "injured" players on a back to back?

What the heck is going on? Why no sense of urgency?

You can't argue we're facing tougher opponents playing playoff-level ball against us in this case, just guys excited to be getting minutes like we have at the end of our bench.

The Grizzlies beat the Bucks a couple games ago. They're not talented, but they are athletic, strong, and as you noted, play with a ton of energy. They can defend at a level that our deep bench cannot.

That aside, the game wasn't particularly close after the middle of the 3rd quarter. We handled the Jazz rather easily (without Mitchell). We split with the Hornets (down Mitchell and others). Bad teams are bad and easy to beat.

At the end of the day, Merrill and CPJ are undersized and on a roster whose starting guards are neither tall nor great defenders. No amount of PT is going to change that. Niang and Morris are also poor defenders. Wade is unavailable. LeVert is a middling defender. There's only so much weight you can put in the boat. You can't hide everyone.

We'll see what happens this offseason. Maybe the roster looks different and you can work CPJ in more easily. But LeMar Stevens is on his third team since we traded him last summer. Diakate wasn't on an NBA roster last I checked. Sometimes guys are third-string for a reason.

And if Stevens or Diakate showed they could contribute to winning without having to be surrounded by our Core-4, I might argue we didn't give them a proper chance too. Out of necessity Merrill and CPJ got the opportunity and then delivered! From there, it's on the coach to figure out why it worked and how/when/where they can be used moving forward.

I just won't concede they were a one hit wonder until they get an honest chance to build on their success. We expect star level players to be able to make an impact no matter what's around them, but that's not the case with non-stars and role players. So, for instance, Kyle Korver had an MVP-level season once for the Hawks in terms of his impact numbers, but he's a nothing burger if nobody on the team can set a decent screen for him, if the ball handler isn't looking for him, or the defense is able to get away with switching or doubling him off of those screens. Players, scheme, and coaching can get around any of those problems but only if someone cares enough to think of Korver as something more than a warm body to eat minutes.

JonFromVA wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:

JonFromVA wrote:
In the sense that any win is good, sure, but down at half time against a team with 12 "injured" players on a back to back?

What the heck is going on? Why no sense of urgency?

You can't argue we're facing tougher opponents playing playoff-level ball against us in this case, just guys excited to be getting minutes like we have at the end of our bench.

The Grizzlies beat the Bucks a couple games ago. They're not talented, but they are athletic, strong, and as you noted, play with a ton of energy. They can defend at a level that our deep bench cannot.

That aside, the game wasn't particularly close after the middle of the 3rd quarter. We handled the Jazz rather easily (without Mitchell). We split with the Hornets (down Mitchell and others). Bad teams are bad and easy to beat.

At the end of the day, Merrill and CPJ are undersized and on a roster whose starting guards are neither tall nor great defenders. No amount of PT is going to change that. Niang and Morris are also poor defenders. Wade is unavailable. LeVert is a middling defender. There's only so much weight you can put in the boat. You can't hide everyone.

We'll see what happens this offseason. Maybe the roster looks different and you can work CPJ in more easily. But LeMar Stevens is on his third team since we traded him last summer. Diakate wasn't on an NBA roster last I checked. Sometimes guys are third-string for a reason.

And if Stevens or Diakate showed they could contribute to winning without having to be surrounded by our Core-4, I might argue we didn't give them a proper chance too. Out of necessity Merrill and CPJ got the opportunity and then delivered! From there, it's on the coach to figure out why it worked and how/when/where they can be used moving forward.

I just won't concede they were a one hit wonder until they get an honest chance to build on their success. We expect star level players to be able to make an impact no matter what's around them, but that's not the case with non-stars and role players. So, for instance, Kyle Korver had an MVP-level season once for the Hawks in terms of his impact numbers, but he's a nothing burger if nobody on the team can set a decent screen for him, if the ball handler isn't looking for him, or the defense is able to get away with switching or doubling him off of those screens. Players, scheme, and coaching can get around any of those problems but only if someone cares enough to think of Korver as something more than a warm body to eat minutes.

If our star players could make guys 6" inches taller, they'd probably start with themselves. If they could magically make guys better on defense, they'd probably start with themselves. But you build your roster around the strengths and weaknesses of your best players, not the end of the bench.

JujitsuFlip wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:

JonFromVA wrote:
In the sense that any win is good, sure, but down at half time against a team with 12 "injured" players on a back to back?

What the heck is going on? Why no sense of urgency?

You can't argue we're facing tougher opponents playing playoff-level ball against us in this case, just guys excited to be getting minutes like we have at the end of our bench.

The Grizzlies beat the Bucks a couple games ago. They're not talented, but they are athletic, strong, and as you noted, play with a ton of energy. They can defend at a level that our deep bench cannot.

That aside, the game wasn't particularly close after the middle of the 3rd quarter. We handled the Jazz rather easily (without Mitchell). We split with the Hornets (down Mitchell and others). Bad teams are bad and easy to beat.

At the end of the day, Merrill and CPJ are undersized and on a roster whose starting guards are neither tall nor great defenders. No amount of PT is going to change that. Niang and Morris are also poor defenders. Wade is unavailable. LeVert is a middling defender. There's only so much weight you can put in the boat. You can't hide everyone.

We'll see what happens this offseason. Maybe the roster looks different and you can work CPJ in more easily. But LeMar Stevens is on his third team since we traded him last summer. Diakate wasn't on an NBA roster last I checked. Sometimes guys are third-string for a reason.

Diakate signed a standard contract with the Knicks, he's playoff eligible.

He's played 3 games for the Spurs and 3 games for the Knicks. He's averaged 2.7 minutes a game.

jbk1234 wrote:

JonFromVA wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:
The Grizzlies beat the Bucks a couple games ago. They're not talented, but they are athletic, strong, and as you noted, play with a ton of energy. They can defend at a level that our deep bench cannot.

That aside, the game wasn't particularly close after the middle of the 3rd quarter. We handled the Jazz rather easily (without Mitchell). We split with the Hornets (down Mitchell and others). Bad teams are bad and easy to beat.

At the end of the day, Merrill and CPJ are undersized and on a roster whose starting guards are neither tall nor great defenders. No amount of PT is going to change that. Niang and Morris are also poor defenders. Wade is unavailable. LeVert is a middling defender. There's only so much weight you can put in the boat. You can't hide everyone.

We'll see what happens this offseason. Maybe the roster looks different and you can work CPJ in more easily. But LeMar Stevens is on his third team since we traded him last summer. Diakate wasn't on an NBA roster last I checked. Sometimes guys are third-string for a reason.

And if Stevens or Diakate showed they could contribute to winning without having to be surrounded by our Core-4, I might argue we didn't give them a proper chance too. Out of necessity Merrill and CPJ got the opportunity and then delivered! From there, it's on the coach to figure out why it worked and how/when/where they can be used moving forward.

I just won't concede they were a one hit wonder until they get an honest chance to build on their success. We expect star level players to be able to make an impact no matter what's around them, but that's not the case with non-stars and role players. So, for instance, Kyle Korver had an MVP-level season once for the Hawks in terms of his impact numbers, but he's a nothing burger if nobody on the team can set a decent screen for him, if the ball handler isn't looking for him, or the defense is able to get away with switching or doubling him off of those screens. Players, scheme, and coaching can get around any of those problems but only if someone cares enough to think of Korver as something more than a warm body to eat minutes.

If our star players could make guys 6" inches taller, they'd probably start with themselves. If they could magically make guys better on defense, they'd probably start with themselves. But you build your roster around the strengths and weaknesses of your best players, not the end of the bench.

You plan around units that work, everything else you test to see if it might work. Nothing else makes actual sense.

JonFromVA wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:

JonFromVA wrote:
And if Stevens or Diakate showed they could contribute to winning without having to be surrounded by our Core-4, I might argue we didn't give them a proper chance too. Out of necessity Merrill and CPJ got the opportunity and then delivered! From there, it's on the coach to figure out why it worked and how/when/where they can be used moving forward.

I just won't concede they were a one hit wonder until they get an honest chance to build on their success. We expect star level players to be able to make an impact no matter what's around them, but that's not the case with non-stars and role players. So, for instance, Kyle Korver had an MVP-level season once for the Hawks in terms of his impact numbers, but he's a nothing burger if nobody on the team can set a decent screen for him, if the ball handler isn't looking for him, or the defense is able to get away with switching or doubling him off of those screens. Players, scheme, and coaching can get around any of those problems but only if someone cares enough to think of Korver as something more than a warm body to eat minutes.

If our star players could make guys 6" inches taller, they'd probably start with themselves. If they could magically make guys better on defense, they'd probably start with themselves. But you build your roster around the strengths and weaknesses of your best players, not the end of the bench.

You plan around units that work, everything else you test to see if it might work. Nothing else makes actual sense.

The fun thing with most of the units that worked really well is that Dean Wade was a prominent part of most of them. Can't really go with what works if you don't have it.

Tristan Thompson should get Morris's opportunities, though. I'm fully out on him. I'm doubling down on two bigs rather than running from it like JBB has been doing lately at the end of games.

jbk1234 wrote:

JujitsuFlip wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:
The Grizzlies beat the Bucks a couple games ago. They're not talented, but they are athletic, strong, and as you noted, play with a ton of energy. They can defend at a level that our deep bench cannot.

That aside, the game wasn't particularly close after the middle of the 3rd quarter. We handled the Jazz rather easily (without Mitchell). We split with the Hornets (down Mitchell and others). Bad teams are bad and easy to beat.

At the end of the day, Merrill and CPJ are undersized and on a roster whose starting guards are neither tall nor great defenders. No amount of PT is going to change that. Niang and Morris are also poor defenders. Wade is unavailable. LeVert is a middling defender. There's only so much weight you can put in the boat. You can't hide everyone.

We'll see what happens this offseason. Maybe the roster looks different and you can work CPJ in more easily. But LeMar Stevens is on his third team since we traded him last summer. Diakate wasn't on an NBA roster last I checked. Sometimes guys are third-string for a reason.

Diakate signed a standard contract with the Knicks, he's playoff eligible.

He's played 3 games for the Spurs and 3 games for the Knicks. He's averaged 2.7 minutes a game.

Hey, i was just letting you know he was on a NBA roster lol

toooskies wrote:

JonFromVA wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:
If our star players could make guys 6" inches taller, they'd probably start with themselves. If they could magically make guys better on defense, they'd probably start with themselves. But you build your roster around the strengths and weaknesses of your best players, not the end of the bench.

You plan around units that work, everything else you test to see if it might work. Nothing else makes actual sense.

The fun thing with most of the units that worked really well is that Dean Wade was a prominent part of most of them. Can't really go with what works if you don't have it.

Tristan Thompson should get Morris's opportunities, though. I'm fully out on him. I'm doubling down on two bigs rather than running from it like JBB has been doing lately at the end of games.

It shouldn't be that hard to look at why a unit worked and find a substitute for one guy in that unit. Maybe you take the new guy aside and explain what he needs to provide that the guy he's replacing was giving?

But while statisticians need to worry about sample sizes before drawing conclusions, a head coach doesn't; he should try to see if he can find minutes for those groups in situations they can try to continue to succeed in or build upon it.

fwiw, here's 4 groups that have played really well without Dean:
(off rtg - def rtg from 82games)

Garland-Okoro-LeVert-Niang-E.Mobley (+14)
Mitchell-Okoro-LeVert-Niang-Allen (+36)
PorterJr.-Merrill-LeVert-Niang-Thompson (+53)
Mitchell-Strus-LeVert-Niang-Allen (+14)

Interestingly, Caris and George are in all of them inspite of their 2-man group being only +0.6.

If there's a silver lining, at least JBB used that first lineup as his bench rotation .vs. Memphis.

JonFromVA wrote:

toooskies wrote:

JonFromVA wrote:
You plan around units that work, everything else you test to see if it might work. Nothing else makes actual sense.

The fun thing with most of the units that worked really well is that Dean Wade was a prominent part of most of them. Can't really go with what works if you don't have it.

Tristan Thompson should get Morris's opportunities, though. I'm fully out on him. I'm doubling down on two bigs rather than running from it like JBB has been doing lately at the end of games.

It shouldn't be that hard to look at why a unit worked and find a substitute for one guy in that unit. Maybe you take the new guy aside and explain what he needs to provide that the guy he's replacing was giving?

But while statisticians need to worry about sample sizes before drawing conclusions, a head coach doesn't; he should try to see if he can find minutes for those groups in situations they can try to continue to succeed in or build upon it.

fwiw, here's 4 groups that have played really well without Dean:
(off rtg - def rtg from 82games)

Garland-Okoro-LeVert-Niang-E.Mobley (+14)
Mitchell-Okoro-LeVert-Niang-Allen (+36)
PorterJr.-Merrill-LeVert-Niang-Thompson (+53)
Mitchell-Strus-LeVert-Niang-Allen (+14)

Interestingly, Caris and George are in all of them inspite of their 2-man group being only +0.6.

If there's a silver lining, at least JBB used that first lineup as his bench rotation .vs. Memphis.

I mean last night you saw the playoff rotation. I think with chances of it going less minutes for 1 of the 3 bench guys, situationally.

JonFromVA wrote:

toooskies wrote:

JonFromVA wrote:
You plan around units that work, everything else you test to see if it might work. Nothing else makes actual sense.

The fun thing with most of the units that worked really well is that Dean Wade was a prominent part of most of them. Can't really go with what works if you don't have it.

Tristan Thompson should get Morris's opportunities, though. I'm fully out on him. I'm doubling down on two bigs rather than running from it like JBB has been doing lately at the end of games.

It shouldn't be that hard to look at why a unit worked and find a substitute for one guy in that unit. Maybe you take the new guy aside and explain what he needs to provide that the guy he's replacing was giving?

But while statisticians need to worry about sample sizes before drawing conclusions, a head coach doesn't; he should try to see if he can find minutes for those groups in situations they can try to continue to succeed in or build upon it.

fwiw, here's 4 groups that have played really well without Dean:
(off rtg - def rtg from 82games)

Garland-Okoro-LeVert-Niang-E.Mobley (+14)
Mitchell-Okoro-LeVert-Niang-Allen (+36)
PorterJr.-Merrill-LeVert-Niang-Thompson (+53)
Mitchell-Strus-LeVert-Niang-Allen (+14)

Interestingly, Caris and George are in all of them inspite of their 2-man group being only +0.6.

If there's a silver lining, at least JBB used that first lineup as his bench rotation .vs. Memphis.

How many minutes are we even talking about with the +53 five-man group?