Injuries ... A Mixed Blessing In Disguise?

[nickagneta]

And you are taking those quotes completely out of context.

President of basketball operations Danny Ainge said Pierce’s injury and Garnett’s one-game setback aren’t related. That is correct. Pierce’s injury is a byproduct of a chance infection, but the question now is whether the Celtics will look to preserve the Big Three for more significant games in April and May.

“It’s a goal of mine not to have KG play 81 games and to not have Paul Pierce play 81 games,’’ Ainge said yesterday. “And to not play 36 minutes a game for 81 games. That’s not my objective at all, or our organizational objective. KG could have played [Tuesday] night. We look for opportunities to give him time off.

“This has nothing to do with wear and tear, especially in Paul’s situation.’’

In other words the quotes here are in answer to a question asking if the injuries were the by-product of too much play. The objective is not to overplay them. Well, neither player is being anything near overplayed. The quote has nothing to do with the extra experience benefiting the bench  or how that extra experience for the bench benefits the team.

Principal owner Wyc Grousbeck told the Globe that the Celtics aren’t going to release a player to sign another one because they are at the 15-player limit.
   
“We’ve got a roster of 15 players. We’re not going to be cutting anybody,’’ he said. “We don’t have any open roster spots. We’ve got guys to practice. I’m glad to see Tony Allen’s playing very well and we’ll have to have people like Tony to step it up.’’

This quote is in response to a question regarding trades or signing a player and again has nothing to do with your theory.

If it takes that much effort to beat Indiana in December, what is it going to take for key April games to seize the No. 1 seed?

“That’s Doc’s choice and Doc’s decision to who he’s going to play,’’ Ainge said. “We know that our best players are in their 30s. It’s never been my objective to win 68 or 72 games. We want to win every game but we want to do it without wearing guys out night in and night out, not forcing guys to try to play 82 games to accomplish some regular-season goal. Our objective is to be prepared physically and have chemistry by the time the playoffs start.’’

Agaian this quote is in response to a question regarding playing players heavy minutes and what it is going to take to win the #1 seed. He is responding that the #1 seed is not the priority and that keeping guys minutes down.


Nothing quoted in that article discusses whether the injuries are a good thing for the bench to get extra playing time or whether the extra playing time for players at the very end of the bench is beneficial for the team. And really, that is what is being lost in this discussion, what is best for the playoff chances of the Boston Celtics.

The injuries to our players are not beneficial to our championship aspirations. Neither is the experience that Walker, Scal, Hudson and Giddens gets. They will not be seeing time on the court during the playoffs. This experience will not develop them into players that will be useful for this team, they simply aren't that good. Their increased experience just in no way helps this team in the pursuit of a championship, which is the goal. And as the coach said in response to the direct question of whether this experience is beneficial to the team:

"There is no benefit as far as I know," he responded before the question was even finished. "When the playoffs start, I am 99 percent sure I will have the regular nine (rotation players) on the floor."


Is this good for the individual players? Sure.

Is it good to help evaluate said players? I doubt it. I think the team has a very firm grip as to who and what they are as players by now.

Will it increase their trade value? I doubt it. Most of the players at the end of the bench are just that, end of the bench players. Their value is in the numeric value of their contract and that's about it.

So, in conclusion, if the coach isn't going to be playing them unless for garbage time and when 1/3 of the team is out due to injury, and even then in limited minutes, if it's playing them is not going to help the team in evaluating the players or will it increase their trade value, and if it's not going to help keep the minutes of the starters down because that is already being done through coaching and proper rotations, what benefit does this bring to the team and it's chances to win the championship? None.

Sure it benefits the players as players, but those players aren't players that will be seeing playing time or even be around here next year.

[Bahku]

And you are taking those quotes completely out of context.

President of basketball operations Danny Ainge said Pierce’s injury and Garnett’s one-game setback aren’t related. That is correct. Pierce’s injury is a byproduct of a chance infection, but the question now is whether the Celtics will look to preserve the Big Three for more significant games in April and May.

“It’s a goal of mine not to have KG play 81 games and to not have Paul Pierce play 81 games,’’ Ainge said yesterday. “And to not play 36 minutes a game for 81 games. That’s not my objective at all, or our organizational objective. KG could have played [Tuesday] night. We look for opportunities to give him time off.

“This has nothing to do with wear and tear, especially in Paul’s situation.’’

In other words the quotes here are in answer to a question asking if the injuries were the by-product of too much play. The objective is not to overplay them. Well, neither player is being anything near overplayed. The quote has nothing to do with the extra experience benefiting the bench  or how that extra experience for the bench benefits the team.

Principal owner Wyc Grousbeck told the Globe that the Celtics aren’t going to release a player to sign another one because they are at the 15-player limit.
   
“We’ve got a roster of 15 players. We’re not going to be cutting anybody,’’ he said. “We don’t have any open roster spots. We’ve got guys to practice. I’m glad to see Tony Allen’s playing very well and we’ll have to have people like Tony to step it up.’’

This quote is in response to a question regarding trades or signing a player and again has nothing to do with your theory.

If it takes that much effort to beat Indiana in December, what is it going to take for key April games to seize the No. 1 seed?

“That’s Doc’s choice and Doc’s decision to who he’s going to play,’’ Ainge said. “We know that our best players are in their 30s. It’s never been my objective to win 68 or 72 games. We want to win every game but we want to do it without wearing guys out night in and night out, not forcing guys to try to play 82 games to accomplish some regular-season goal. Our objective is to be prepared physically and have chemistry by the time the playoffs start.’’

Agaian this quote is in response to a question regarding playing players heavy minutes and what it is going to take to win the #1 seed. He is responding that the #1 seed is not the priority and that keeping guys minutes down.


Nothing quoted in that article discusses whether the injuries are a good thing for the bench to get extra playing time or whether the extra playing time for players at the very end of the bench is beneficial for the team. And really, that is what is being lost in this discussion, what is best for the playoff chances of the Boston Celtics.

The injuries to our players are not beneficial to our championship aspirations. Neither is the experience that Walker, Scal, Hudson and Giddens gets. They will not be seeing time on the court during the playoffs. This experience will not develop them into players that will be useful for this team, they simply aren't that good. Their increased experience just in no way helps this team in the pursuit of a championship, which is the goal. And as the coach said in response to the direct question of whether this experience is beneficial to the team:

"There is no benefit as far as I know," he responded before the question was even finished. "When the playoffs start, I am 99 percent sure I will have the regular nine (rotation players) on the floor."


Is this good for the individual players? Sure.

Is it good to help evaluate said players? I doubt it. I think the team has a very firm grip as to who and what they are as players by now.

Will it increase their trade value? I doubt it. Most of the players at the end of the bench are just that, end of the bench players. Their value is in the numeric value of their contract and that's about it.

So, in conclusion, if the coach isn't going to be playing them unless for garbage time and when 1/3 of the team is out due to injury, and even then in limited minutes, if it's playing them is not going to help the team in evaluating the players or will it increase their trade value, and if it's not going to help keep the minutes of the starters down because that is already being done through coaching and proper rotations, what benefit does this bring to the team and it's chances to win the championship? None.

Sure it benefits the players as players, but those players aren't players that will be seeing playing time or even be around here next year.

Come on, Nick ... why do you feel the need to be difficult? Do I really need to translate this for you? I think you're smarter than that, but whatever. Please read the areas in green ... they're talking about not playing the starters in every game, whether they're healthy or not, about looking for opportunities to rest them, about having other reasons to have them fresh at playoff time, and about players like Tony Allen "stepping up" ... what do you think that means?

Why do you think Gary Washburn came to the conclusion he did? He's not an idiot, he knows basketball, the Celtics, and has a pretty good idea about what's going on, especially after having talked to the players and coaching staff for a long time. I honestly can't imagine anyone ever admitting that extra experience is a bad thing, or even serves no purpose ... it just makes no sense at all.

If experience didn't matter, there would be no such thing as PRACTICE ... period. Well, I've said all I need to from my side ... if you want the last word as to how extra playing time can have no good come of it, fire away ... I'm just glad the coaching staff and players and owners know better. Personally I'd rather try to look for the good to be made out of a bad situation.

I'm done with this one ... experience is ALWAYS a good thing, no matter WHO gets it, and if you think Doc feels otherwise, then you'e not watching or listening very closely. Experience is the key to success, especially in sports, and there's absolutely nothing anyone could ever say to make me feel otherwise ... but if you wanna keep beating this dead horse, be my guest!

[nickagneta]

Thanks for the translation. Us dumb people can't understand these things sometimes. Thanks for the help. I thought we were having a good discussion, and not trading insulting barbs.

[Bahku]

Thanks for the translation. Us dumb people can't understand these things sometimes. Thanks for the help. I thought we were having a good discussion, and not trading insulting barbs.

Yeah, right ... nothing you said was remotely insulting ... my bad, as always. Please accept my apology ... I should have learned by now that nothing I say is going to be taken, (by some), in the positive way it was intended. This was a thread that looked to make something good out of a bad situation, but it was taken, and then ARGUED, to be something quite different. So be it ... like I said, my bad. I'm done.

[nickagneta]

Tell you what. Point to one thing that I said that was insulting. One.

I never put words in your mouth.
I never passively aggressively insulted you.
I never called into question your prerogatives or allegiances.

I agreed with you that the experience was good for the individual players. I said it was good to look for good in these situations. I just don't agree that anything beneficial will come out of it and argued my point while providing evidence.

[Bahku]

Tell you what. Point to one thing that I said that was insulting. One.

I never put words in your mouth.
I never passively aggressively insulted you.
I never called into question your prerogatives or allegiances.

I agreed with you that the experience was good for the individual players. I said it was good to look for good in these situations. I just don't agree that anything beneficial will come out of it and argued my point while providing evidence.

Did you jump down wdleehi's throat when he disagreed with you?

For a person who's supposed to be all about positivity and community these passive aggressive attacks seem against what you supposedly stand for.

This isn't "trading barbs" as you put it?!? Wow ... ok, my bad again, Nick.

[Chris]

Cut it out.  Lets get this back on track.  Any more of this bickering back and forth, and I am locking the thread.

[Bahku]

  Assuming his leg injury is minor, having Pierce or KG out for a (small) stretch is good for the development of Rondo, increasing his aggressiveness on the offensive end. It's also good for Tony, who's regaining his confidence after the injury and probably giving Doc more confidence in him than he had.

And experience for ANY of the bench players will improve their confidence and the coach's, and leave them more prepared should things happen that makes it necessary for them to play again. The coaching staff also had no intention of playing the starters, (especially Paul and KG), for the entire regular season anyway, and were looking for opportunities to rest the Big Three, so this kills two birds with one stone, so to speak.

[Bahku]

Cut it out.  Lets get this back on track.  Any more of this bickering back and forth, and I am locking the thread.

I apologize for my part in this "bickering" ... I've also done so in a PM. I'm done.

[Bahku]

  Assuming his leg injury is minor, having Pierce or KG out for a (small) stretch is good for the development of Rondo, increasing his aggressiveness on the offensive end. It's also good for Tony, who's regaining his confidence after the injury and probably giving Doc more confidence in him than he had.

And experience for ANY of the bench players will improve their confidence and the coach's, and leave them more prepared should things happen that makes it necessary for them to play again. The coaching staff also had no intention of playing the starters, (especially Paul and KG), for the entire regular season anyway, and were looking for opportunities to rest the Big Three, so this kills two birds with one stone, so to speak.

I think we may get another taste of what the deep bench can do tonight ... looks like House did not make the plane and Perk is questionable, (both with the flu).

http://www.nba.com/celtics/news/blog/postups-notebook-2009-10.html

[mmbaby]

Excellent original post, Bahku. I see the point you are trying to make and think maybe using the term 'mixed blessing' would have saved you some grief, though that is not a guarantee with some on this forum. I have been pondering on the same thing. If Baby had not started for last year's playoffs, in his first year after being a rookie, because of KG's injury, he wouldn't have developed as he has and we wouldn't know that he could be such an excellent player (so soon) in the NBA, nor would HE! A team is constantly evolving; so are its players. Part of this evolution is the older, best players being more prone to injury and/or slowing down; part is the younger players developing into their roles. Perkins has been in the nba for 7 (?) years and didn't really develop much till last year, and, this season, he has greatly sharpened his skills and is becoming incredible at shooting and defending. Assuming we are going to lose because of injuries and therefore giving up is unrealistic; assuming we are going to win because our starters are - at the moment- healthy, and therefore not developing our bench is also unrealistic.
Your OP invited some very interesting arguments to read and think about, debate and discuss. TP to you.
   

[Bahku]

Excellent original post, Bahku. I see the point you are trying to make and think maybe using the term 'mixed blessing' would have saved you some grief, though that is not a guarantee with some on this forum. I have been pondering on the same thing. If Baby had not started for last year's playoffs, in his first year after being a rookie, because of KG's injury, he wouldn't have developed as he has and we wouldn't know that he could be such an excellent player (so soon) in the NBA, nor would HE! A team is constantly evolving; so are its players. Part of this evolution is the older, best players being more prone to injury and/or slowing down; part is the younger players developing into their roles. Perkins has been in the nba for 7 (?) years and didn't really develop much till last year, and, this season, he has greatly sharpened his skills and is becoming incredible at shooting and defending. Assuming we are going to lose because of injuries and therefore giving up is unrealistic; assuming we are going to win because our starters are - at the moment- healthy, and therefore not developing our bench is also unrealistic.
Your OP invited some very interesting arguments to read and think about, debate and discuss. TP to you.
  

Thanks, MMBaby ... back atcha. You're probably right ... a tempering of semantics may have saved some scuttle, because you have the grasp of what I was trying to convey. In no way was I saying that I was happy about losing our starters, but merely that now that it has happened, let's look for the opportunities to get something positive OUT of it. One of my favorite people in history, (after Jesus and Walt Whitman), was a man named Norrman Vincent Peale, and his primary philosophy in life was this: There is no such thing as "problems" ... only opportunities.

To him a problem was an opportunity to learn, improve, discover, convey ... the bigger the problem, the larger the opportunity, and in turn, the reward. So from him I have tried to always look for the good in ALL that happens, no matter how bad. And while it's sometimes difficult to see, it's always there ... sooner or later, though maybe not in the way we had hoped. Thanks again for the great post, and for getting the gist of what I was trying to get across. (I changed the title, by the way, though it doesn't show the change within the thread )

[Fafnir]

I don't think semantics caused the debate in this thread.

[Bahku]

Nice "post" script ... thanks for the reality check. 

[Fafnir]

Nice "post" script ... thanks for the reality check. 

*shrug* just the truth of it clash of viewpoints not poor word choice was what marked this thread.

Hopefully the blessing part you outline does come through whether in the rest for our players or experience for our bench.