Lester Hudson sent down to Maine

[CDawg834]

Actually, after Doc's comments about Tony's troubles handling the ball (and somewhat backhanded compliment about his defense), I am starting to wonder if there is more to this trip for Hudson.  I wonder if they are sending him down to get him back into the flow of playing regularly, while they give Tony one last chance, and then they will give Hudson a chance to get those minutes running the team off the bench when he returns.

Or on the other hand, perhaps they are trying to bring Walker back, in order to take Tony's minutes?

ooh i like these thoughts!
I am surprised Hudson was heading down which as stated maybe its just to get into playing shape.  To me Giddens should be down and walker up since we need help at sf with daniels out.  Also with daniels out makes sense to have extra pg.  We have enough sg, ray, tony, eddie, giddens

I don't know if we will see Walker back anytime soon.  I assumed the Portland assignment was likely more of a rehab stint for his knee than anything, but when BBD and Daniels return, who is active?  I am guessing Hudson, and 2 of the following 3: Walker, Giddens, and Scal are going to be inactive.  Just not enough minutes to go around.  I would love to see them move Tony's expiring money for a future pick...let's say a 2nd rounder to a team under the cap (so the salaries don't have to match).  That would free up a spot in uniform so these guys don't have to spend all season in Maine or in suits on the bench.

[RAcker]

This will be good for Lester.  I don't think he needs the NBDL as much as some young guys, but getting some PT can't hurt.

I am curious to see what they do with the last active spot on the roster.  Will they bring Walker back up?  Will they just go ahead with 11 guys?

He was sent to the D League for a good reason as opposed to the reasons why some guys are sent there.  He is going simply so that he can play.  Right now, the C's don't have enough minutes for him and he's good enough that he needs to be playing to stay sharp and improve his game.

Other guys get sent there for the aforementioned rehab reason and the "they are clueless" reason.  I'm just glad that Lester isn't in one of these categories.

[Reggie's Ghost]

You mean sent up to Maine?

Nope, unfortunately it's "down" 

I have mixed emotions about this.  Obviously I'm pleased that Hudson is being groomed, and that he'll get some run.  Still, the obvious solution is to insert Hudson at the point and move House up to the 2 where he belongs.  This would not only give Hudson some run, his junkyard dog defense more than makes up for his size, he can handle the ball better than any of the present alternatives, and he provides a reliable midrange game to a position of need.

Of course, as many here have stated, Doc would never do this.  Many here including myself have pulled their hair out of this aspect of Doc's rotations, but I understand there's a method to his madness.  Doc has shown over time that he'll always choose the player who has had time to learn the system, or has played NBA basketball for longer.  That's why TA plays over Lester, that's why Telfair played over Rondo for so long in 07, that's why Banks played over Delonte in 06, and that's why Blount played over Perk in 05.  Obviously, this is a good long term method, so when Lester's had a year under his belt he'll be an attractive option for one of the two backup guard spots to Doc.

Another rant here, why aren't Red Claws games televised on Comcast?  I mean really?  You're telling me that wouldn't get better ratings than "Ship Shape TV"? I don't get it...

[nickagneta]

You mean sent up to Maine?

Nope, unfortunately it's "down" 

I have mixed emotions about this.  Obviously I'm pleased that Hudson is being groomed, and that he'll get some run.  Still, the obvious solution is to insert Hudson at the point and move House up to the 2 where he belongs.  This would not only give Hudson some run, his junkyard dog defense more than makes up for his size, he can handle the ball better than any of the present alternatives, and he provides a reliable midrange game to a position of need.

Of course, as many here have stated, Doc would never do this.  Many here including myself have pulled their hair out of this aspect of Doc's rotations, but I understand there's a method to his madness.  Doc has shown over time that he'll always choose the player who has had time to learn the system, or has played NBA basketball for longer.  That's why TA plays over Lester, that's why Telfair played over Rondo for so long in 07, that's why Banks played over Delonte in 06, and that's why Blount played over Perk in 05.  Obviously, this is a good long term method, so when Lester's had a year under his belt he'll be an attractive option for one of the two backup guard spots to Doc.

Another rant here, why aren't Red Claws games televised on Comcast?  I mean really?  You're telling me that wouldn't get better ratings than "Ship Shape TV"? I don't get it...

Blount played over Perk in 05 because he was better than Perk was. perk was a pathetic excuse for a big man in 2005. Blount could at the very least play NBA basketball at the time.

Telfair played over Rondo in 2007 to start the season because Rondo was clueless at the time as to how to run a team. Telfair wasn't much better but he was better. But as Rondo became better at it and Delonte had to play more SG because of Wally's injury, Telfair made his way to the bench and Rondo and West split the time at PG once Wally came back.

Banks played over West in 2006 because he was better than him, at that time.

It's really easy to look at how careers have gone since a certain time and say things like Perk should have played over Blount in 2005 or West should have played right away over Banks because West and Perk are now better players than Banks and Blount, but at the time, Doc made the proper decisions over who was better. At those times the latter players were better than the former. You have to look at it as what was happening at that very moment and not who became better so Doc should have played that person.

If young players have shown the talent and knowledge and drive to play, they play for Doc. If they don't they don't. It really is that simple as if you look at Doc's history of young players, there is not one single player ever that didn't get playing time under Doc that went on to explode in production elsewhere. Not one.

[Finkelskyhook]

Of Walker Giddens and Hudson, Hudson is the only one of the three close to being an NBA player.  Walker and Giddens aren't within striking distance.  One of them will be gone when Coach Lue is deemed in playing shape

So I'd agree with the Hudson getting in playing shape theory.  Barring Lue not being able, I doubt Hudson will be back up anytime soon.

[Reggie's Ghost]

You mean sent up to Maine?

Nope, unfortunately it's "down" 

I have mixed emotions about this.  Obviously I'm pleased that Hudson is being groomed, and that he'll get some run.  Still, the obvious solution is to insert Hudson at the point and move House up to the 2 where he belongs.  This would not only give Hudson some run, his junkyard dog defense more than makes up for his size, he can handle the ball better than any of the present alternatives, and he provides a reliable midrange game to a position of need.

Of course, as many here have stated, Doc would never do this.  Many here including myself have pulled their hair out of this aspect of Doc's rotations, but I understand there's a method to his madness.  Doc has shown over time that he'll always choose the player who has had time to learn the system, or has played NBA basketball for longer.  That's why TA plays over Lester, that's why Telfair played over Rondo for so long in 07, that's why Banks played over Delonte in 06, and that's why Blount played over Perk in 05.  Obviously, this is a good long term method, so when Lester's had a year under his belt he'll be an attractive option for one of the two backup guard spots to Doc.

Another rant here, why aren't Red Claws games televised on Comcast?  I mean really?  You're telling me that wouldn't get better ratings than "Ship Shape TV"? I don't get it...

Blount played over Perk in 05 because he was better than Perk was. perk was a pathetic excuse for a big man in 2005. Blount could at the very least play NBA basketball at the time.

Telfair played over Rondo in 2007 to start the season because Rondo was clueless at the time as to how to run a team. Telfair wasn't much better but he was better. But as Rondo became better at it and Delonte had to play more SG because of Wally's injury, Telfair made his way to the bench and Rondo and West split the time at PG once Wally came back.

Banks played over West in 2006 because he was better than him, at that time.

It's really easy to look at how careers have gone since a certain time and say things like Perk should have played over Blount in 2005 or West should have played right away over Banks because West and Perk are now better players than Banks and Blount, but at the time, Doc made the proper decisions over who was better. At those times the latter players were better than the former. You have to look at it as what was happening at that very moment and not who became better so Doc should have played that person.

If young players have shown the talent and knowledge and drive to play, they play for Doc. If they don't they don't. It really is that simple as if you look at Doc's history of young players, there is not one single player ever that didn't get playing time under Doc that went on to explode in production elsewhere. Not one.

I disagree.

I'm not just speaking in hindsight, I felt these lineups were backwards at the time as well:

Perhaps I'm getting my years mixed, but in his final year with the C's Blount was the worst big in the game.  I used to play a game with my friends where we'd get hammered by drinking every time Blount made a mistake.  He was a black hole with stone hands, was soft as tissue paper and had a BBall IQ that makes TA look like Einstein.  Perk had shed the weight, he could rebound, and although he was a hapless offensive player he was positively a better option in every way except (as I stated in my post) he wasn't as familiar with the plays Doc was calling and didn't have the NBA experience.

Telfair was a total bust from day 1, who was outplayed by Rondo off the bench every night Rondo saw action.  When Telfair had finally stunk up the joint so badly that a move had to be made, Rondo led the team in his rookie year to a fantastic winning streak and made the future look bright in combination with Perk and Al.

Marcus Banks was a perennial disappointment, who played an entire season ahead of West until Payton came in took the job away from both of them.  Marcus banks has NEVER been better than Delonte in any way other than footspeed.

Can't help but feel there's a healthy dose of revisionist history in your post, and the whole "no one has ever gone on to explode in production elsewhere" thing has nothing to do with anything I'm talking about, just an arbitrary statement.  Although Delonte, Gomes and Al have all gone on to play very good ball for their respective teams, that's not what I'm arguing.  Only that Doc has a maddening habit (which I stated in my post has a method and am not totally knocking btw) of burying better options on the bench in order to stick to his ethos of dolling out playing time to players who are more familiar with his sets.  So, to make a point that is relevant to my argument, players like Blount, Banks and Telfair have all gone on to be awful players on their future teams after Doc gave them starting roles and the bulk of the minutes at their positions in Boston for FAR too long at the expense of better options.  THAT is the point...

[Finkelskyhook]

Rivers was trying to find anybody who could play that pathetically horrible defensive concept that he was putting out there.  The blitz is a gimmick...Rivers was too lazy to implement anything else.

Banks was a better individual defender than West.  Blount was a better defender than Perk period at the time.  But Garnett or Jordan wouldn't have been better defenders than Blount or West in that defense.

[nickagneta]

You mean sent up to Maine?

Nope, unfortunately it's "down" 

I have mixed emotions about this.  Obviously I'm pleased that Hudson is being groomed, and that he'll get some run.  Still, the obvious solution is to insert Hudson at the point and move House up to the 2 where he belongs.  This would not only give Hudson some run, his junkyard dog defense more than makes up for his size, he can handle the ball better than any of the present alternatives, and he provides a reliable midrange game to a position of need.

Of course, as many here have stated, Doc would never do this.  Many here including myself have pulled their hair out of this aspect of Doc's rotations, but I understand there's a method to his madness.  Doc has shown over time that he'll always choose the player who has had time to learn the system, or has played NBA basketball for longer.  That's why TA plays over Lester, that's why Telfair played over Rondo for so long in 07, that's why Banks played over Delonte in 06, and that's why Blount played over Perk in 05.  Obviously, this is a good long term method, so when Lester's had a year under his belt he'll be an attractive option for one of the two backup guard spots to Doc.

Another rant here, why aren't Red Claws games televised on Comcast?  I mean really?  You're telling me that wouldn't get better ratings than "Ship Shape TV"? I don't get it...

Blount played over Perk in 05 because he was better than Perk was. perk was a pathetic excuse for a big man in 2005. Blount could at the very least play NBA basketball at the time.

Telfair played over Rondo in 2007 to start the season because Rondo was clueless at the time as to how to run a team. Telfair wasn't much better but he was better. But as Rondo became better at it and Delonte had to play more SG because of Wally's injury, Telfair made his way to the bench and Rondo and West split the time at PG once Wally came back.

Banks played over West in 2006 because he was better than him, at that time.

It's really easy to look at how careers have gone since a certain time and say things like Perk should have played over Blount in 2005 or West should have played right away over Banks because West and Perk are now better players than Banks and Blount, but at the time, Doc made the proper decisions over who was better. At those times the latter players were better than the former. You have to look at it as what was happening at that very moment and not who became better so Doc should have played that person.

If young players have shown the talent and knowledge and drive to play, they play for Doc. If they don't they don't. It really is that simple as if you look at Doc's history of young players, there is not one single player ever that didn't get playing time under Doc that went on to explode in production elsewhere. Not one.

I disagree.

I'm not just speaking in hindsight, I felt these lineups were backwards at the time as well:

Perhaps I'm getting my years mixed, but in his final year with the C's Blount was the worst big in the game.  I used to play a game with my friends where we'd get hammered by drinking every time Blount made a mistake.  He was a black hole with stone hands, was soft as tissue paper and had a BBall IQ that makes TA look like Einstein.  Perk had shed the weight, he could rebound, and although he was a hapless offensive player he was positively a better option in every way except (as I stated in my post) he wasn't as familiar with the plays Doc was calling and didn't have the NBA experience.

Telfair was a total bust from day 1, who was outplayed by Rondo off the bench every night Rondo saw action.  When Telfair had finally stunk up the joint so badly that a move had to be made, Rondo led the team in his rookie year to a fantastic winning streak and made the future look bright in combination with Perk and Al.

Marcus Banks was a perennial disappointment, who played an entire season ahead of West until Payton came in took the job away from both of them.  Marcus banks has NEVER been better than Delonte in any way other than footspeed.

Can't help but feel there's a healthy dose of revisionist history in your post, and the whole "no one has ever gone on to explode in production elsewhere" thing has nothing to do with anything I'm talking about, just an arbitrary statement.  Although Delonte, Gomes and Al have all gone on to play very good ball for their respective teams, that's not what I'm arguing.  Only that Doc has a maddening habit (which I stated in my post has a method and am not totally knocking btw) of burying better options on the bench in order to stick to his ethos of dolling out playing time to players who are more familiar with his sets.  So, to make a point that is relevant to my argument, players like Blount, Banks and Telfair have all gone on to be awful players on their future teams after Doc gave them starting roles and the bulk of the minutes at their positions in Boston for FAR too long at the expense of better options.  THAT is the point...

Completely disagree with just about every word you wrote there Reggie but you're a good guy and we can agree to disagree. TP for the thoughts though.

[Reggie's Ghost]

Rivers was trying to find anybody who could play that pathetically horrible defensive concept that he was putting out there.  The blitz is a gimmick...Rivers was too lazy to implement anything else.

Banks was a better individual defender than West.  Blount was a better defender than Perk period at the time.  But Garnett or Jordan wouldn't have been better defenders than Blount or West in that defense.

As for all this "period" business, just look.  

In the 05-06 season:

Blount
05-06   23.1 min, 11.5 ppg, fg% .655, 4.8 reb, .6 blocks, 2.75 TO

Perkins
05-06   19.6 min, 5.2 ppg, fg% .515, 5.9 reb, 1.5 blocks, 1.57 TO

in fewer mins, even at the time Perkins was averaging better defensive and rebounding numbers with a totally inadequate supporting bench.  Coupled with the fact that the team was getting killed on the glass every night, and Blount was vocaly complaining about "touches" and fancied himself as Tim Duncan light, he was NOT a better option...

Delonte was a fantastic, physical defender at his position from his rookie year.  Banks was dumb as a rock and couldn't defend a chair, but got the rep as a quality defender because of his gambling on steals all the time...

Completely disagree with just about every word you wrote there Reggie but you're a good guy and we can agree to disagree. TP for the thoughts though.

Much love Nick, I just don't want to look wrong in front of all these people    TP back at'cha, I think the spirit of both our posts was that Doc is doing his thing, and that it has worked out in the long run.  I'm all for that, just wish Lester could be groomed in Marquis's absence by playing NBA ball rather than D-League, once we get healthy we can ship his butt back to Maine for all I care...

[2short]

You mean sent up to Maine?

Nope, unfortunately it's "down" 

I have mixed emotions about this.  Obviously I'm pleased that Hudson is being groomed, and that he'll get some run.  Still, the obvious solution is to insert Hudson at the point and move House up to the 2 where he belongs.  This would not only give Hudson some run, his junkyard dog defense more than makes up for his size, he can handle the ball better than any of the present alternatives, and he provides a reliable midrange game to a position of need.

Of course, as many here have stated, Doc would never do this.  Many here including myself have pulled their hair out of this aspect of Doc's rotations, but I understand there's a method to his madness.  Doc has shown over time that he'll always choose the player who has had time to learn the system, or has played NBA basketball for longer.  That's why TA plays over Lester, that's why Telfair played over Rondo for so long in 07, that's why Banks played over Delonte in 06, and that's why Blount played over Perk in 05.  Obviously, this is a good long term method, so when Lester's had a year under his belt he'll be an attractive option for one of the two backup guard spots to Doc.

Another rant here, why aren't Red Claws games televised on Comcast?  I mean really?  You're telling me that wouldn't get better ratings than "Ship Shape TV"? I don't get it...

Blount played over Perk in 05 because he was better than Perk was. perk was a pathetic excuse for a big man in 2005. Blount could at the very least play NBA basketball at the time.

Telfair played over Rondo in 2007 to start the season because Rondo was clueless at the time as to how to run a team. Telfair wasn't much better but he was better. But as Rondo became better at it and Delonte had to play more SG because of Wally's injury, Telfair made his way to the bench and Rondo and West split the time at PG once Wally came back.

Banks played over West in 2006 because he was better than him, at that time.

It's really easy to look at how careers have gone since a certain time and say things like Perk should have played over Blount in 2005 or West should have played right away over Banks because West and Perk are now better players than Banks and Blount, but at the time, Doc made the proper decisions over who was better. At those times the latter players were better than the former. You have to look at it as what was happening at that very moment and not who became better so Doc should have played that person.

If young players have shown the talent and knowledge and drive to play, they play for Doc. If they don't they don't. It really is that simple as if you look at Doc's history of young players, there is not one single player ever that didn't get playing time under Doc that went on to explode in production elsewhere. Not one.

My opinion on the telfair / Rondo idea is exactly the opposite, I think Telkfair got the pt for trade bait.  The preseason of rondos rookie year he was far far better.  I remember watching a game and you could HEAR cousy's SMILE about his play. 

[nickagneta]

Rivers was trying to find anybody who could play that pathetically horrible defensive concept that he was putting out there.  The blitz is a gimmick...Rivers was too lazy to implement anything else.

Banks was a better individual defender than West.  Blount was a better defender than Perk period at the time.  But Garnett or Jordan wouldn't have been better defenders than Blount or West in that defense.

As for all this "period" business, just look.  

In the 05-06 season:

Blount
05-06   23.1 min, 11.5 ppg, fg% .655, 4.8 reb, .6 blocks, 2.75 TO

Perkins
05-06   19.6 min, 5.2 ppg, fg% .515, 5.9 reb, 1.5 blocks, 1.57 TO

in fewer mins, even at the time Perkins was averaging better defensive and rebounding numbers with a totally inadequate supporting bench.  Coupled with the fact that the team was getting killed on the glass every night, and Blount was vocaly complaining about "touches" and fancied himself as Tim Duncan light, he was NOT a better option...

Delonte was a fantastic, physical defender at his position from his rookie year.  Banks was dumb as a rock and couldn't defend a chair, but got the rep as a quality defender because of his gambling on steals all the time...

Completely disagree with just about every word you wrote there Reggie but you're a good guy and we can agree to disagree. TP for the thoughts though.

Much love Nick, I just don't want to look wrong in front of all these people    TP back at'cha, I think the spirit of both our posts was that Doc is doing his thing, and that it has worked out in the long run.  I'm all for that, just wish Lester could be groomed in Marquis's absence by playing NBA ball rather than D-League, once we get healthy we can ship his butt back to Maine for all I care...

I think what is going to happen is that in January or February, there will be a trade that ships out one or more players than comes in and Hudson, after another half season of time, will start to get some run as a garbage time player and will regularly be activated for games. Anything we see from him will come next year, I am afraid.

Got to be honest though, from what I have seen, I'm not nearly as high on Lester as you are. I'm not really high on any of the three young guys. I say next year, can Walker and Giddens and use the first round pick and a traded up for higher second round pick to replace them and start to develop others.

[Reggie's Ghost]

My opinion on the telfair / Rondo idea is exactly the opposite, I think Telkfair got the pt for trade bait.  The preseason of rondos rookie year he was far far better.  I remember watching a game and you could HEAR cousy's SMILE about his play. 

That sounds right, why does this make your opinion "opposite" mine? They don't sound mutually exclusive.  Regardless of your opinion about WHY Telfair was getting all that run, he was a useless player, and Rondo brought more to the table as he showed later that season.  I agree his preseason was better than his in-season play, but he still had days where he "took over" games against good teams, Telfair had 1 solid game (against Portland) all year...

I think what is going to happen is that in January or February, there will be a trade that ships out one or more players than comes in and Hudson, after another half season of time, will start to get some run as a garbage time player and will regularly be activated for games. Anything we see from him will come next year, I am afraid.

Got to be honest though, from what I have seen, I'm not nearly as high on Lester as you are. I'm not really high on any of the three young guys. I say next year, can Walker and Giddens and use the first round pick and a traded up for higher second round pick to replace them and start to develop others.

I'm not all that high on him either yet, I thoroughly enjoy watching him play but only feel that he's a better option inserted at point for the time being for the mins TA is playing, and since we agree he wont be playing meaningful mins later this season I think he'd be a fine fill in for a few weeks.  TA is a mess, I'd rather Walker play his mins TBH...

[ManUp]

With Young players Doc's hand has to be forced. In just about every case injuries and lack of depth have always been what has gotten young guys minutes on the floor. Remember in the 06-07 we started the season with Pierce at PF instead of Al Jefferson? I think it was Ratliff's injury that got Al the minutes he needed.

Doc just holds a special place in his heart for vets.

[scoop]

I think the "Coach doesn't like rookies, he loves his vets too much" is the most common complain among NBA fans. Go to a Spurs board and they say the same about Popovich, Warriors fans say the same about Nelson, Knicks fans say the same about D'Antoni, Pacers fans say the same about O'Brien, Bulls fans about Del Negro, etc. Fans tend to like like young players, especially rookies, more than coaches. I've noticed this also happens in other sports and leagues.

Is he going to play tomorrow? I'll try to watch that game.

[Jon]

I think the "Coach doesn't like rookies, he loves his vets too much" is the most common complain among NBA fans. Go to a Spurs board and they say the same about Popovich, Warriors fans say the same about Nelson, Knicks fans say the same about D'Antoni, Pacers fans say the same about O'Brien, Bulls fans about Del Negro, etc. Fans tend to like like young players, especially rookies, more than coaches. I've noticed this also happens in other sports and leagues.

Is he going to play tomorrow? I'll try to watch that game.

This is a good point.  It isn't just Doc.  More importantly, the likely scenario is that fans delude themselves into thinking rookies are great because they looked good in college highlights, the summer league, preseason, or garbage time when no one's trying. 

Sending him down to the D-League is probably the best thing for him.  Even if people don't think it is, who cares?  We're talking about one of the last picks in the draft on one of the best teams in the NBA.