Knight78
Well-Known Member
Many times while playing with the starters, Murray was playing like a freshman - out of position, step late on defensive help, and not aware of our offensive spacing.
Turns out getting zero points from starting guards...
- Thread starter Hawkfnntn
- Start date
Robowe
Well-Known Member
I would agree on a different option ... if Fredrick wasn't also out with his injury in the 2nd half. At that point, I believe they hoped Jordan would start hitting shots. Didn't happen. Also, Murray started the 2nd half with Fredrick out and he did fine.
Also, in your analogy, I believe that Jordan (5th year senior with a proven record) is more like a QB (veteran on the team) having a bad game. Coaches don't bench Brady or Mahomes, they just hope they start connecting on passes. OK, maybe a bad example - I will change it to Philip Rivers or Drew Brees.
Fryowa
Administrator
I don't think anybody is suggesting pulling the guy completely out of the rotation, just some substitutions to try and get something going. It wasn't working last night for Bohannon and they had his number. Once he started missing a bunch of shots Indiana smelled blood. Murray in my opinion offers other benefits and I think it would've been smart to add his length and inside threat. Garza was completely plugged up and a guy like Murray is not only an inside threat himself, but he would've taken some of the triple teams off Luka.
kicker22
Well-Known Member
I'm not one that says he needs to sit, but why is when ever "sitting" a player is brought up it implies permanent changes. Why can't it simply be to pull a guy (distribute his minutes to someone else the remainder of the game) who's struggling and simply doesn't have it on a given night.
I'm nothing more than a fan, but for the most part no one seems to mind when defenders are put into a game to try to maintain a lead, or free throw shooters/ three point line ups are put on the court when baskets are needed, or a guy is pulled with two fouls in the first half to avoid "foul trouble" before the half, but yet to suggest to pull a player who simply isn't hitting his shots that night is crazy talk.
IMO it's has nothing to do with loyalty to a player or "look what he's done for the team" mentality, but rather simply wanting to win a game on a given night. Sure you want your best players receiving the majority of the minutes game in and game out, but at what point do you just accept the fact that they simply don't have it that night and look elsewhere to generate their productivity.
I'm nothing more than a fan, but for the most part no one seems to mind when defenders are put into a game to try to maintain a lead, or free throw shooters/ three point line ups are put on the court when baskets are needed, or a guy is pulled with two fouls in the first half to avoid "foul trouble" before the half, but yet to suggest to pull a player who simply isn't hitting his shots that night is crazy talk.
IMO it's has nothing to do with loyalty to a player or "look what he's done for the team" mentality, but rather simply wanting to win a game on a given night. Sure you want your best players receiving the majority of the minutes game in and game out, but at what point do you just accept the fact that they simply don't have it that night and look elsewhere to generate their productivity.
Fryowa
Administrator
If we were talking Garza I'd agree with your analogy. Bohannon is a very specific role player that will absolutely kill you with his one weapon...but only if it's working.Also, in your analogy, I believe that Jordan (5th year senior with a proven record) is more like a QB (veteran on the team) having a bad game. Coaches don't bench Brady or Mahomes, they just hope they start connecting on passes. OK, maybe a bad example - I will change it to Philip Rivers or Drew Brees.
Fryowa
Administrator
This x 1,000
Fryowa
Administrator
If you want to go that route, Murray had 8 pts and 5 rebounds in less than half the minutes.
dahlhawk
Well-Known Member
I was a big Joe T fan but I'm starting to see a very limited player. When he was in he had no ability to get Garza the ball, has no outside shot or even driving 15 footer which lets teams really sag off of him. In the Big a PG has to be a threat to shoot some, it's a big boy league and teams are not going to respect him. As for his defense, I saw a lot of guys just shoot over him. JBo was playing the best D of his career, don't know if he just had a set back on his rehab, dead legs, or what. It might be time to give the second unit over to Ulis, he can do a lot more than Joe T and seems to always be under control.
I'll throw in a couple points. Bohannon did go to the bench in this game, and we looked terrible when he was out. No one brought it this game except Luka and Wieskamp for the first 10 minutes. There wasn't a good backup option this particular game to replace Bohannon. They all had a chance to take minutes and they all sucked.
Also, Bohannon has had a lot of games in his career where he sucked bad the first 35 minutes, then was great the last 5. At what point do you give him less minutes when you watch the backups suck it up too when he's out during his normal breathers?
There have been games this year where Bohannon lost minutes for sucking. Minnesota being one of them. In fact, him being out because he was sucking is the main reason we lost that game. If any backup would have showed any promise last night, Bohannon would have lost minutes.
Also, Bohannon has had a lot of games in his career where he sucked bad the first 35 minutes, then was great the last 5. At what point do you give him less minutes when you watch the backups suck it up too when he's out during his normal breathers?
There have been games this year where Bohannon lost minutes for sucking. Minnesota being one of them. In fact, him being out because he was sucking is the main reason we lost that game. If any backup would have showed any promise last night, Bohannon would have lost minutes.
1980HAWKFAN
Well-Known Member
I'm still a Joe T. fan, but agree we are starting to see why he has not played more minutes for the Hawks. Tremendous speed with the ball and get can get open. However once he's open from mid range it means nothing because he hasn't shown he can pull up and burn you. Other coaches know this and teams sag off on him and it jams up the paint. Jbo same deal except teams if they have the speed will pick up Jbo at about 30 feet out and hound him knowing that he's not going to hurt you off the bounce. Got to give Indiana credit, they played every Hawk just like the scouting report probably says you should play them.
WindsorHawk
Well-Known Member
I think JBo is the guy this year...outside shooting, experience and a good ball handler and passer. All of this is important with the POY roaming the paint.
For those losing faith in Toussaint I suggest waiting a year. The 9 man rotation I envision next year will be going high speed, breaking people down off the dribble, dunking, etc. I think this style will suit Joe’s skills...and 2 years of experience won’t hurt.
For those losing faith in Toussaint I suggest waiting a year. The 9 man rotation I envision next year will be going high speed, breaking people down off the dribble, dunking, etc. I think this style will suit Joe’s skills...and 2 years of experience won’t hurt.
Exactly. I wasn't suggesting to start JT now going forward and only play JBo 10 mins a game. No I'm just saying that by halftime and certainly shortly after it was obvious he was just off. What good is having all this depth if you aren't going to use it in a situation such as that? Coaches sub players out for all sorts of reasons as you listed due to not playing well. How is shooting terribly not on the list?
Fran has already benched Bohannon for playing bad. That's why he wasn't on to shoot free throws against Minnesota. The problem with last game is everyone else was playing bad too and CJ was out. Hell, Perkins came in before Toussaint even so that tells you what Fran was thinking about Joe's game. Other games there are options to replace him. This game there wasn't.
Jordan played 33 mins... He coulda played significantly less in the 2nd half of that game. JT only played 8. Perkins was in because yeah CJ didn't play at all the 2nd half and they needed another body. Murray didn't have his best game either. They tried playing big with him in more but he got in foul trouble early and often so hence Perkins got to play a little. They coulda easily played JT more and with hindsight being what it is probably shoulda.
My point is Perkins played before Joe T in the 2nd half. Fran must not have liked what he saw from him either. He had two guys playing like shit and chose to ride with the senior. I see both sides in this one. He was kinda in a lose lose with how everyone was playing. I also wonder if his decision was based on the defense Indiana was playing. If they pack it in, you don't really want to bring in another bad 3 point shooter.
kicker22
Well-Known Member
I guess my opinion is that if a coach is willing to bench a starter in the first half after picking up a second foul, or sits a guy the majority of the second half for picking up a 4th foul. I guess my feelings is that those are strategic decisions and if your willing to pull a perfectly healthy player to guarantee that he's available late you need to make the same adjustments to see to it that your team is in the best possible position to win at the end of the game which, IMO means if a guy is ice cold during a given time during a game and can't seem to snap out of it, your doing your team no favor by leaving him out there.
kicker22
Well-Known Member
Your right that playing time is entirely up to a coach and that it varies from situation to situation and player to player. Interesting take on the thought of not wanting to bring in another bad 3 point shooter, when IMO I'd pull the cold 3 pt. shooter and go with the guy who can attack the basket (or anywhere inside the perimeter) and maybe get to the stripe.
