Doc: Playing Starters Too Few Minutes Does More Harm Than Good
by Roy_Hobbs on Oct 6, 2009 12:35 AM EDT
in News/Links
44 comments
Many fans have called for Doc Rivers to play the starters vastly reduced minutes this season, mostly to keep the "big three" fresh for the playoffs. According to Doc, it isn't going to happen:
While Rivers said it sounds good in theory to limit his starters to less than 30 minutes a night to prevent injury and excess fatigue before the postseason, he believes that holding them back would do more harm than good. "You have to play your starters for a certain amount of minutes," Rivers said. "People think that if you can play them 28 minutes a night that’s good, but that’s awful. If you look historically, Michael Jordan never played under 37 minutes a night. There is a reason for that — rhythm. You have to keep your rhythm during the season. [Playing fewer minutes] sounds like a great idea, but if you play them 28 minutes to conserve them, then you throw them out of their rhythm." That sounds good in theory. However, there's a fine line between playing the starters too little, and over-playing them to the point of exhaustion, like last season. Repeatedly last season, Doc admitted that he was overplaying Pierce and Ray. Last season, Pierce stated that fatigue for he and Ray Allen was a concern. Already in training camp, Doc has admitted to playing KG too many minutes. In the past, Doc has played other players too many minutes, even against doctor's orders (i.e., Wally Szczerbiak, among others). Should we trust him, then, when he's already talking about playing the starters more minutes than maybe some fans are expecting?
The good thing is, the players are on Doc's side on this one:
Celtics captain Paul Pierce and fellow All-Star Ray Allen both said they don’t want to play fewer minutes to conserve themselves for the postseason if it means the Celtics are going to lose games. "That doesn’t make sense to me," Pierce said. "I’m trying to win every game we play. … When I step out on the court and the other guys step out on the court, we play to win." Furthermore, Doc's plan isn't as radical as it may seem, as he recognizes that he can't run the starters into the ground:
"We’re going to be who we are," Rivers said. "We are not going to apologize for it. We are going to play every night to win games, and at the same time, because we have a bench, the minutes will be fairly good." Rivers said that ideally he would like to play his starters somewhere between 32 and 36 minutes a night. "Everybody’s different and you don’t know what it is until it starts," Rivers said. "With Kevin, with injuries, you might have to do it less. … I think Paul is one of those guys that you can play any stretch of minutes, but Kevin and Ray need minutes. That’s what they need to get going to get their plays." Ultimately, if Doc truly keeps the starters in the 32 to 36 minute per game range, that's probably fine. As Doc points out, there have been plenty of aging starters in league history who have averaged 32+ minutes per game. I think, though, that you start running into problems when the starters are averaging closer to 40 minutes, like they did late last season. Obviously, there were extenuating circumstances there; KG was hurt, and Doc was basically left without a bench competent enough to win games. However, it's imperative that Doc keeps the team fresh down the stretch. With Rasheed and Daniels on the bench, I think that's something he'll have a lot more success with this season. UPDATE: Doc has more on the subject in this morning's Dennis & Callahan interview: I assume the addition of Rasheed and Shelden Williams and Marquis Daniels allows you to even further monitor the minutes your guys are playing, mix and match and get guys rest to extend their viability throughout the course of the season. Fair to say?
Yeah, that is fair. You know, you have to careful with the rest, though. There’s a limit, if you know what I’m saying. If you play Paul Pierce let’s say 28 minutes a night, that’s probably not good for him. It doesn’t allow him to stay in rhythm and get done what he likes to get done on the floor. So, there’s a happy medium to that, too. Historically, if you look at all the great players who are [older than 30], they still stayed in that 35-minute area. And I think if you ask each one of them, they would even say higher. I’ve asked them, and they always say the 38[-minute] number, which I think is too much. So, we’re going to try to keep him at that 35, 33 number, and that would be terrific.
0 recs |
44 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
look, we win despite doc.
just like we won despite KC and Fitch. we didn’t have to overcome Red, Bill or Tommy. Just imho
by wahz on Oct 6, 2009 12:58 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
??
Not really
doc really brought this team together, interested ubuntu, hired thibodeau, and motivated them as good as you possibly can the year they won the title, not to mention the players like doc
by latin on Oct 6, 2009 9:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
minutes
Not surprisingly, no one is suggesting he play starters just 28 minutes, except maybe in a blow out, which he has done on occasion anyway. Regularly, of course that would be silly…unless you are going with a true platoon at a position, which rarely (never?) happens in the NBA.
I pretty much said what I wanted on this topic earlier. Neither extreme is good. It is really in the details. But with depth, Doc is generally a good juggler of overall minutes.
Clearly, these guys are hell bent for leather this season. They are going for a record performance.
by tenaciousT on Oct 6, 2009 1:15 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
games
if low minutes per game is bad, then why not give some of the big names entire nights off, that has to help their situation, its a long season, you don’t win a title on a great night in the regular season.
Take this as an example, we have back to backs with the 2nd game against the Timberwolves or the Grizzlies or another bottom 8 teams in the league. Why play all the big names a full 30+ minutes?
Paul says “I’m trying to win every game we play” That is true, however the effort you have to put in to “try” to win a mid season game against the Bucks can decrease the effort you have to put in to win a finals game against the Lakers. Because no matter what anyone says the energy and effort a player has over an entire 82 game season plus the playoffs is not unlimited. It it were unlimited they would be able to play doubleheaders every night and not get fatigued.
Keeping you rhythm during the season is not an excuse for giving the big names much needed rest. They can take the entire night off, instead of a 15 minute game. Because if a game is scheduled on friday and saturday and off on sunday, if you skip saturday its just like having two nights off instead of one. That is not going to upset a players rhythm.
by star18 on Oct 6, 2009 3:46 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Like everyone else, coaches aren't above wearing out things that make them look.
I don’t know what’s the best balance to take on minutes. But certainly many coaches err on the side of playing starters too many minutes because the extra wins show up on their coaching record. The past is littered with star players that were rode into the ground by coaches that were fixated on the short term.
by no kidding on Oct 6, 2009 10:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great, so Doc will try and burn out PP again…
30-34 minutes per game is more than enough for the big three…
by thebirdman on Oct 6, 2009 4:40 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Memo to Doc : Jordan is not the "standard"....he`s the "exception"!!!
John Stockton averaged 29 mins. during his final 6 seasons.
Tim Duncan has averaged 33 mins. ever since he was 28 {last 5 yrs.}.
Sam Jones averaged 26 during his final year of `69 {Celtics won title}.
by Title 18 on Oct 6, 2009 5:02 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Agreed, T18
Not that I’m necessarily in tremendous disagreement with Doc overall, but the first thing that struck me while reading his quote was “What’s the value in comparing to Michael?” Sure, he’s the ‘gold standard,’ so to speak, but he was also clearly a once-in-a-lifetime type, and there’s a reason others haven’t replicated what he has done. That part of the rhetoric doesn’t hold a ton of water with me either.
Nice follow-up stats as well.
-sw
Growing up in the Weinman household, you learn two rules very quickly if you aspire to reach double-digits in the years-of-age category: Hate thy Knick, hate thy Yankee.
Go Celtics, Go Dodgers. -sw
by Steve Weinman on Oct 6, 2009 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What's the point of having a great bench
If you play the starters about 37 minutes a game?
I hope Doc will change his mind and quickly realize that his stars are getting tired. Otherwise this will lead to a lot of fatigue or injuries and we will be doomed…
by Drucci on Oct 6, 2009 6:38 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
need more blowouts
one problem with last year’s team was that the bench never stepped on the neck of opponents and we always had close games – even during the winning streaks
we need more blowouts to balance out the occasional overtime games
"We few, we happy few, we band of brothers" Henry V
by Jeff Clark on Oct 6, 2009 6:49 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Fine point
Poor late-first, early-second quarter bench play kept opponents in a lot of games that might have been put away early otherwise.
-sw
Growing up in the Weinman household, you learn two rules very quickly if you aspire to reach double-digits in the years-of-age category: Hate thy Knick, hate thy Yankee.
Go Celtics, Go Dodgers. -sw
by Steve Weinman on Oct 6, 2009 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think this is huge point
there were many games last year were doc had the second team out there and had to pull them too quickly because they couldn’t keep or extend leads. At first he solve it by simply yanking the whole crew back the bench and sending the starters back out earlier than intended. Then he got to the mode where he would never put a ‘pure’ second team out there – he always had Paul or Ray on the floor with the second string. That contributed in large part to why those two guys in particular had so many minutes by season’s end.
This year’s second unit looks, at least on paper, to be WAY better so hopefully this will mean Doc will leave the seconds out there for that extra 2-3 minutes in the second period and the end of the third. That alone would be huge toward saving the starters.
by mmmmm on Oct 6, 2009 1:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wonder how much Doc's theory comes from personal experience...
Despite being a regular starter in his career, he never averaged as many as 33 minutes per season. I imagine he thought he should be playing more at the time.
All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino
by Roy_Hobbs on Oct 6, 2009 7:40 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't care what Doc says about this
He said last year he was overplaying Pierce and Ray, as noted above. He also said he’d play bench players to rest them even if it meant losing games. Well, we still lost some games but he didn’t really play anybody to give them a rest. We’ll see how much he plays them and that’ll be that. Hopefully we do get a good amount of blowouts so the point will be moot in the end.
The other thing about this is…is anybody really asking for the starters to play less than 30mpg? And by starters we’re talking PGA, of course. I don’t really think that’s the case.
by Berkcelt on Oct 6, 2009 8:04 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Doc's History
Doc has historically been criticized for his rotations of players going back to Orlando. It’s his achilles heel. At this stage I doubt it will end.
Most of the people I’ve heard complain about the minutes (myself included) usually are addressing how Doc substitutes. He plays players for too long of stretches at a time. When you read studies on blood oxygen levels, a better pattern is for shorter stretches of minutes played, with shorter breaks. The overall minutes might not be much different, but again, how the minutes are distributed changes.
by amenhotep04 on Oct 6, 2009 8:31 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Listen
Before the rash of injuries Doc was a man of his word and was keeping the starters between 31 and 36 minutes per game last year. The year before, the same exact thing except Perk played even less minutes.
What we have here is a fan base that is only remembering the last two months of the season and not the year and a half before that time. Doc will keep his starters between 30-36 MPG if everyone is healthy, that you can bank on. Sorry people but that is his history. The last two months of last year with Ray and Paul are an aberration.
by nickagneta on Oct 6, 2009 8:47 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I remember quite well. I’m just saying that injuries are not enough of an excuse to play Pierce the amount of minutes he played towards the end of the season. There are ways around it, and it takes better rotation discipline… better substitution patterns, identifying moments during the game where he can afford to play less experienced or the bench for a couple of minutes giving the guy a couple of minutes of extra rest.
The amount of minutes Pierce played was a result of a coaching style rather than result of injuries.
Just take the Spurs for example, and how they manage the minutes of their players despite their injuries. Yet they still manage to win a lot of games.
It’s quite doable, and what Doc did with our players was borderline irresponsible and lacked big picture mentallity.
by BudweiserCeltic on Oct 6, 2009 9:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree, too...
You can’t entirely disregard the last two months of the season. The fact is, Doc ran Ray, and especially Pierce, into the ground the last two months. While he didn’t have a lot of options, he could have worked in minutes for Walker, rather than playing Pierce 40+ minutes per night.
If the Celtics have injury issues this season — which are likely, with a lot of aging and/or brittle players — then Doc needs to do a better job adjusting minutes. 36 minutes per game is fine as a cap, but I don’t want to see minutes go much higher than that.
All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino
by Roy_Hobbs on Oct 6, 2009 9:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well
I think you’re wrong about last year and we’ll just have to leave it at that and Doc in general. Besides last year Doc has only had one season here where he played ANY starter over 37 minutes per game. That was the 2005-06 season where the team had Ricky and Paul as about the only players that were playing any quality ball whatsoever. Davis and Pierce were both young.
Last year, the way I see it, was no different than any other year where Doc’s rotations were allowing him to keep his players minutes down to a level of 31-36 MPG. Then Tony, KG, Scal, Powe, Baby, and Tony again all went out with injury. At one point in one game, if you remember, Pierce was putting minutes in as a center because they were so shorthanded. Don’t forget that Marbury and Moore weren’t even a part of this team until the last week of February. Most of February this team was down to 10-11 players most nights with the options off the bench being Walker, POB, Giddens, Pruitt(all clueless last year BTW), an injured sub par Tony, Eddie, and Powe. Scal was injured. Baby was starting.
Sorry if I don’t agree that Popovich’s coaching style is the only way to do things. He coach’s his way and doesn’t mind losing games during the year. I happen to think you can try to win all your games and still keep the minutes down if you have a decent bench. Last year’s bench was pathetic and Doc went with the guys he trusted to win games to attempt to get HCA in a very tight Eastern Conference.
And as much as Pierce went public with his playing time concerns, I wonder what he was saying to Doc on those nights when they were trying to get a W. My guess here is that he wasn’t saying take me out but rather he was saying keep me in so we can win. Doc is great with the press and I wouldn’t put it past him admitting to overplaying Paul and Ray publicly to protect the team from a large internal controversy. If he had come forward and asserted his authority saying Pierce should keep his mouth shut because this is internal team stuff and because he was asking his coach to leave him in so they could win those games, the team would only have suffered more. The internal strife could have ripped the team apart.
by nickagneta on Oct 6, 2009 10:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Your last paragraph
1) It’s the job of the coach to make the tough decisions, which include looking at the long view rather than just the short term of winning games. I mean, we don’t forgive Jimy Williams for trusting Pedro against the Yankees, do we?;
2) Last year wasn’t the first time Doc admitted to overplaying his guys. He admitted to specifically going against doctor’s orders with Wally, for instance, and playing him too many minutes. He played Pierce heavy minutes coming back from elbow surgery in a meaningless year, and he did the same thing with Big Al even though he was complaining of persistent ankle pain. He’s already admitted to playing KG too much this year. It’s not a ploy, it’s reality. It’s a problem the guy has.
Ultimately, I think we reach the same conclusion, which is that the team’s minutes will be fine this year. However, I don’t think we should ignore the reality that Doc has, in fact, overplayed his starters in an attempt to win games in the past. Luckily, though, Doc can still win this year without having his starters in there.
All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino
by Roy_Hobbs on Oct 6, 2009 10:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pierce did not play heavy minutes after elbow surgery. He averaged 35 MPG during that 23 games stretch before they shut him down because it was a meaningless season and they wanted to tank. His elbow was fine and he had medical clearance.
Big Al was given a clean bill of health by the entire Celtic medical staff. Danny, the trainers and the medical staff did not believe that Al was that injured and thought he was just being a soft 19 year old that didn’t know the difference between playing in pain and playing injured. That’s why Doc kept playing him. That wasn’t Doc’s fault. Hell the medical staff was surprised when the surgery showed that Al’s foot was messed up worse than it was.
And in retrospect Doc did comment he might have played Garnett too much but he referring to the amount of games he played him when his knee started hurting and not in regards to minutes. But KG wanted to go so he sent him in there. Doc was playing Monday morning QB with his decision on games he played KG not minutes.
I’ll give you the Wally situation. And I’ll admit that Doc played Ray and Paul too much last year for 2 months. But I think he was justified and had little options last year. The Wally situation was inexcusable. So in my mind Roy, I don’t see a pattern of overuse in minutes of players. I just don’t.
by nickagneta on Oct 6, 2009 10:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're wrong, nick...
Pierce came back from elbow surgery, and was battling foot problems. Despite that, Doc played him 50 minutes in one game down the stretch, and in 40 in multiple others.
He also went against doctor’s orders. For instance, in his first game back, Pierce was, “being restricted to no more than 20 minutes. Originally, Rivers was told by the team’s medical staff that Pierce couldn’t play more than three minutes at a time, but that order was rescinded.”
In that first game back, Doc played Pierce 32 minutes, in a meaningless game.
All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino
by Roy_Hobbs on Oct 6, 2009 10:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Doc tried to rest Paul and Ray and Rajon near the end of the season
But all that effort was lost in the Chicago series. From the beginning of February until early March Paul played 40+ minutes 12 times in 17 games. After that he played 40+ minutes 3 times in 17 games. He played 31 minutes or less in 5 of his last 6 games before taking off the last game. He probably averaged about 35 minutes a game for almost a month before the playoffs. He might have needed more rest but he wasn’t run into the ground (after early March).
by BballTim on Oct 6, 2009 11:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
A little too late though. And yeah, the Chicago series does make the problem negligible… but it doesn’t excuse it. Would a better rested Pierce have made that Chicago series different though? He looked quite sluggish in the series from the get-go. Though I blame Pierce quite a bit for it, Doc is not absolved of any fault.
by BudweiserCeltic on Oct 6, 2009 11:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think fans are a little bit whiny and do a little fabricating when it comes to the overplaying of the big 3 myself
KGs minutes have been held under 32 MPG since he arrived as a celtic, and doc is strict with them and will continue to be strict with his minutes
Paul and Ray were both at 35 MPG when we won the title, and went up 1 and 2 minutes last year due to injury, lack of depth, and close game after close game….get over it
by latin on Oct 6, 2009 8:59 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I am just laughing at the idea of Doc dwelling on what the fans will think.
It isn’t about 32 or 36 mpg. The issue is the nights he lets Ray or Paul go over 40 to win a regular season game in Dec or Jan. Daniels and Rondo developing into a catalyst for the second unit as well as an overall upgrade and development of talent with Wallace and Baby on that second unit should reduce Doc’s dependence on having either Paul or Ray on the floor for every minute of the game. But some nights Doc has to pull what Pop does in SA and just let it go down the tubes if the bench can’t do its job, but that is pretty frustrating to watch.
by sully00 on Oct 6, 2009 9:22 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
It's Doc's call.
Winning games in Dec- Jan is important for playoff home court strategies. Resting your players is important. Difficult balance. That’s what senior managers are paid to do – make those tough trade-off decisions. Doc’s record with the Big Three has been good in this regard.
Wahz, while I agree with your point about KC especially -a more clueless looking NBA coach I don’t think I’ll ever see – its an insult to compare Doc to KC.
by Wildblu1 on Oct 6, 2009 9:32 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
It was not so much the minutes, it was the pressure to be “the man” because they didn’t have a complete team around them that burned PP and Ray out last year, plus nagging injuries of their own. In this case, I don’t think it was the quantity as much as the quality. I like Scal, Baby and, uh, Marbury as much as any Celtics Fan, but they did put a lot of pressure on Paul and Ray to score. This year the “quality” and “production” should not drop off as much when the bench is called on. Just my opinion.
by thirstyboots18 on Oct 6, 2009 9:33 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think it's both...
I think both quality and quantity of minutes matter. In terms of sheer quantity, Pierce talked about playing too much, and said that Doc needed to play the rookies more. That should show that Pierce himself thought he was playing too much.
However, you’re absolutely right that high-leverage minutes where a player is carrying his team probably count for more than minutes where a guy can coast a little.
Ultimately, though, I don’t think it will matter, because Doc has a real bench this year. Because of that, there should be no need to overplay anybody.
All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino
by Roy_Hobbs on Oct 6, 2009 9:43 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree about the role, there are mins when Ray is on the floor and playing a certain way that I just don’t think the impact is there physically (nor is it there results wise). Paul doesn’t do that on the offensive end he is always grinding. Doc he has actually done a decent job managing the mins, I don’t think they will go much below 36 just avoid the 46-48 min burnouts and sit Paul if he is hurt and not let him just keep going with a bad elbow or knee or something. I think there is also more value in sitting these guys for full games instead of worrying about 5 mins here or there it isn’t were the mileage adds up.
by sully00 on Oct 6, 2009 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thirstyboots, great comment.
I think that was definitely a factor last season. it wasn’t just the minutes, it was the pressure of the role required. Pierce even said this season that is easy to give up having the ‘be man’ when you have the players he has around him to rely on.
Another great thread on C-blog about the nuances of minutes, fatigue, etc.
If you read the comments by the players this pre-season, there is a dance they play about definitely needing help that they didn’t have last season, yet…being tired last year being ‘overblown’. The two don’t mesh. It’s largely about deflecting criticism for their coach, IMO, who they really enjoy playing for.
That said, no one on the Cs this season will ever concede to letting substitute players play, even if it means losing a game or two along the way. It is the use of the phrase ‘losing game’ that rankles the players. In that regard, they are 100% behind Doc.
That is where they depart from ‘the Popovich way’. KG is certainly not a Tim Duncan type personality. This team is talking about going for a record year. That actually puts more pressure on Doc, IMO, though he is also talking the same way.
The team will actually be more tightly wound than last season in many respects. One way to manage that is through minutes. Another is trying to adjust the team’s mindset a bit. Doc has publicly gone on record as saying he won’t try to do that. They are an emotional team and he will not make any attempt to change that.
Saying that, he already knows that KG can get too excited sometimes. I’m of the opinion there have been times that Doc’s done some attitude tweaking behind the scenes.
This is a really interesting topic, because it’s like catching water with sieve. How do you do it? Or catching the wind, or putting mist in a bottle. It’s there – It’s not there. Yet..you know that it is there.
I’ve thought about Doc using the Jordan comparison and saying that might not be a good comparison. I always say the same about comparing a player to Larry Bird. Yet, I’m sure that KG and PP would find that to be a reasonable comparison. In fact, they may want to measure them selves against those great teams – especially this season. They want to be talked about in those conversations.
by tenaciousT on Oct 6, 2009 5:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
32 minutes per game played for the starters should be just right ............
He can play the starters 8 minutes per quarter.
32 minutes per game is the right balance of rest and playing time to keep them sharp and fresh.
Doc has a deep, solid talented bench this year and should use it.
I hope he does not fall into a mode of playing the starters alot like he seems to like to do at times over the years.
It is vital the starters, especially the older ones get proper rest this year.
by fordescort on Oct 6, 2009 10:19 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Moderation in All Things
If a player is used to playing 40+ minutes a night, then playing him 28 could easily disrupt his rhythm. But if a player is used to playing 32 minutes a night, then playing him 32 the next night won’t disrupt a thing.
by Brickowski on Oct 6, 2009 10:30 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Good stuff as always, RH
With ya.
-sw
Growing up in the Weinman household, you learn two rules very quickly if you aspire to reach double-digits in the years-of-age category: Hate thy Knick, hate thy Yankee.
Go Celtics, Go Dodgers. -sw
by Steve Weinman on Oct 6, 2009 12:23 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Thanks, Steve...
This one was pretty much a softball of an article. I’m glad the team is finally giving us some stuff to talk about, and to debate.
All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino
by Roy_Hobbs on Oct 6, 2009 12:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
last year it was- we got to catch up to cleve. and the majic because we needed home court advantage. let’s see what this year brings. injuries decide everything and we do have an aging team so judiciousness will be needed. prevention is worth a pound of cure.
by nazzbo on Oct 6, 2009 12:28 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
So, based on Doc's most recent comments...
It looks like we’re going with 35 minutes. Basically, that’s doable, although maybe not ideal.
All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino
by Roy_Hobbs on Oct 6, 2009 3:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
He actually mentioned 33-37 minutes as a barometer at one point but...
then backed off of that. He really wants to keep his options open, and not to be held to something specific. Things can change during the course of a season. I understand that.
by tenaciousT on Oct 6, 2009 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
35 minutes is ok, I guess, but I think that older players benefit from 3-4 nights completely off during the course of the season. One night out of every ten or so, just sit Ray or Paul down for the entire game.
by Brickowski on Oct 6, 2009 4:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
