I'm confused

[Peoriabird]

After the Cliipers game many posters were congratulating Bud for making the right personnel decisions to ensure a loss. Then I started reading conflicting commentary stating that Collins and Dennis could not play together because of their defensive deficiencies etc. So wait which is It? Is Bud tanking or trying to win games?

[AHF]

He should be looking to lose games and develop the young players.  I see zero reason for Collins and Dennis not to be sharing time on the floor together.  

[sturt]

For my part, it's tongue-in-cheek... I don't actually think of it as Bud trying to lose. Me, I'm just celebrating the outcome when it happens by one possession score.

[Peoriabird]

So Bud is trying to win these games then is what I'm hearing so far.

[AHF]

6 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

So Bud is trying to win these games then is what I'm hearing so far.

Pretty sure I did not say that.

[Peoriabird]

21 minutes ago, AHF said:

Pretty sure I did not say that.

Why is this team so bad defensively?

[Lurker]

16 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

Why is this team so bad defensively?

Certain people are going to hate reading this, but Bud's defensive scheme was exposed by the end of 14/15 (even before the playoffs). Yes, he still had "good" defenses, but the scheme was exposed on the perimeter.

My dad's words during a March 2015 game vs the Cavs ended up proving to be telling when he saw the Hawks playing defense: "It's like the Hawks are playing a prevent defense!"

Edited January 9, 2018 by Lurker

[sturt]

45 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

So Bud is trying to win these games then is what I'm hearing so far.

I think I would feel comfortable with saying it this way. He is satisfied with winning. If suddenly Taurean started reminding everyone of Kawhi, and leading the team to win after win... he would be excited to discover that he's identified a pillar of the team, and he would not start pulling Prince from games at strategic times to try to lose after all...  so, yeah, "satisfied" is the adjective I would use... but it's not the same priority, obviously, and so he naturally feels some freedom to experiment with the five-man at different parts of any game.

[Peoriabird]

33 minutes ago, sturt said:

I think I would feel comfortable with saying it this way. He is satisfied with winning. If suddenly Taurean started reminding everyone of Kawhi, and leading the team to win after win... he would be excited to discover that he's identified a pillar of the team, and he would not start pulling Prince from games at strategic times to try to lose after all...  so, yeah, "satisfied" is the adjective I would use... but it's not the same priority, obviously, and so he naturally feels some freedom to experiment with the five-man at different parts of any game.

So you are not convinced that he is trying to win every game

[AHF]

51 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

Why is this team so bad defensively?

The biggest reasons are youth, low level of talent on defense, and a plan to lose while 'competing'.  I'd say Dedmon is probably our only above average defender at this point.

[sturt]

3 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

So you are not convinced that he is trying to win every game

I believe it's a matter of priority. Ordinarily, winning is the highest priority. Now, it's at best third on the list... the highest priority is a contest between (a) individual player development and (b) five-man group assessments.

[NBASupes]

31 minutes ago, AHF said:

The biggest reasons are youth, low level of talent on defense, and a plan to lose while 'competing'.  I'd say Dedmon is probably our only above average defender at this point.

Bazemore is too. 

[Peoriabird]

35 minutes ago, sturt said:

I believe it's a matter of priority. Ordinarily, winning is the highest priority. Now, it's at best third on the list... the highest priority is a contest between (a) individual player development and (b) five-man group assessments.

So what's with the Delaney experiment? Why sit John Collins? Why feature Baze? Why were we wasting time with Luke Babbitt? Why foul Jordan?  all of these acts are mixed signals!

[Peoriabird]

48 minutes ago, AHF said:

a plan to lose while 'competing'. 

Who's plan? Plus the only difference between our starting line up this year over last year is the front court and Howard wasn't known for his transition defense.

[sturt]

34 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

So what's with the Delaney experiment? Why sit John Collins? Why feature Baze? Why were we wasting time with Luke Babbitt? Why foul Jordan?  all of these acts are mixed signals!

You'd have to ask Bud to be sure, of course, but my working theory has been

(a) that sometimes it's as much about allowing a player some down time from action (and thus some observation time) as it is putting him on the floor.

And (b) some of these players are proxies for future players who the young pillars will play beside when the team start prioritizing winning again... there's something to be gained playing beside a Luke Babbitt, not because Babbitt himself will be out there in 2 years, but a player not unlike Babbitt will be.

And finally (c), there's the trade deadline interest... some players get some of their minutes simply out of an interest to possibly tempt other teams to offer something.

Those are my inclinations.

Oh, and why foul Jordan? Again... it's not that there's NO interest in winning. It's still a priority, and so if the other priorities are getting adequate treatment, then winning gets its due as well.

[JTB]

49 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

So what's with the Delaney experiment? Why sit John Collins? Why feature Baze? Why were we wasting time with Luke Babbitt? Why foul Jordan?  all of these acts are mixed signals!

Lol seriously your questions are too smart at the time! Stop trying to figure out this intentional losing strategy! You’re going to blow Schlenks cover! Stop it I say!

look into my eyes ...embrace the tank...embrace the tank...embrace the tank...embrace the tank....embrace the tank....embrace the tank...repeat it!

lol ok I’m done.

[Peoriabird]

2 minutes ago, JTB said:

Lol seriously your questions are too smart at the time! Stop trying to figure out this intentional losing strategy! You’re going to blow Schlenks cover! Stop it I say!

look into my eyes ...embrace the tank...embrace the tank...embrace the tank...embrace the tank....embrace the tank....embrace the tank...repeat it!

lol ok I’m done.

I'm not talking about Schlenk...I'm talking about Bud.

[Peoriabird]

2 hours ago, Lurker said:

Certain people are going to hate reading this, but Bud's defensive scheme was exposed by the end of 14/15 (even before the playoffs). Yes, he still had "good" defenses, but the scheme was exposed on the perimeter.

My dad's words during a March 2015 game vs the Cavs ended up proving to be telling when he saw the Hawks playing defense: "It's like the Hawks are playing a prevent defense!"

So you and your dad think that the gig is up with Bud and it has very little to do with personnel. You might be on to something!

[TheNorthCydeRises]

26 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

Why is this team so bad defensively?

Oh that's easy

 

1) Our best one on one defenders are gone ( Millsap and Sefolosha )

2) We're 27th in defensive rebounding ( mainly because we lost our 2 best rebounders, and coach won't give extended minutes to the rookie PF/C, who is the best rebounder on the team )

3) Bud plays "small ball" lineups to help out the offense, which kills us defensively.

[Peoriabird]

4 hours ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

 

3) Bud plays "small ball" lineups to help out the offense, which kills us defensively.

Something he has done repeatedly in thed past so the question is...Does Bud ball still work? Or was it a gimmick that got figured out late during our 60 win season? Because one can argue that the anti-Bud ball i.e. Memphis was just as effective for more years.