Big Baby could contribute, so he played. Powe could contribute, so he played. As much as we need size right now, if JuJuan Johnson could help this team, he'd be playing. So lay off Doc already. Personally, I think JJJ is terrible and will have the same career that every soft, 6'10", jump shooting PF, who plays no defense and can't rebound has. A short one. The only reason he's on the C's is because of his height. He was just another body to fill a roster spot, at a time when we were desperate for size. In fact, our ENTIRE bench is put together out of desperation. With MAYBE the exception of Pietrus, none of our reserves belong in the NBA, and in four years or less, none of them will be in the NBA.
I assume the people that call out Doc for not playing the rooks are kids. When I was young, no matter how bad they were, the rookies were always my favorite players. Or at least I always wanted to see them play. As I got older, I learned how to evaluate talent a little better, and I understood why the rookies didn't play. For every basket you watch JJJ make, Doc sees him make 5 mistakes that you don't see. Stiemsma, Bradley, Moore and JJJ are not NBA players. So don't get mad at Doc for not playing them in NBA games. Oh, and this link also says you're wrong. Good day, kids.
http://www.celticslife.com/2012/01/debunking-myth-that-doc-wont-play.html
that article doesn't debunk anything. it does prove you're pretty condescending with an unsupportable opinion.
What that article, and the "will play rookies if they're good enough" crowd on this site continually neglect to provide is a very basic piece of info to support their opinion (it's not a fact) and it's this --> what vets did doc sit in favor of those rookies? the answer --> none.
I'll believe Doc plays rookies based on talent when someone who believes this can actually tell me any veteran that was healthy and available but was a DNP-CD.
As for whether Faried would be playing -- I'm not sure. Doc obviously doesn't feel a sense a need to expand the rotation to get another big in there (JJJ) so I'm not sure Faried sees court time either. Also, his D didn't overwhelm me in that game. loved his rebounding (from a talent evaluation standpoint, not as someone pleased to see him do that to the C's) and was hoping the C's could get him in the draft. I'm not so sure Doc plays him. He's no Center whereas Steimsma is so that could be why he's getting time instead of JJJ.
If KG and Bass were out while we still had JO and Wilcox, we might be seeing JJJ instead of Steimsma right now.
Oh, and by the way, I'm no kid. I'm probably older than you and by a fair amount too.
I'm not sure I get this. I mean, Daniels and Pavlovic have gotten plenty of DNP-CDs as veterans. Clearly your argument isn't has clear cut as that.
Can you prove to me, for example, that JJJ deserves time over Bass? That Stiemsma deserved time over Wilcox, or even JO? Or do you just hate JO like some people and would use that to concoct an argument in sitting?
Also realize that it's about learning the system too, which Doc especially talked about when discussion JJJ to the media after one of his better games. Just saying they put up a few jump shots doesn't say anything. Gerald Green could do that (and dunk), yet only this season was he able to get back in the NBA after being out for a while.
Most rookies don't pick up a NBA system just like that, especially in a season like this where training camps were cut to almost nil. Even Faried didn't start getting on the court regularly until early February. So with that said, if he developed as well with the Celtics as he did with the Nuggets, of course Doc would play him.
This urban myth, to be frank, has annoyed me and to be honest again I'm not sure where the proof lies that other NBA coaches are that much different. As in, I'm sure most teams have a young player, possibly a rookie, where the fanbase wonders why the player in question doesn't play more over so and so veteran.
My point isn't with Daniels or Sasha -- there's no rookies behind them so using them as an example doesn't really make a point.
I've mentioned in a number of threads that I wouldn't expect JJJ to have seen the court this year because he was behind KG (HOF'er) and Bass (playing like a 6th man candidate at the time). I've even argued with those who share my opinion of Doc that expecting JJJ to get time isn't realistic with proven, better options ahead of him. This isn't like earlier years where the depth chart ahead of some young players was really thin. However, Doc's down to just 4 healthy players that could play PF or C at this point with JJJ being one of them. One would think that at some point JJJ has to get court time in order to preserve something in KG and Bass for the playoffs.
Also, I don't think the fact Steimsma is getting time instead of JJJ is an indication that he's the better player. I just think it indicates the 2 guys ahead of him on the Center depth chart are out for the season and therefore, he's now a rotation player for Doc.
I don't disagree that it takes rookies time to learn a system. I do take issue with the fact that just because a vet comes in that they'll learn the system any faster. Case in point, post Perk trade last year where Green and Krstic, both seasoned, quality vets, couldn't pick up this system in the last couple of months in the season.
For this season, based on how players have performed when healthy, I can understand the case people have made for Bradley and Moore to get time over Dooling. Bradley wasn't getting time until Dooling was out. With some court time, Bradley has gone from looking like a wasted pick to someone that can actually contribute. Moore, with some time, just might do the same. (although to be fair, as much as I'm rooting for Moore to become spectacular, I think a more realistic hope is for him to become as good as Dooling in his prime).
Topic: If Faried fell to the C's, would he be playing? (Read 8111 times)