Q12543 wrote:BloopOracle wrote:Yeah if only Thibs put in his garbage bench we would have won more games, are we seriously going to try and play the angle that Tom was holding back some incredible bench again!? Give me a break our record would have been almost exactly the same, our core would be rested sure but also even worse with their defensive rotations with less playing time.
Rush was was starting on a bad team after playing bench minutes for the greatest regular season team in history, Hill played a total of 15 minutes throughout a 7 game playoff series and about the same the last 7 games of the season sans the meaningless finale, he's a stopgap this is painfully obvious. Aldrich barely played as our centers stayed healthy. Mystery solved
Do I think Thibs played his starters too much? Yes absolutely especially Wiggins but let's stop this nonsense that it somehow affected our record negatively.
- I think LST's point is less about "holding back" an incredible bench and more about not giving the starters enough rest. Rush, Aldrich, and Hill were all
credible (not
incredible) rotation players on winning teams the prior season. Surely playing one or two of them an extra minute or two per game wouldn't have killed us.
- Thibs' bark was bigger than his bite when it came to his "big three". While he would cajole and bark all game at them, he never actually sat them down when defensive lapses took place. Thus, there were no real consequences. Instead, he rode them for big minutes and it's not silly to suggest that may be, just may be, tired legs and poor defensive habits helped tank our team in many 2nd half melt downs.
In my opinion, LST's theory is credible. But it is still just a theory.
I agree...just a theory, and it can't be proven. But here's some things we know are true:
1) Thibs played his starters more than any other coach in the league
2) The Wolves almost set a record for most double digit leads resulting in losses, surpassed only by a hapless Knicks team
3) The Thibs-led Wolves went 3-13 in their final 16 games; the Mitchell-led Wolves went 8-8.
4) Despite being much maligned on this board and little used by Thibs, the Wolves bench was actually fairly decent in staying with the opponent as measured by plus/minus. In fact, four of the five best gross plus/minus totals were posted by reserves (only Gorgui cracked the top five).
Those are facts. Here are some non-provable observations and theories:
1) The Wolves just looked more tired than their opponents at the end of games, and were unable to get defensive stops on a consistent basis.
2) The Wolves looked more tired than almost all their opponents at the end of the season.
3) Starters play better when they are given adequate rest during a game, and struggle with their shot and defense when they are not.
4) Bench players play better when they are given consistent, sufficient playing time. (While I have this in the "theory" category, almost any NBA reserve will tell you this is true. And we also know that Hill, Rush and Aldrich all played better the previous year when given more minutes.
You add these facts and theories together, and it's pretty difficult to conclude that Thibs' refusal to play his bench anywhere near the league average was a successful strategy.
