Stotts just gave one of the worst answers I’ve ever heard in a postgame.

[Wade Garrett]

It was reported yesterday (sorry I do not remember source think it was Chad Doing's show might have been Travis Demers) that the players, although they questioned the strategy, to a man, they absolutely loved the answer their coach gave, and rallied around him.
So, yeah...maybe this thread was warranted after all.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Absolutely and I was literally amazed by that, but they were definitely "in" the game, though it never felt like they were. I'm not trying to be all "doom and gloom", I thought they didn't play well and I think they'll play better tonight.

Me too

 

[TBpup]

What was so insulting about that question? The response was unnecessary-- Stotts even apologized yesterday to that reporter. Terry always reacts like this when there is even a hint of criticism his way.

Reporters have mentioned as much. Terry doesn't like to be questioned about something that didn't go well or that he doesn't like. Some of his eye rolls, answers, or just dismissals about Jake Layman questions when he was playing quite well were downright disrespectful from what I've been told.

 

[oldmangrouch]

Does it mean they were right? Houston doubled Steph and he dropped 33 in a half

Are you so desperate to defend Stotts you are claiming Curry should be allowed wide-open shots - or are you just trolling?

 

[Cugel]

force steph to shoot two pointers, and make him drive to the hoop, get physical with him. he is not as deadly from mid range but his floater is good.

 

[tlongII]

It was bad defensive strategy, but it’s not the reason we lost. Turnovers and shitty shooting are what doomed us.

 

[BonesJones]

I disagree with your premise, ie that Stotts is saying that he's not going to adjust. He's saying STFU.

Sarcasm is the correct response to an insulting question, as if Stotts isn't aware of what Houston employed or how ineffective our game plan ended up being. He has coached us to the WCF.

How is that question insulting? He asked him a question about his questionable defensive scheme. Stotts is being petty and stubborn.

 

[BonesJones]

Stotts is being petty and stubborn.

And this is the way he coaches.

 

[BonesJones]

Does it mean they were right? Houston doubled Steph and he dropped 33 in a half

How many did he have in the 1st half? He hit very tough shots in the 2nd half and a lot of them were in transition. He wasn't dropping 33 because he was trapped.

Game 1, he dropped 36 because of the way we guarded him. People come up with false equivalencies to try to dismiss great, logical points. Sigh.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Are you so desperate to defend Stotts you are claiming Curry should be allowed wide-open shots - or are you just trolling?

Adjustments maybe would have helped. My point is, maybe not either. They were within 6 late

 

[Lukee]

Adjustments maybe would have helped. My point is, maybe not either. They were within 6 late

But it felt like 12, that was never close game

 

[Tince]

What about all the other games where this happened?

It's not the first time he's seen this guy, this year, or this decade. He has a lot of tape and knowledge on this team. There is no excuse.

I didn't love the game plan for Game 1, but I totally understand how it came to be.

The team didn't even meet on Monday, something the players have said was needed. For the majority of the season, the personnel given to Stotts is not one that can easily blitz the PnR for 100 games and the team decided that forcing players down screen into mid-range 2's was the best core defense. Going into Game 1, with little to no prep time, Stotts went with the core defense he thought Kanter could handle. We found in Game 2 that Kanter still isn't able to to blitz the PnR. Tonight, Stotts made some adjustments, but to me the personnel is the far bigger issue than the game plan.

It's easy to say 7'0" bigs should sprint out to 35', show and recover, but not all bigs have the ability to do that; especially without food or water. Blaming Stotts seems like the lazy way out.

 

[hoopsjock]

I didn't love the game plan for Game 1, but I totally understand how it came to be.

The team didn't even meet on Monday, something the players have said was needed. For the majority of the season, the personnel given to Stotts is not one that can easily blitz the PnR for 100 games and the team decided that forcing players down screen into mid-range 2's was the best core defense. Going into Game 1, with little to no prep time, Stotts went with the core defense he thought Kanter could handle. We found in Game 2 that Kanter still isn't able to to blitz the PnR. Tonight, Stotts made some adjustments, but to me the personnel is the far bigger issue than the game plan.

It's easy to say 7'0" bigs should sprint out to 35', show and recover, but not all bigs have the ability to do that; especially without food or water. Blaming Stotts seems like the lazy way out.

They purposely dropped the big way back. They had to tell them to do that. It was stupid.

 

[Tince]

They purposely dropped the big way back. They had to tell them to do that. It was stupid.

Like I said, I didn't love the game plan myself, but how it came to be makes a lot of sense. This isn't what people want to hear, but with our current roster of PF/C's, I don't think there isn't a scheme GS isn't going to expose. Please share the scheme you think GS won't have an answer for. After multiple attempts tonight, Stotts ended up playing Meyers against his own will. It's the roster holding us from being a top 2 team, not a scheme.

 

[BonesJones]

Are you so desperate to defend Stotts you are claiming Curry should be allowed wide-open shots - or are you just trolling?

You have a large selection of people who will never criticize Stotts on anything, ever.

 

[BonesJones]

Like I said, I didn't love the game plan myself, but how it came to be makes a lot of sense. This isn't what people want to hear, but with our current roster of PF/C's, I don't think there isn't a scheme GS isn't going to expose. Please share the scheme you think GS won't have an answer for. After multiple attempts tonight, Stotts ended up playing Meyers against his own will. It's the roster holding us from being a top 2 team, not a scheme.

The scheme we played in Game 2, except with proper helpside rotation.

 

[TBpup]

The scheme we played in Game 2, except with proper helpside rotation.

Exactly right. Just tough to do when you pick the Playoffs against the 2-time defending champs to implement such a strategy for the first time all year. Guess what....there are going to be some MAJOR gaps in the scheme you haven't practiced the whole season.

 

[hoopsjock]

Like I said, I didn't love the game plan myself, but how it came to be makes a lot of sense. This isn't what people want to hear, but with our current roster of PF/C's, I don't think there isn't a scheme GS isn't going to expose. Please share the scheme you think GS won't have an answer for. After multiple attempts tonight, Stotts ended up playing Meyers against his own will. It's the roster holding us from being a top 2 team, not a scheme.

1) Every single person who has watched GS play could've told you before game 1 that you can't give Curry and Thompson that much room on 3 pointers, except Stotts. It would be like if a bank knew they were about to get robbed so instead of protecting their money and beefing up security they pre-bagged all the money and had it waiting for the robbers at the door.

2) Myself and others 100% agree that there is not one perfect scheme. My personal argument has always been to mix up coverages to always keep the other team guessing instead of being predictable. You can't play every team the same way and you can't play the same way every time against one team. A good coach has his team prepared for different styles on both ends of the court.

3) GS thrives off of chaos plays through turnovers, offensive rebounds, quick outlets before the defense is set, etc. In the horrific 3rd quarter we had 5 turnovers and played a super small lineup that got annihilated on the boards. Those two factors were more to blame than our half court defense.

4) How many games does our starting lineup have to kill us in either the 1st or the 3rd before a change is warranted? Last night they blew a 15 point lead in less than 5 minutes.

 

[gatorpops]

1) Every single person who has watched GS play could've told you before game 1 that you can't give Curry and Thompson that much room on 3 pointers, except Stotts. It would be like if a bank knew they were about to get robbed so instead of protecting their money and beefing up security they pre-bagged all the money and had it waiting for the robbers at the door.

2) Myself and others 100% agree that there is not one perfect scheme. My personal argument has always been to mix up coverages to always keep the other team guessing instead of being predictable. You can't play every team the same way and you can't play the same way every time against one team. A good coach has his team prepared for different styles on both ends of the court.

3) GS thrives off of chaos plays through turnovers, offensive rebounds, quick outlets before the defense is set, etc. In the horrific 3rd quarter we had 5 turnovers and played a super small lineup that got annihilated on the boards. Those two factors were more to blame than our half court defense.

4) How many games does our starting lineup have to kill us in either the 1st or the 3rd before a change is warranted? Last night they blew a 15 point lead in less than 5 minutes.

Who do you sub in? We are at least one good man short without Nurk who would be fasting as well!!!

 

[TBpup]

Who do you sub in? We are at least one good man short without Nurk who would be fasting as well!!!

Call me crazy but I submit having 3 players in your top 7 rotation who are fasting and can't hydrate during the Playoffs might not be a good thing in the future.