Daily Thunder.com

I should have said Bulls and Griz in first paragraph.

and another correction in the last paragraph: ...for at "least" part of...

I haven't looked at the Chicago game by game detail and you either have or have a better sense of it, so I won't argue the Bulls further. For me they were just a proxy in the discussion of the main topic.

We can disagree some (though maybe not as much as it seems) and we can let it go. I was mainly pushing around to try to determine what is most logical or appropriate for this season.

Either you have guys who are the intended choice for significant roles soon that you get ready for that or adequately test them for that or you don't get them as ready as they could be playing decent minutes including some meaningful ones.

They'll develop Aldrich some but it is still a question of how much. They can figure it out. I am not really that concerned about this choice but there is a wrong answer. Less than 500 minutes for the season would be the wrong answer.

Cook I don't believe to be a good development target; but if they do, then do it and take the consequences.

Mullens is much tougher. Use him hardly at all for another season and how is he going to be ready to play 800-1200 minutes in 2011-12?

Never use White in a meaningful way, ok, whatever.

Probably shouldn't be quite as much praise for at part of the draft-centric strategy if some of the 1st round picks stay on the shelf even longer, longer than normal.

@Crow

I guess we can agree to disagree on this. James Johnson got over 40% of his minutes for the season in games that Luol Deng missd. A good portion of the other games were blowouts / garbage time. Hamed Haddadi earned most of his minutes at Thabeet's expense (granted, not an injury), then Thabeet earned minutes when Gasol went down.

Do you feel that five minute stretches in garbage time really has that much of an effect on player development? This does not seem like it would be a priority for most teams.

Either you go all out for playoff seed and max playoff performance this season or you invest to some degree for that "long-term, sustainable future".

If you go all out this season you sign a good free agent or make a "now trade". They didn't or haven't yet.

If you are not doing that, you spend some time NBA court time on development this season so you are better prepared for the next season or the one after.

I know Pleiss isn't coming until 2011-12 at the earliest but when he does he will need some NBA development time becasue he takes major minutes.

To me nothing- I mean nothing- substitutes for the learning of real, meaningful NBA minutes if your design calls for these guys to take roles in the near future. Nobody relies on the D-league and practice as the main tools to get ready. It is temporary tool at best. A Plan B that barely beats nothing.

"Does James Johnson get any run if Luol Deng plays 82 games?"

Yes. Deng missed 12 games. Johnson played 65. I think his minute allocation was about right regardless of what happened to Deng given what the design intends for or at least is considering for him fairly soon.

"Does Hakim Warrick play if Joakhim Noah did not get hurt?

Not related or barely related. Warrick plays. They traded for him to play.

"Do Hamed Haddadi or Darrell Arthur sniff the court if Marc Gasol didn’t miss 13 games?"

Yes. Gasol missed 13 games. Haddadi played 36 and did so because of how he looked in the previous season. You invested a high pick in Arthur and you should look at him, his development, for trade value if nothing else.

Yahoo ranks Thabo Sefalosha as the 29th best shooting guard in the league. James Harden checked in at 22nd.

@justin
Yeah I'm with Justin on this one. Crow, Pleiss isn't supposed to be on the team this year. Unless you were referring to the 11-12 season.

Crow :Putting aside the main guys and the focus on winning now for just a moment, what minute targets might be “nice” for young guy “development”? If I rattle off 400 for Mullens, possibly 600 for Cook and at least 800 for Aldrich, can they do that? There are just under 20,000 minutes in a season available. This much development represents just under 10% of all minutes. Possibly add 200 for White and you are at the full 10%. Did they give 10% of minutes beyond the first 9 guys to the vet stabilizers and the young guys last season? Nope, only half that at about 1000 minutes. Just to do this much development means doubling the minutes taken away from the 9 man rotation and puts you in the 10-11 men averaging near or over 10 minutes a game. Do they keep the focus on putting the standard 9 out there almost every time or do they cut significantly from these fairly modest minute totals for these particular guys? I didn’t even give Ivey or Peterson a single minute yet.

Development of young talent is important but there are other ways to do that. Winning games is more important to me than finding minutes for the 10th - 12th man. How many teams go out of their way to find minutes for everyone? This isn't high school intramurals...

I seemed to rely heavily on our 'top 9' primarily because we didn't suffer any major injuries. Look at even similarly young teams like Chicago. Does James Johnson get any run if Luol Deng plays 82 games? Does Hakim Warrick play if Joakhim Noah did not get hurt? Check out Memphis. Do Hamed Haddadi or Darrell Arthur sniff the court if Marc Gasol didn't miss 13 games?

Teams are going to play their best players. There's D-League and practice to develop young talent, and of course offseason programs. Only the aging teams like the Spurs seem to go out of their way to get their young guys more run, but again, you don't think they'd play Tim Duncan 40 minutes a game if he was 25 years old?

There will be an issue in the front court due to the addition of Aldrich. Someone will have to exit the nine man rotation or minutes up front will have to be cut to accomodate Aldrich as the tenth man. We'll see how that's handled.

Beyond that, I honestly don't think it should be a high priority at all to get the end-of-bench guys meaningful minutes. If the team was coming off a losing season then yeah you might want to do that. But this team is competitive and the best guys should play. The rest have to earn it, or wait their shot.

As For Mullens, Hopefully he will be dominating the D League like his name is Shaqeem Webber and its 1995

this answer might seem like dodging the issue, but we have to consider who will be on the team next year, and how many minutes it will take them to be ready for the playoffs. Guys who won't or might not be back include.

Peterson, cook, DJ white, Kristic, collision, green ( what if some team offers him the Max?) that gives us 9 guys that we like that we need to have ready.

Also this is the last year of Kevin durant at under 10 million unless the cap drastically changes. we should make the most of it. and that means having Harden, ibaka, maynor, Aldrich and anyone else eligable for the rookie sophmore game, ready to make a significant playoff contribution.

Because in order to win now i believe we need our most talented players ready to play significant post season minutes effectively, and right now they're not

Sorry for the double post. Computer issues. The second post is the better one.

Putting aside the main guys and the focus on winning now for just a moment, what minute targets might be "nice" for young guy "development"? If I rattle off 400 for Mullens, possibly 600 for Cook and at least 800 for Aldrich, can they do that? There are just under 20,000 minutes in a season available. This much development represents just under 10% of all minutes. Possibly add 200 for White and you are at the full 10%. Did they give 10% of minutes beyond the first 9 guys to the vet stabilizers and the young guys last season? Nope, only half that at about 1000 minutes. Just to do this much development means doubling the minutes taken away from the 9 man rotation and puts you in the 10-11 men averaging near or over 10 minutes a game. Do they keep the focus on putting the standard 9 out there almost every time or do they cut significantly from these fairly modest minute totals for these particular guys? I didn't even give Ivey or Peterson a single minute yet.

Putting aside the main guys and the focus on winning now for just a moment, what minute targets might be "nice" for young guy "development"? If I rattle off 400 for Mullens, 600 for Cook, at least 800 for Aldrich can they do that? There are just under 20,000 minutes in a season available. This much development represents just under 10% of all minutes. Add 200 for White and you are at 10%. Did they give 10% beyond the first 9 for the vet stabilizers and the young guys last season? Nope, half that at about 1000 minutes. Just to do this much development means doubling the minutes taken away from the 9 man rotation. Do they keep the focus on putting the standard 9 out out there or do they cut significantly from these fairly modest minute totals for these particular guys? I didn't even give Ivey, Cook or Peterson a single minute yet.

http://outofbounds.yahoo.com/?id=21428905

Haha Lebron lost in a 3 point contest to a teenager.

@justin
no it doesnt take quality of opponent into account,just straight numbers and yeah thabo is a better defender, but i dont think there will be this huge dropoff on defense if harden started, that was my point.

I am of the opinion start harden and as the situation demands play thabo more mins against elite guards and less against teams that harden plays good enough defense against. My hope is a 30% reduction in thabos mins, help keep him fresh for the playoffs

@DeWayne

I don't know. That would take a bit more digging than I feel compelled to do; but, yes, injuries are a main cause.

The Spurs were the only western playoff team to do that but if they are the template for most things I'd say this isn't out of bounds. Not essential, but not out of bounds.

The Spurs, for one, in fact fully had 10 over 15 minutes per game in most games. If that means anything.

@Crow

How many starts did those teams lose to injuries that made it a necessity to play a 10th player 700+ minutes over 82 games?

I assume they incorporate Aldrich. I'd rather not incorporate Ivey and Cook. Peterson depends on how he looks but I might use him sort of like the old Sonics did with Chuck Person that 1 season. I'd rather not cut Collison's minutes deeply at least until proven not needed. I'd prefer to see Mullens some this season (400+ minutes?) and then Pless. And then the next guys.

If you pick up 50 wins back to back (or at least start to do it again for 2-3 months) then a tight rotation might move from an absolute to a most of the time kind of thing that allows the 10th and 11th man to get some decent minutes, or perhaps the more politically acceptable term to get some "development".

Is it just me or did Hassan Whiteside put on a lot of muscle in a very short time? He was always on the skinny side when he was at Marshall.

@justin

I guess my memory was a bit fuzzy and I misremembered my minute off level. I said 15 minutes here, but that was wrong. Sorry. My previous examination showed lots of teams with 10-11 players at 10+ minutes per game for most games. In fact every other western playoff team except for the Lakers and the Thunder had a 10th man with more than 700 minutes for the season (roughly equivalent to 10+ minutes in most games).

justin :

Sammy :@justinIf Harden’s still getting the majority of the minutes, I don’t see what the problem is with Thabo starting. I don’t really think Harden is suited to play the Ginobli/Crawford supersub-type, but I understand the rationale.

I think the problem is the team falls behind far too often to start games because they cannot score.

I realize you are likely refering to a shorter time period, but from 2/26 to the end of the regular season, we were 21-5 in the first quarter, but 23-26-7 before that, so it got better at the end of the year. If we keep that up, we could be ok.

In 2009, the Top 8 ‘slots’ played 93.5% of all minutes across the NBA. The 10th man in the NBA averaged 6.5 minutes a game in 2009. Teams went ’10 deep’ in only 64% of the games in the NBA in 2009.

What teams use 11 guys for 15+ minutes for most games…?

I think health is a reason why a lot of Thunder players didn’t see the floor. There was no reason for them to. If there’s a better player available, why play the worse one?

I think there are situations when Brooks should have been more flexible with his rotations, but at the same time I don't think anyone's being grievously looked over. I'm more worried about minutes distributions for our existing rotation players more than incorporating players who aren't in the rotation and testing esoteric lineups...

Crow :@justin
It depends on how you define rotation and I won’t rehash the argument beyond restating that a lot of teams use 10-11 guys for 15+ minutes for most games.
Different ways to cut it that make the Thunder look different… or more normal. Most western playoff teams use 7 guys 20+ minutes a game and OKC was one of them.

In 2009, the Top 8 'slots' played 93.5% of all minutes across the NBA. The 10th man in the NBA averaged 6.5 minutes a game in 2009. Teams went '10 deep' in only 64% of the games in the NBA in 2009.

http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/2009/10/the-...

What teams use 11 guys for 15+ minutes for most games...?

I think health is a reason why a lot of Thunder players didn't see the floor. There was no reason for them to. If there's a better player available, why play the worse one?

It is fairly rare that a 8th man or beyond makes much competitive difference. It is still mostly about the first 6.

@justin

It depends on how you define rotation and I won't rehash the argument beyond restating that a lot of teams use 10-11 guys for 15+ minutes for most games.

Different ways to cut it that make the Thunder look different... or more normal. Most western playoff teams use 7 guys 20+ minutes a game and OKC was one of them.

Apparently Cook is an OK defender. he could fit with the starters if green and nenad are having an off shooting day, allowing Harden to settle into the 6th man type role for at least this year.

I would still like to consolidate some talent. The Thabo-Harden debate only exists because our PF-C positions are difficult to fit. Green can't defend, Ibaka is lost on offense. Krstic doesn't rebound, Collison can't shoot. If we could find a way to consolidate some of those guys into a PF or C who can play both ways, it becomes a lot easier to decide who to play and when since we wouldn't be losing anything significant on either side.

Keith :
Harden fits so much better with the starters than the bench.

The problem, I think, is so does Thabo.

Actually, the more I think about it, theres no debate. Harden must start. Its a given, a fact, that our team will improve. As of now, opposing teams know Durants gonna get the ball, they know who Westbrooks mostlikely to pass to (Making RW easier to guard) hes going to shoot, the KNOW Thabo is not. With Harden, he will absolutely have to be accounted for and that goes for the man guarding Westbrook and everyone else on t floor. Now teams KNOW that there are other options for Westbrook to pass to. Not only does Harden add a shooting threat, hes an amzing distibutor. the offensive game plan for the Thunder will be much more complicated for teams to strategize for. Other teams defenses will have to work that much harder. Its a no brainer.

@Sammy
But those things specifically would be helped significantly by Harden. Harden can create and make smart plays when Westbrook is out of control. Further, he is a better 3pt shooter than Green.

It doesn't solve everything, but Harden fits so much better with the starters than the bench. On the bench he has to be the primary scorer, which severely limits his other skills.

Crow :If there are always going to be just 9 regular slots a lot of guys will just sit and / or get squeezed out.
Where are future draft picks going to fit?
The Thunder is a kind odd amalgam of just 3 big minute players (and you can question if one should be) and 6 bench slots.
Either consolidate talent a lot over the next 2 years or play the bench a bit more and a bit more creatively.

Most teams have a 9 man rotation, doesn't seem weird to me.

Sammy :@justinWhen Jeff Green is not making threes and Russell Westbrook is not playing smart/well, we have more problems than will be fixed by swapping Thabo for Harden. I think breaking up the Krstic/Green combo would do a lot more for our first quarter margin than starting Harden would.

I can agree with this. The first priority should be breaking up the Krstic / Green combination - in the exit interview Krstic almost seemed resigned to becoming a bench player. I think that has a decent shot at happening. This could increase the productivity of the PF / C positions and then keeping Thabo where he is isn't so bad.

I guess you can blend the 2 strategies.

@justin
When Jeff Green is not making threes and Russell Westbrook is not playing smart/well, we have more problems than will be fixed by swapping Thabo for Harden. I think breaking up the Krstic/Green combo would do a lot more for our first quarter margin than starting Harden would.

If there are always going to be just 9 regular slots a lot of guys will just sit and / or get squeezed out.

Where are future draft picks going to fit?

The Thunder is a kind odd amalgam of just 3 big minute players (and you can question if one should be) and 6 bench slots.

Either consolidate talent a lot over the next 2 years or play the bench a bit more and a bit more creatively.

@justin
I think the real thing that is killing us at the start of games is not having a big guy who can score, as we don't tend to fall behind when nenad is having a good offensive game.

Hopefully this will be corrected as some of our younger big guys develop. Especially if mullens can start to put it together. this is the downside of having rookies and young guys as significant parts teams with expectations. sometimes they aren't ready

@Sammy

I would have no problem with Thabo starting if we had more offense coming from PF / C. It's just that I'm not sure how valuable Thabo is in that role when we can't score. When Jeff Green is making three's and Russell Westbrook is playing smart then Thabo looks great at SG. When Jeff Green is throwing up bricks and Russ is missing layups, you start to wish you had someone who could spread the floor and make defenses play defense.

I think the improvement in the offense would be bigger than the dropoff in defense with James Harden starting, in most situations, assuming we don't get anything unexpected from PF / C.

8+ min removed of pt from the opposing wing means you have 8+ min left of flexibility to get Thabo in the game.

Clarity fail. What I mean is that if the opposing wing is playing 8+ min at the start of the game, that's 8+ min less that Brooks has to match him up with Thabo.

Not yet 28.

The Thunder signing Amundson would potentially make some sense for playing a limited role, especially after this season. It would suggest that Collison is not going to be retained.

But Amundson isn't coming. Somebody else will take him.

justin :@Sammy

I think Harden would perform better playing next to Durant / Westbrook more often… he seems to struggle most when he’s with Green and the subs.

That's legitimate, and I tend to agree. But on the other hand if the goal is to get Thabo ~20 min a game matched up against the opposing team's most dangerous wing, that becomes trickier when you're not even bringing Thabo in until the end of the first. 8+ min removed of pt from the opposing wing means you have 8+ min left of flexibility to get Thabo in the game.

@justin
its not about tayloring the roster to thabo's limitations, but to everybody's strengths. Thabo is almost useless as a bench player, because defense doesn't cancel out his offense. against starters it does. Harden also benefits being on the bench, by dropping buckets on lesser players, this will help him develop as a primary scorer type, that will only benefit this team in 4th quarter situations where he will be able to get his own shot if kd and russ are being doubled, or having bad games

@Sammy

I think Harden would perform better playing next to Durant / Westbrook more often... he seems to struggle most when he's with Green and the subs.

@justin
You know as well as anyone that minutes in the end count just as much as minutes in the first.

@justin
Would it be any better if the team removes one of their primary weapons in the beginnings of second quarters?

Sammy :@justinIf Harden’s still getting the majority of the minutes, I don’t see what the problem is with Thabo starting. I don’t really think Harden is suited to play the Ginobli/Crawford supersub-type, but I understand the rationale.

I think the problem is the team falls behind far too often to start games because they cannot score.

@justin
If Harden's still getting the majority of the minutes, I don't see what the problem is with Thabo starting. I don't really think Harden is suited to play the Ginobli/Crawford supersub-type, but I understand the rationale.

Thabo hustles and has teh height advantage - hes a great defender. While I am certain there will be a drop off on D, it will be minimal compared to an exponential (Sorry for the hyperbole) improvement on offense.