The Stevens doghouse.

[Snakehead]

I do not understand why Humphries is in the doghouse, but with Bass and Fully playing decent, KO starting to play good, Fav being great, theres probably just not enough room. But thats counter productive to the tanking strategy. Humph is an expiring contract, that alone makes him an appealing trade chip. It will add gret value if he plays decently. Dont know why he's not playing at all.

Hump's contract is all that makes him a trade chip, as I said in another thread.  His play is totally irrelevant.

So he shouldn't be playing.

For the most part this but he will get his chance.  Fav, KO, and Sully have never played an 82 game season, so they are bound to hit a wall at some point, plus I would bet at least 1 big would get slightly injured along the way.   

If Bass continues his better play than last year Ainge might try to sell high on him quickly to a playoff team so that could open more time.

Sure, injuries are possible.  It'll take something like that though.  Sully isn't even playing decent minutes right now.

And a Bass trade is certainly possible.  It's part of the argument to play him a lot at least (though he is good and should be anyways).  He could help some teams a lot.

[Eddie20]

As for Humphries, I assume that there's a reason for that as well.  There was talk about him being a hard worker this summer, but if Humph is simply not in the rotation despite his talent and experience, I have to conclude that he's not working that hard or doesn't seem to be buying in and working well with teammates.

It's simply a numbers game. We have a 4 big rotation and putting Humphries means that either Bass, Fav, Olynyk, or Sullinger will be on the bench.

As for Pressey, quite simply he's not ready. At least not ready to play ahead of Lee and Crawford who have played well. Yes, he may be a true PG, but he is really undersized (even heard an announcer say that standing next to him he's closer to 5-7 than he is his listed height) and at this point in his career the undrafted rookie isn't ready to be part of the rotation.

Yeah but Humphries is probably the best bigman on the team.  I get wanting to play the young guys, but Bass could and should lose a fair number of minutes to Humphries.

But is he really? If you do a poll on who is better between Bass & Humphries, I'm almost certain that it'll be a 50/50 split.  Stevens is apparently on the Bass side. Perhaps it has to do with his defense and experience with the team.

These are Stevens thoughts on Bass:

Stevens made a point of singling out Bass for his willingness to follow instructions.

“He’s trying to do everything we’ve asked and I really appreciate that,” said the coach. “Because he’s a guy who’s been here, he’s had success, he’s had a large role, and he’s done nothing but do everything we’ve asked. I think like others, he’s going to be a lot more comfortable the longer we go.

“I told him this, I just brought him in and we watched a little bit of film – he’s a guy along with (Jared Sullinger) that I really like to see anchor our defense. Because he gets it, he’s been at the NBA level, he’s a very versatile defender, and he’s very capable of that. And I know he’s excited about that challenge. It’s something you can do through effort and talk, and he brings those things pretty consistently.”

Added Stevens, “I’ve really loved his attitude. He’s been great the whole time. You know, we’re asking him to be more of an inside guy than he’s been in the past couple of years. He’s played more pick and pop; we’re asking him to get to the basket and play at the rim. He had a couple of moves (Saturday) right at the rim that I thought were fantastic.”

[nickagneta]

I'm thinking Stevens is going with the guys that get it defensively and who have potential to be cohesive enough offensively to be good once his floor general returns from injury. Remember, the offense will flow differently once Rondo returns and Stevens has to envision how the offense will run with Rondo and who will best fit with him running that offense.

Frankly, Humphries has never been anything but a garbage man offensively and nothing to write home about defensively. On a good team last year his role was severely reduced from prior years. Why? Because of the type of player he is and because his game has major holes.

As for Pressey, I mean, come on. Please explain to me how an undrafted free agent, undersized PG that is the team's 15th player can be in a coach's doghouse. He's not playing because he's the 15th man on the roster and just not ready to be an NBA player yet.

[RAcker]

I hope Bradley gets put in Stevens' doghouse soon and never gets out. Oye.

This!!! At least if it gets him away from turning the ball over 5 times in crunch time.  Law!

[RAcker]

Here are my completely uninformed thoughts:

* Bass, Wallace, Lee, Jordan and Bradley play due to effort.

* Green, Hump & others due to not giving 100%

* Sully's minutes down due to his lack of conditioning (which p---es me off too)

* KO, Fav & others who are "developing" are playing when rotations allow for the most success for those guys.

This is just what I feel might be going on. Granted, Stevens is very green on the pro bench too, but I think he is showing everyone in that locker room that it's going to be his way or the highway.

[aingeforthree]

No doghouse really.

The organization is going about it the right way. Ainge and Stevens aren't stupid. Nobody's getting in a doghouse.  Nobody's getting tarred, nobody's getting feathered....You're building for a playoff team in 3-4 years, maybe sooner. Play the youth you have , see what you got, and don't worry about a record in 2013.

Nab a top 15 pick, get another one later on, and try and use those picks to build around your core. Right now, play guys like Olynyk, Sullinger, & Faverani so that they can get some minutes and so you can see what they'll give you.  You have an idea based on last year with Sullinger, now get KO and Faverani time to see what they can develop into.

You know what Bradley, Lee, Green, Wallace, Humphries etc. give you. No need to give them valuable minutes. The younger core is what you need to keep putting out there, preferably Faverani, KO, & Sullinger.

[guava_wrench]

An undrafted rookie with a guarrateed contract is in the doghouse? I can't agree. He will get his chances. Right now, even Brooks is finding it hard to get minutes.

[Boris Badenov]

I think there's a combination of things going on here:

1. No clear stars. It's not like when we had PP and he was our best SF every single night. So, on any given night it makes much more sense to change up the rotation based on matchups, or who's hot.

2. Even if Stevens is going to settle on a rotation eventually, he needs time to figure out who fits best with each other. He will mix and match for a while.

3. To the extent that there's an incentive to showcase guys, Bass and Wallace seem like the clear choice to get minutes based on that. To have trade value they need to show that they can help a contender enough to justify taking their contracts. (The same is true for Lee but his value is so low right now, he might be seen as a lost cause).

4. If the choice is between developing Sully/KO and playing Hump, I can see why you play the young guys. In contrast to Bass, Hump's value is much more tied to his expiring contract than whether he's playing well or not. And those two young guys are among our most valuable assets right now.

If I'm Ainge I see the season as having two segments:
1. Pre-deadline and pre-Rondo, build up asset value and try to unload some salaries and vets by the deadline for younger assets, cap room and picks.

2. Post-deadline and with Rondo, play the young guys much more with Rondo running the show, to develop talent and chemistry for the future.

Trading Rondo might be part of (1), of course.

[guava_wrench]

I think there's a combination of things going on here:

1. No clear stars. It's not like when we had PP and he was our best SF every single night. So, on any given night it makes much more sense to change up the rotation based on matchups, or who's hot.

2. Even if Stevens is going to settle on a rotation eventually, he needs time to figure out who fits best with each other. He will mix and match for a while.

3. To the extent that there's an incentive to showcase guys, Bass and Wallace seem like the clear choice to get minutes based on that. To have trade value they need to show that they can help a contender enough to justify taking their contracts. (The same is true for Lee but his value is so low right now, he might be seen as a lost cause).

4. If the choice is between developing Sully/KO and playing Hump, I can see why you play the young guys. In contrast to Bass, Hump's value is much more tied to his expiring contract than whether he's playing well or not. And those two young guys are among our most valuable assets right now.

If I'm Ainge I see the season as having two segments:
1. Pre-deadline and pre-Rondo, build up asset value and try to unload some salaries and vets by the deadline for younger assets, cap room and picks.

2. Post-deadline and with Rondo, play the young guys much more with Rondo running the show, to develop talent and chemistry for the future.

Trading Rondo might be part of (1), of course.

"Showcasing" guys is mostly a discussion forum phenomenon. Coaches aren't doing this much, though fans like to invoke it. Clearly, Hump isn't being showcased. Wallace deserves his minutes.

[Eddie20]

I think there's a combination of things going on here:

1. No clear stars. It's not like when we had PP and he was our best SF every single night. So, on any given night it makes much more sense to change up the rotation based on matchups, or who's hot.

2. Even if Stevens is going to settle on a rotation eventually, he needs time to figure out who fits best with each other. He will mix and match for a while.

3. To the extent that there's an incentive to showcase guys, Bass and Wallace seem like the clear choice to get minutes based on that. To have trade value they need to show that they can help a contender enough to justify taking their contracts. (The same is true for Lee but his value is so low right now, he might be seen as a lost cause).

4. If the choice is between developing Sully/KO and playing Hump, I can see why you play the young guys. In contrast to Bass, Hump's value is much more tied to his expiring contract than whether he's playing well or not. And those two young guys are among our most valuable assets right now.

If I'm Ainge I see the season as having two segments:
1. Pre-deadline and pre-Rondo, build up asset value and try to unload some salaries and vets by the deadline for younger assets, cap room and picks.

2. Post-deadline and with Rondo, play the young guys much more with Rondo running the show, to develop talent and chemistry for the future.

Trading Rondo might be part of (1), of course.

TP

Great post. I echo the majority of your thoughts.

[hpantazo]

I think there's a combination of things going on here:

1. No clear stars. It's not like when we had PP and he was our best SF every single night. So, on any given night it makes much more sense to change up the rotation based on matchups, or who's hot.

2. Even if Stevens is going to settle on a rotation eventually, he needs time to figure out who fits best with each other. He will mix and match for a while.

3. To the extent that there's an incentive to showcase guys, Bass and Wallace seem like the clear choice to get minutes based on that. To have trade value they need to show that they can help a contender enough to justify taking their contracts. (The same is true for Lee but his value is so low right now, he might be seen as a lost cause).

4. If the choice is between developing Sully/KO and playing Hump, I can see why you play the young guys. In contrast to Bass, Hump's value is much more tied to his expiring contract than whether he's playing well or not. And those two young guys are among our most valuable assets right now.

If I'm Ainge I see the season as having two segments:
1. Pre-deadline and pre-Rondo, build up asset value and try to unload some salaries and vets by the deadline for younger assets, cap room and picks.

2. Post-deadline and with Rondo, play the young guys much more with Rondo running the show, to develop talent and chemistry for the future.

Trading Rondo might be part of (1), of course.

"Showcasing" guys is mostly a discussion forum phenomenon. Coaches aren't doing this much, though fans like to invoke it. Clearly, Hump isn't being showcased. Wallace deserves his minutes.

Showcasing does happen often. Humph isn't showcased because, as many others have pointed out, his expiring contract is more than enough value. Ainge and Doc showcased players before the KG era (Wally Sczerbiak, Ricky Davis, Delonte West, Ryan Gomes, Al Jefferson, Sebastian Telfair, etc.), so nothing new here. I expected it this year and it's happening.

Wallace, in 36 minutes, shot 2-6, scored fewer points (5) than Green did in 20 minutes, and shot the 2nd most 3 pointers on the team, while failing to shut down anyone on defense. How did he clearly deserve his minutes?

Bradley, as is becoming the norm, in 34 minutes shot 6-14, lead the team in turnovers, had twice as many turnovers as assists, and had the worst +/- on the team (-15).

Bass in 37 minutes shot 2-8 including key misses down the stretch.

How did these guys clearly deserve their minutes?

Meanwhile Faverani (19 minutes) shot 4-6 and Green (20 minutes) shot 3-5 and they barely saw the floor in the 2nd half.

[Mr October]

Even if Bass and Wallace aren't being played with the intent of showcasing, they have contracts that will keep them in Boston beyond this season. You might as well see what they can do under Brad Stevens, and eventually with Rondo. Meanwhile, Humphries and his expiring contract have 79 games remaining before he exits Boston..

[nickagneta]

I think there's a combination of things going on here:

1. No clear stars. It's not like when we had PP and he was our best SF every single night. So, on any given night it makes much more sense to change up the rotation based on matchups, or who's hot.

2. Even if Stevens is going to settle on a rotation eventually, he needs time to figure out who fits best with each other. He will mix and match for a while.

3. To the extent that there's an incentive to showcase guys, Bass and Wallace seem like the clear choice to get minutes based on that. To have trade value they need to show that they can help a contender enough to justify taking their contracts. (The same is true for Lee but his value is so low right now, he might be seen as a lost cause).

4. If the choice is between developing Sully/KO and playing Hump, I can see why you play the young guys. In contrast to Bass, Hump's value is much more tied to his expiring contract than whether he's playing well or not. And those two young guys are among our most valuable assets right now.

If I'm Ainge I see the season as having two segments:
1. Pre-deadline and pre-Rondo, build up asset value and try to unload some salaries and vets by the deadline for younger assets, cap room and picks.

2. Post-deadline and with Rondo, play the young guys much more with Rondo running the show, to develop talent and chemistry for the future.

Trading Rondo might be part of (1), of course.

"Showcasing" guys is mostly a discussion forum phenomenon. Coaches aren't doing this much, though fans like to invoke it. Clearly, Hump isn't being showcased. Wallace deserves his minutes.

Showcasing does happen often. Humph isn't showcased because, as many others have pointed out, his expiring contract is more than enough value. Ainge and Doc showcased players before the KG era (Wally Sczerbiak, Ricky Davis, Delonte West, Ryan Gomes, Al Jefferson, Sebastian Telfair, etc.), so nothing new here. I expected it this year and it's happening.

Wallace, in 36 minutes, shot 2-6, scored fewer points (5) than Green did in 20 minutes, and shot the 2nd most 3 pointers on the team, while failing to shut down anyone on defense. How did he clearly deserve his minutes?

Bradley, as is becoming the norm, in 34 minutes shot 6-14, lead the team in turnovers, had twice as many turnovers as assists, and had the worst +/- on the team (-15).

Bass in 37 minutes shot 2-8 including key misses down the stretch.

How did these guys clearly deserve their minutes?

Meanwhile Faverani (19 minutes) shot 4-6 and Green (20 minutes) shot 3-5 and they barely saw the floor in the 2nd half.

Another scenario could be they are not showcasing Humphries because they want to hold onto his expiring contract, renounce his rights after the season and wipe that money off the books.

If that is the case they Humphries is going to have to earn his way into the rotation, which, all things considered, he is capable of doing but right now might not be doing. Hence, he's not playing.

[nickagneta]

I find the reasons people come up with to justify why certain players are playing or should play and why certain players aren't playing or shouldn't be playing to be quite comical at times.

Didn't anyone ever think that maybe, just maybe, the coach is playing the players that show the best knowledge of his system and are playing it the best and that he is sitting his worst players or the players that just are not picking up his new system the best?

Coaches coach to win and to develop players. They don't coach to do the general manager's job of making players more enticing for trade scenarios or to get the most out of the money invested in a player.

Maybe, just maybe, Humphries, Brooks, and Pressey are playing because they are not playing better than the players in front of them and there is no doghouse. Maybe, just maybe, Bass is playing because he is currently, due to his play, the best PF on this team and not being showcased. Same for Lee at SG.

[LooseCannon]

Coaches coach to win and to develop players. They don't coach to do the general manager's job of making players more enticing for trade scenarios or to get the most out of the money invested in a player.

Coaches sometimes get fired for not playing who the GM wants to see on the floor.  George Karl in Denver was an example.