Did Stotts make a crucial miscalculation?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Flying back and forth across the country in a 48 hour time frame after a long season can take a toll on the body. It does for me. So I can see the reasoning with a back to back coming up right after the return trip. The one thing that makes me question it is maybe GS was the better trip to skip, where the odds of winning are less.

But there is absolutely no guarantee that we would have won the game in Brooklyn even with those three. So flying all that way and not winning...we would still be second guessing them.
 
Boob-No-More said:
Having HCA may also mean winning a playoff series. Most articles I've read on the subject claim HCA is worth about 4.5 points per game in the playoffs. As close as the games are, that could be a huge difference.

How much rest do they need before the playoffs? Last year, we played only one playoff game in the 6 days after our last regular season game. We had three days off, played one game, had two more days off and then played the second game a week after the regular season ended - with no travel in between. Did Aldridge not look well rested in Games 1 and 2 against HOU last year. Our regular season ends on a Wednesday again this year. So, look for a similar schedule for round 1 this year.

BNM
Click to expand...

Lillard and LMA said they were gassed when they faced the Spurs.
 
Boob-No-More said:
By throwing in the towel against BRK, we guaranteed we wouldn't win out. My point is, what if we win tonight against GSW (who has lost two in a row and may decide it's time to start resting some of their guys) and win our remaining games. If so, the BRK loss would have cost us HCA.

Prior to the BRK game, we controlled our own fate - win them all and we get HCA. By losing to BRK, now we need help from other teams to get HCA. We still have a very slim chance for HCA, but now we MUST win out and hope somebody else falters (HOU and MEM, for example).

BNM
Click to expand...
The benefit of the rest for the vets plus the benefit of the experience for the kids outweighs HCA, and I don't think it's even a little close.
 
The decision was made for the logical reason of getting more rest for three players who were pretty dinged up. Getting them healthy for the playoffs is more important than earning HCA at the expense of the team being gassed at the start of the series. We can pick nits all we want around here (and seem to love to), but the decision is in the rear view mirror.
 
Blazers should fire Stotts, then we give each player an ipad. They can follow the game thread and we can tell them what to do.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
Blazers should fire Stotts, then we give each player an ipad. They can follow the game thread and we can tell them what to do.
Click to expand...
You think coaches don't make mistakes? Just ask Seahawks fans about that.
 
I think the travel back East was a big issue. Frankly, I think we will still get HCA in the first round. And lets say we beat GS or even win out from here on out. You go into the post season being a hot team, with a loss because you rested players. I can't imagine any team we face being confident about matching up with us
 
Shooter said:
You think coaches don't make mistakes? Just ask Seahawks fans about that.
Click to expand...

Not as many mistakes as fans make.

Look at the big picture, all of the issues, not just one issue that supports an agenda.
 
Just commenting on the fact that they don't play in NJ anymore :) Brooklyn!
 
And aren't we about 95% guaranteed HCA if we win out? Hou vs SA tomorrow, LA vs Mem Saturday.
 
OSUBlazerfan said:
And aren't we about 95% guaranteed HCA if we win out? Hou vs SA tomorrow, LA vs Mem Saturday.
Click to expand...

No. If Memphis and Houston win, then the Blazers could get HCA by winning out, but if SA and LA win those games (as expected), at least two of those four teams would need to lose another game in order for the Blazers to get HCA in round 1.
 
If HCA is still a possibility, you go after it. This team is not as good as they were on the road a year ago (23-18 in 2013-14 and currently 19-19) and needs the home fans more so than any other Western Conference playoff contender.

Losing that Clippers game probably did us in even more than the Nets on Monday night, but if we had won out, despite the loss to Los Angeles, home court was ours. Why not try to obtain better seeding? To me, it made much more sense to play the Brooklyn game full strength and rest key players against Minnesota and Utah? If you lose in the process to Golden State or even Brooklyn, then fine, rest. Also, there are plenty of opportunities for the team to rest the last week of the season (@OKC, @DAL). But to just concede HCA like that, with 10+ days to go in the season, was really disheartening to see.
 
MAS RipCity said:
If you lose in the process to Golden State or even Brooklyn, then fine, rest. Also, there are plenty of opportunities for the team to rest the last week of the season (@OKC, @DAL). But to just concede HCA like that, with 10+ days to go in the season, was really disheartening to see.
Click to expand...

Good point
 
Id rather rested players then a shot at HCA. Were hurt and gassed. HCA is great and if it was garaunteed we should have gone for it but I never once looked at our remaining games and thought we were going undefeated.
 
Rhal said:
Id rather rested players then a shot at HCA. Were hurt and gassed. HCA is great and if it was garaunteed we should have gone for it but I never once looked at our remaining games and thought we were going undefeated.
Click to expand...

Then win the games that are winnable and rest LMA, Nic and Kaman tonight. I know it's a short flight to the Bay Area and back, but it's the second of a home and away back-to-back that we would be unlikely to win even at full strength. Resting those guys against BRK costs us a very winnable game. They should have played in that game, gotten the win and rested tonight. That way, they all still get a night off (on the second night of a back-to-back, no less) and we only lose one game instead of (most likely) two. According to basketball-reference, we only have a 28% chance of winning tonight. So, if we lose tonight, and play all our guys, what did we really gain?

Pop does this all the time - he "gives away" games against top opponents as it gives your opponent no psychological advantage as they did not beat your A Team. This is one (of many) reasons why regular season record against the Spurs is absolutely meaningless when it comes to the playoffs. You may go 3-1 against them in the regular season, but what team did you beat, the Real Spurs, or their JV team?

BNM
 
I've been wanting Stotts to rest some guys off and on for awhile (or at least lower their minutes), so I'm very okay with what he did. Batum and Kaman in particular really seem to respond well this year after they've had some rest. All three were dealing with injuries as well. Would I like home court in the first round, sure, but I'd rather guys are rested and healthy. It makes a huge difference. I'm fine with resting some people tonight too. Even if we had home court in the first round we'd probably have to win at least one on the road anyways. But mostly, this team is best when they play the role of the underdog.
 
Last season Stotts was afraid to play the bench. This season he's holding playoff tryouts when the rotation tightens up. I think it was a smart move to throw CJ and Leonard into the fire on a road trip and rest the regulars before the GS game. I trust Stotts decision concerning the Nets makeup game.
 
You guys are overthinking everything. We are fine. Brooklyn win wasn't guaranteed. The guys are playing hurt and needed rest. No 2 day rest from March 24 to end of season. That would've killed them HCA is still very possible and we will win tonight. GS can't guard Aldridge.
 
Boob-No-More said:
Then win the games that are winnable and rest LMA, Nic and Kaman tonight. I know it's a short flight to the Bay Area and back, but it's the second of a home and away back-to-back that we would be unlikely to win even at full strength. Resting those guys against BRK costs us a very winnable game. They should have played in that game, gotten the win and rested tonight. That way, they all still get a night off (on the second night of a back-to-back, no less) and we only lose one game instead of (most likely) two. According to basketball-reference, we only have a 28% chance of winning tonight. So, if we lose tonight, and play all our guys, what did we really gain?

BNM
Click to expand...
Its just how you look at it. I looked at the schedule and assumed we would lose to GS and then lose a gimmie game to one of Wolves/Thunder/Mavs.
Resting vs Brooklyn, who had been playing well yes, didnt mean giving the game away I still felt we would win it as long as Brook didnt go off.
I still think we drop the game tonight and another game. If we only lose one more game the rest of the season then I would have been wrong but we will see.
 
Rhal said:
I still think we drop the game tonight and another game. If we only lose one more game the rest of the season then I would have been wrong but we will see.
Click to expand...

I would think that if Stotts made the decision to rest players in Brooklyn, then he won't stop there. Maybe after the Clipper loss he/they decided rest was more valuable than HCA, and resting only one game is not going to do it. I am not sure I agree with it, but if that is the decision then I can't see us winning more than two of the remaining 4 games. Utah and maybe Dallas if they decide to rest the last game as well.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
I would think that if Stotts made the decision to rest players in Brooklyn, then he won't stop there. Maybe after the Clipper loss he/they decided rest was more valuable than HCA, and resting only one game is not going to do it. I am not sure I agree with it, but if that is the decision then I can't see us winning more than two of the remaining 4 games. Utah and maybe Dallas if they decide to rest the last game as well.
Click to expand...
It's not about resting one game, it's about resting instead of traveling back and forth to the East Coast in a little over 24 hours. If it was a home game or a West Coast game, I'd bet a year's salary that those three would have played.
 
BlazerWookee said:
It's not about resting one game, it's about resting instead of traveling back and forth to the East Coast in a little over 24 hours. If it was a home game or a West Coast game, I'd bet a year's salary that those three would have played.
Click to expand...

Hmmmmm......

I do need some beer and stripper money...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top