Minnesota Sports Forum

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

FNG wrote:I'm stuck in the middle on this one. I'm also disappointed when I go to a game and find out that a star that I wanted to see live isn't playing, and the "old man" in me says these guys are paid millions of dollars and need to play if they aren't really injured. But I also recognize that the goal of savvy GMs and coaches not named Tom Thibodeau is to go as deep in the playoffs as possible, not to win a specific game on January 14th, and there is a belief that a rested player is likely to perform better in the playoffs. It's a complicated issue, but I suspect it is management that decides to rest players, not the players.

And is it any different in baseball? I grew up in an era when starting pitchers regularly pitched complete games, but now it's a rarity. It's load management again. The pitcher doesn't want to come out of the game in the 6th inning (you can see the typical reaction in the dugout), but managers have concluded that limiting innings during the regular season gives his team a better chance postseason.

I don't like it in either case and I admire Ant's enthusiasm, but my suspicion is that management is right in both baseball and basketball.

I disagree a bit that it's primarily a management thing in the NBA. Even guys on bad teams have load management days.

The NBA is a player's league. If LeBron James wants to play... he's going to play. If he wants to sit out a game for rest even with his team currently out of the play-in... he's going to rest.

lipoli390 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

FNG wrote:I'm stuck in the middle on this one. I'm also disappointed when I go to a game and find out that a star that I wanted to see live isn't playing, and the "old man" in me says these guys are paid millions of dollars and need to play if they aren't really injured. But I also recognize that the goal of savvy GMs and coaches not named Tom Thibodeau is to go as deep in the playoffs as possible, not to win a specific game on January 14th, and there is a belief that a rested player is likely to perform better in the playoffs. It's a complicated issue, but I suspect it is management that decides to rest players, not the players.

And is it any different in baseball? I grew up in an era when starting pitchers regularly pitched complete games, but now it's a rarity. It's load management again. The pitcher doesn't want to come out of the game in the 6th inning (you can see the typical reaction in the dugout), but managers have concluded that limiting innings during the regular season gives his team a better chance postseason.

I don't like it in either case and I admire Ant's enthusiasm, but my suspicion is that management is right in both baseball and basketball.

I disagree a bit that it's primarily a management thing in the NBA. Even guys on bad teams have load management days.

The NBA is a player's league. If LeBron James wants to play... he's going to play. If he wants to sit out a game for rest even with his team currently out of the play-in... he's going to rest.

Yes. It's the star players who take games off, not the lesser rotation players. And it's those star players who are calling the shots, not the coaches, GMs or medical/training staff. If it were up to management, Ant would not be playing every game this season. Ant wants to play even when he's hurting or exhausted and, therefore, he plays. Speaking of Ant, as much as I don't like star players taking games off, there's a part of me that wishes Wolves management would have kept him out of some games in the interest of his longevity. On the other hand, I'm not sure how much total minutes played impact's a player's longevity. I think about players like MJ, Stockton, Malone and Kareem. They all rarely sat and piled up a lot of minutes yet they all had long careers and were playing at the high level late in their respective careers.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

FNG wrote:I'm stuck in the middle on this one. I'm also disappointed when I go to a game and find out that a star that I wanted to see live isn't playing, and the "old man" in me says these guys are paid millions of dollars and need to play if they aren't really injured. But I also recognize that the goal of savvy GMs and coaches not named Tom Thibodeau is to go as deep in the playoffs as possible, not to win a specific game on January 14th, and there is a belief that a rested player is likely to perform better in the playoffs. It's a complicated issue, but I suspect it is management that decides to rest players, not the players.

And is it any different in baseball? I grew up in an era when starting pitchers regularly pitched complete games, but now it's a rarity. It's load management again. The pitcher doesn't want to come out of the game in the 6th inning (you can see the typical reaction in the dugout), but managers have concluded that limiting innings during the regular season gives his team a better chance postseason.

I don't like it in either case and I admire Ant's enthusiasm, but my suspicion is that management is right in both baseball and basketball.

I disagree a bit that it's primarily a management thing in the NBA. Even guys on bad teams have load management days.

The NBA is a player's league. If LeBron James wants to play... he's going to play. If he wants to sit out a game for rest even with his team currently out of the play-in... he's going to rest.

Yes. It's the star players who take games off, not the lesser rotation players. And it's those star players who are calling the shots, not the coaches, GMs or medical/training staff. If it were up to management, Ant would not be playing every game this season. Ant wants to play even when he's hurting or exhausted and, therefore, he plays. Speaking of Ant, as much as I don't like star players taking games off, there's a part of me that wishes Wolves management would have kept him out of some games in the interest of his longevity. On the other hand, I'm not sure how much total minutes played impact's a player's longevity. I think about players like MJ, Stockton, Malone and Kareem. They all rarely sat and piled up a lot of minutes yet they all had long careers and were playing at the high level late in their respective careers.

I think there's something to today's game being more taxing in certain ways.

I also think there's something to the old adage "give an inch, they'll take a mile" when it comes to load management and other aspects of today's NBA. Ideally, there's a happy medium.

As for Anthony Edwards, in today's NBA, it's unlikely he'll be in Minnesota when all those miles start to show on his legs anyway. So in the meantime, I enjoy his willingness to play every game and keep us in the playoff hunt stance. It's a bit different than what we see from others and adds to his likability.

CoolBreeze44 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

FNG wrote:I'm stuck in the middle on this one. I'm also disappointed when I go to a game and find out that a star that I wanted to see live isn't playing, and the "old man" in me says these guys are paid millions of dollars and need to play if they aren't really injured. But I also recognize that the goal of savvy GMs and coaches not named Tom Thibodeau is to go as deep in the playoffs as possible, not to win a specific game on January 14th, and there is a belief that a rested player is likely to perform better in the playoffs. It's a complicated issue, but I suspect it is management that decides to rest players, not the players.

And is it any different in baseball? I grew up in an era when starting pitchers regularly pitched complete games, but now it's a rarity. It's load management again. The pitcher doesn't want to come out of the game in the 6th inning (you can see the typical reaction in the dugout), but managers have concluded that limiting innings during the regular season gives his team a better chance postseason.

I don't like it in either case and I admire Ant's enthusiasm, but my suspicion is that management is right in both baseball and basketball.

I disagree a bit that it's primarily a management thing in the NBA. Even guys on bad teams have load management days.

The NBA is a player's league. If LeBron James wants to play... he's going to play. If he wants to sit out a game for rest even with his team currently out of the play-in... he's going to rest.

Yes. It's the star players who take games off, not the lesser rotation players. And it's those star players who are calling the shots, not the coaches, GMs or medical/training staff. If it were up to management, Ant would not be playing every game this season. Ant wants to play even when he's hurting or exhausted and, therefore, he plays. Speaking of Ant, as much as I don't like star players taking games off, there's a part of me that wishes Wolves management would have kept him out of some games in the interest of his longevity. On the other hand, I'm not sure how much total minutes played impact's a player's longevity. I think about players like MJ, Stockton, Malone and Kareem. They all rarely sat and piled up a lot of minutes yet they all had long careers and were playing at the high level late in their respective careers.

I think there's something to today's game being more taxing in certain ways.

I also think there's something to the old adage "give an inch, they'll take a mile" when it comes to load management and other aspects of today's NBA. Ideally, there's a happy medium.

As for Anthony Edwards, in today's NBA, it's unlikely he'll be in Minnesota when all those miles start to show on his legs anyway. So in the meantime, I enjoy his willingness to play every game and keep us in the playoff hunt stance. It's a bit different than what we see from others and adds to his likability.

Id be curious to know what you think is more taxing on the players today. They have chartered flights, better equipment (shoes), luxury hotels, less overall travel, personal assistants and massage therapists, deeper rosters, player friendly coaches, and less in-game contact. What's harder today than previous generations?

Camden wrote:

CoolBreeze44 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

FNG wrote:I'm stuck in the middle on this one. I'm also disappointed when I go to a game and find out that a star that I wanted to see live isn't playing, and the "old man" in me says these guys are paid millions of dollars and need to play if they aren't really injured. But I also recognize that the goal of savvy GMs and coaches not named Tom Thibodeau is to go as deep in the playoffs as possible, not to win a specific game on January 14th, and there is a belief that a rested player is likely to perform better in the playoffs. It's a complicated issue, but I suspect it is management that decides to rest players, not the players.

And is it any different in baseball? I grew up in an era when starting pitchers regularly pitched complete games, but now it's a rarity. It's load management again. The pitcher doesn't want to come out of the game in the 6th inning (you can see the typical reaction in the dugout), but managers have concluded that limiting innings during the regular season gives his team a better chance postseason.

I don't like it in either case and I admire Ant's enthusiasm, but my suspicion is that management is right in both baseball and basketball.

I disagree a bit that it's primarily a management thing in the NBA. Even guys on bad teams have load management days.

The NBA is a player's league. If LeBron James wants to play... he's going to play. If he wants to sit out a game for rest even with his team currently out of the play-in... he's going to rest.

Yes. It's the star players who take games off, not the lesser rotation players. And it's those star players who are calling the shots, not the coaches, GMs or medical/training staff. If it were up to management, Ant would not be playing every game this season. Ant wants to play even when he's hurting or exhausted and, therefore, he plays. Speaking of Ant, as much as I don't like star players taking games off, there's a part of me that wishes Wolves management would have kept him out of some games in the interest of his longevity. On the other hand, I'm not sure how much total minutes played impact's a player's longevity. I think about players like MJ, Stockton, Malone and Kareem. They all rarely sat and piled up a lot of minutes yet they all had long careers and were playing at the high level late in their respective careers.

I think there's something to today's game being more taxing in certain ways.

I also think there's something to the old adage "give an inch, they'll take a mile" when it comes to load management and other aspects of today's NBA. Ideally, there's a happy medium.

As for Anthony Edwards, in today's NBA, it's unlikely he'll be in Minnesota when all those miles start to show on his legs anyway. So in the meantime, I enjoy his willingness to play every game and keep us in the playoff hunt stance. It's a bit different than what we see from others and adds to his likability.

Id be curious to know what you think is more taxing on the players today. They have chartered flights, better equipment (shoes), luxury hotels, less overall travel, personal assistants and massage therapists, deeper rosters, player friendly coaches, and less in-game contact. What's harder today than previous generations?

The game itself is more difficult, for starters. There's much more emphasis on faster pace and using more possessions. Bigger, stronger, faster, more explosive athletes defending other bigger, stronger, faster, more explosive athletes more times in one game. Ligaments and tendons can only handle so much stress before injury. Add in the fact that off-season regiments are typically more intense than in decades past with athletes often playing more and more exhibition games on top of that. Way more proverbial miles on the body even with the advanced methods in rehabilitation and recovery. You also mentioned less in-game contact, and that may be true in the sense that they aren't getting clobbered in the paint or being hand-checked, but there's overall more movement and change of direction within the game that makes up for that damage to the body in some ways.

With that said, I still don't think load management is excusable given that it's ultimately still an entertainment industry, but I do think it's much more difficult on the human body playing in today's league than any other era.

CoolBreeze44 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

FNG wrote:I'm stuck in the middle on this one. I'm also disappointed when I go to a game and find out that a star that I wanted to see live isn't playing, and the "old man" in me says these guys are paid millions of dollars and need to play if they aren't really injured. But I also recognize that the goal of savvy GMs and coaches not named Tom Thibodeau is to go as deep in the playoffs as possible, not to win a specific game on January 14th, and there is a belief that a rested player is likely to perform better in the playoffs. It's a complicated issue, but I suspect it is management that decides to rest players, not the players.

And is it any different in baseball? I grew up in an era when starting pitchers regularly pitched complete games, but now it's a rarity. It's load management again. The pitcher doesn't want to come out of the game in the 6th inning (you can see the typical reaction in the dugout), but managers have concluded that limiting innings during the regular season gives his team a better chance postseason.

I don't like it in either case and I admire Ant's enthusiasm, but my suspicion is that management is right in both baseball and basketball.

I disagree a bit that it's primarily a management thing in the NBA. Even guys on bad teams have load management days.

The NBA is a player's league. If LeBron James wants to play... he's going to play. If he wants to sit out a game for rest even with his team currently out of the play-in... he's going to rest.

Yes. It's the star players who take games off, not the lesser rotation players. And it's those star players who are calling the shots, not the coaches, GMs or medical/training staff. If it were up to management, Ant would not be playing every game this season. Ant wants to play even when he's hurting or exhausted and, therefore, he plays. Speaking of Ant, as much as I don't like star players taking games off, there's a part of me that wishes Wolves management would have kept him out of some games in the interest of his longevity. On the other hand, I'm not sure how much total minutes played impact's a player's longevity. I think about players like MJ, Stockton, Malone and Kareem. They all rarely sat and piled up a lot of minutes yet they all had long careers and were playing at the high level late in their respective careers.

I think there's something to today's game being more taxing in certain ways.

I also think there's something to the old adage "give an inch, they'll take a mile" when it comes to load management and other aspects of today's NBA. Ideally, there's a happy medium.

As for Anthony Edwards, in today's NBA, it's unlikely he'll be in Minnesota when all those miles start to show on his legs anyway. So in the meantime, I enjoy his willingness to play every game and keep us in the playoff hunt stance. It's a bit different than what we see from others and adds to his likability.

Id be curious to know what you think is more taxing on the players today. They have chartered flights, better equipment (shoes), luxury hotels, less overall travel, personal assistants and massage therapists, deeper rosters, player friendly coaches, and less in-game contact. What's harder today than previous generations?

CoolBreeze44 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

FNG wrote:I'm stuck in the middle on this one. I'm also disappointed when I go to a game and find out that a star that I wanted to see live isn't playing, and the "old man" in me says these guys are paid millions of dollars and need to play if they aren't really injured. But I also recognize that the goal of savvy GMs and coaches not named Tom Thibodeau is to go as deep in the playoffs as possible, not to win a specific game on January 14th, and there is a belief that a rested player is likely to perform better in the playoffs. It's a complicated issue, but I suspect it is management that decides to rest players, not the players.

And is it any different in baseball? I grew up in an era when starting pitchers regularly pitched complete games, but now it's a rarity. It's load management again. The pitcher doesn't want to come out of the game in the 6th inning (you can see the typical reaction in the dugout), but managers have concluded that limiting innings during the regular season gives his team a better chance postseason.

I don't like it in either case and I admire Ant's enthusiasm, but my suspicion is that management is right in both baseball and basketball.

I disagree a bit that it's primarily a management thing in the NBA. Even guys on bad teams have load management days.

The NBA is a player's league. If LeBron James wants to play... he's going to play. If he wants to sit out a game for rest even with his team currently out of the play-in... he's going to rest.

Yes. It's the star players who take games off, not the lesser rotation players. And it's those star players who are calling the shots, not the coaches, GMs or medical/training staff. If it were up to management, Ant would not be playing every game this season. Ant wants to play even when he's hurting or exhausted and, therefore, he plays. Speaking of Ant, as much as I don't like star players taking games off, there's a part of me that wishes Wolves management would have kept him out of some games in the interest of his longevity. On the other hand, I'm not sure how much total minutes played impact's a player's longevity. I think about players like MJ, Stockton, Malone and Kareem. They all rarely sat and piled up a lot of minutes yet they all had long careers and were playing at the high level late in their respective careers.

I think there's something to today's game being more taxing in certain ways.

I also think there's something to the old adage "give an inch, they'll take a mile" when it comes to load management and other aspects of today's NBA. Ideally, there's a happy medium.

As for Anthony Edwards, in today's NBA, it's unlikely he'll be in Minnesota when all those miles start to show on his legs anyway. So in the meantime, I enjoy his willingness to play every game and keep us in the playoff hunt stance. It's a bit different than what we see from others and adds to his likability.

Id be curious to know what you think is more taxing on the players today. They have chartered flights, better equipment (shoes), luxury hotels, less overall travel, personal assistants and massage therapists, deeper rosters, player friendly coaches, and less in-game contact. What's harder today than previous generations?