The definition of insanity

[GVC]

I can buy the optimal argument in terms of lineups, but not minutes. I find it hard to believe that the bench, who consistently outscore their opponents (mostly bench players), are worse at the margin than the starters, who are routinely outscored. Bring those first subs in earlier and ride them longer in both halves, and I think the team is likely to improve if only by a little.

Corbin has shown a willingness to ride the hot players at 4 of the 5 positions down the stretch. It'd be nice if he were also willing to go with combos not featuring Al when Al doesn't show up. He's the only guy guaranteed crunch time minutes at this point, and while I recognize he lowers the variance in offensive points per possession and tends to step up defensively at the end of close games (relative to his effort in the first 3 quarters), sitting him when he's lazy might motivate him to play a bit harder early in games. It might possibly add incentive for the young bigs to play harder (Kanter seems to play better in the 2nd, when he can earn extended minutes, than in the 4th, when he has 0 chance of playing more).

 

[One Brow]

Variety.

I do love it spicy, but I'm not an NBA coach.

 

[One Brow]

Yes this. See above One Brow. Simple mistake.

Absolutely. I've made worse mistakes. I just wasn't sure which group you thought Foye belonged with.

 

[One Brow]

If Corbin believes this than he needs to be removed immediately.

If O'Connor agreed with your analysis, Corbin probably would have been.

 

[Stoked]

If O'Connor agreed with your analysis, Corbin probably would have been.

Damn the man! Save the Empire!

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

Definition of insanity: Not tanking the season and trying to get Anthony Bennett.

 

[One Brow]

I'm pretty sure that we all agree that getting down by ~10 pts in the first quarter like we have the past ~7 games in a row that I've watched is not optimal. And I assume even Corbin agrees with that.

I agree that, when playing chess, losing a pawn is not optimal, yet so many GrandMasters offer to do just that on their second move.

Perhaps Corbin thinks he has a team with less overall ability no matter who starts, but with so much depth, strength, and endurance that the game plan is to use muscle and resources to wear down the opponent over the course of the game. Maybe he thinks that starting Favors over Millsap, or Jefferson, would not improve the first quarter but make the second quarter worse. There can be all kinds of reasons that Corbin indeed thinks his starting line-up is optimal, even if they have a habit of falling behind.

 

[Crawlnstall]

One thing that has been an obvious trend is the consistent slow starts by our starting 5. Watching the Bucks game last night after the 1st, I thought we were going to lose or at best win in a close one. Jefferson, Millsap and Marvin had zero energy. They pick it up a bit later and the stats look decent. But every game now we start slow, even Matt Harpring brought it up and called them out, so if he's doing it, its been happening for awhile. "Seems like they ate a thanksgiving dinner for their pre game dinner" Moving real lethargic in the 1st. Coaching has something to do with it if its happening every game

 

[Stoked]

Definition of insanity: Not tanking the season and trying to get Anthony Bennett.

No thank you. This is not the Golden State Tankers.

 

[One Brow]

Bring those first subs in earlier and ride them longer in both halves, and I think the team is likely to improve if only by a little.

... [Al]'s the only guy guaranteed crunch time minutes at this point, and while I recognize he lowers the variance in offensive points per possession and tends to step up defensively at the end of close games

I think you might be correct. The only reason I can see for not bringing in the bench a little earlier is if you are worried that they might wear out, should you want them to stay in for the entire fourth quarter. I don't know if that is valid or not.

Jefferson also steps up his shooting in the 4th quarter, at least in close games, comparing his clutch statistics to his to his regular at 82games.

 

[Stoked]

I think you might be correct. The only reason I can see for not bringing in the bench a little earlier is if you are worried that they might wear out, should you want them to stay in for the entire fourth quarter. I don't know if that is valid or not.

Jefferson also steps up his shooting in the 4th quarter, at least in close games, comparing his clutch statistics to his to his regular at 82games.

Considering the only ones I have really ever seen Corbin ride to close out the fourth are Hayward, Favors and Burks and that is not often. So there is still no reason Kanter is getting so little time.

 

[One Brow]

Considering the only ones I have really ever seen Corbin ride to close out the fourth are Hayward, Favors and Burks and that is not often. So there is still no reason Kanter is getting so little time.

I agree Kanter should probably get more time.

 

[Revolution 9]

"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results" --Einstein*

How long before Corbin changes the starting lineup? Does he think that all of a sudden starting Tinsley, Foye, Ma. Williams, Millsap, and Jefferson is going to produce different results?



*may or may not have really been said by Einstein. Probably not.

Colton it's good to have you aboard the Corbin wtf are you doing group!
To me it's Marvin Williams that first needs to go. He's got a free pass all year.
I think putting Marvin in the doghouse for a while, to make him earn back his time, would be great for all parties.

 

[DutchJazzer]

I remember when the Nuggets traded Antheny, didn't they go on a tear after the trade? I think the same thing would happen with us. Also think the starting lineup could be fixed by putting Al on the bench, except then our bench would suck.

Addition by subtraction.

unless al is put on the bench for good.
only getting garbage minutes

 

[DutchJazzer]

I think it's best for Hayward, Carroll, Favors and Kanter to get as few minutes with Al (and Marvin) as possible. I'd rather have the young/energy players playing together than having the life sucked out of them playing with Marvin and Al.

so the life getting scuekd out by big al does not apply to marvin?

marvin had his best game when al was out

 

[DutchJazzer]

I agree that, when playing chess, losing a pawn is not optimal, yet so many GrandMasters offer to do just that on their second move.

Perhaps Corbin thinks he has a team with less overall ability no matter who starts, but with so much depth, strength, and endurance that the game plan is to use muscle and resources to wear down the opponent over the course of the game. Maybe he thinks that starting Favors over Millsap, or Jefferson, would not improve the first quarter but make the second quarter worse. There can be all kinds of reasons that Corbin indeed thinks his starting line-up is optimal, even if they have a habit of falling behind.

losing a pawn is optimal.
thats what pawns are for.

problem is big al is a pawn, and yet corbin threads him like a king.
trying to protect his "precious pawn"

 

[fishonjazz]

I agree that, when playing chess, losing a pawn is not optimal, yet so many GrandMasters offer to do just that on their second move.

Perhaps Corbin thinks he has a team with less overall ability no matter who starts, but with so much depth, strength, and endurance that the game plan is to use muscle and resources to wear down the opponent over the course of the game. Maybe he thinks that starting Favors over Millsap, or Jefferson, would not improve the first quarter but make the second quarter worse. There can be all kinds of reasons that Corbin indeed thinks his starting line-up is optimal, even if they have a habit of falling behind.

You are right, there could be all kinds of reasons for the starting lineup corbin chooses.... seems like it is determined by age though.

 

[fishonjazz]

I think you might be correct. The only reason I can see for not bringing in the bench a little earlier is if you are worried that they might wear out, should you want them to stay in for the entire fourth quarter. I don't know if that is valid or not.

Jefferson also steps up his shooting in the 4th quarter, at least in close games, comparing his clutch statistics to his to his regular at 82games.

Well of course the youngsters would wear out, i mean they are 20-22 years old right? Who was in good shape when they were 20? Just wait till they are 35 and then they will be in great shape.

 

[One Brow]

Well of course the youngsters would wear out, i mean they are 20-22 years old right? Who was in good shape when they were 20? Just wait till they are 35 and then they will be in great shape.

Do we have any starters that are 35? I think they are mostly late 20s. Generally, the prime years for athletes are in fact the late 20s.

 

[BabyPeterzz]

This board is the definition of insanity. What the **** do you people want? Al traded right? Well, removing him from the starting lineup diminishes his trade value. Is that what you want, just to perhaps start games stronger? Ya'll will never be happy, which is Corbin's fault. Keeping the starting lineup as is will at least keep Al and Paul's value up. That is probably not Ty's main concern, but it's on the FO's mind and they'll let it ride.