CoolBreeze44 wrote:These NBA TV guys are making me wonder if the game has passed Thibs by.
I really think it has. I don't think Thibs can function in a league where giving up 100+ routinely is normal and acceptable. I don't know if Thibs can win games 120-115 or 125-120 but I don't think he wants to.
One of the things McHale harped on was our reluctance to switch. He said with as young as we are and as athletic as we are we could get away with a lot more switching. Said Thibs is coaching this group like a veteran team and expecting them to work as a 5 man unit on defense. Explained that it takes a more veteran laden team to be able to do that, and we should be able to compensate in other ways to be a good defense.
Whew! We pulled out the loss. At least we secured a top 9 lottery position with an outside shot to get as high as 6th if Knicks win tomorrow and we lose and the coin flip gets us the earlier pick. It would be nice if Sac wins tonight or tomorrow so we could avoid a coin flip with them. Also want a Dallas win so in case we win, we don't have to coin flip with them.
Thibs had us playing the best defense in the NBA for multiple weeks in a row before Belly went down with our playoff hopes, don't trip on what NBA TV guys are saying who barely watch us anyway, are you guys serious right now lol?
BloopOracle wrote:Thibs had us playing the best defense in the NBA for multiple weeks in a row before Belly went down with our playoff hopes, don't trip on what NBA TV guys are saying who barely watch us anyway, are you guys serious right now lol?
I'm not sure Bloop, but it sounds like your defending the job Thibs did with our defense this year. I can't get on board with that.
BloopOracle wrote:Thibs had us playing the best defense in the NBA for multiple weeks in a row before Belly went down with our playoff hopes, don't trip on what NBA TV guys are saying who barely watch us anyway, are you guys serious right now lol?
I'm not sure Bloop, but it sounds like your defending the job Thibs did with our defense this year. I can't get on board with that.
Considering the sample size... "fluke" might help describe it.