What To Do With Baby?

"Well here's another fine mess you gotten me into" Oliver Hardy to Stan Laurel.

Well Danny picked a real diamond in the ruff by signing Williams and now created some what of a mess for Doc.
Now what does Doc do? Does he cut Williams minutes
and possibly hurting Williams progression as a player when Baby comes back? Some tough decisions that must be made by the coaching staff.

I will restate what I said a week ago, Williams was having past trouble because he was being asked to fill a role he was not capable of filling with the teams he was with or was not ready to fill because of the speed
of his personnel development. Couple that with perhaps poor coaching by teams staff. As far as big men go, the Celtics have one of the finest coaching staff for big men in the league (Clifford & Russell, Let's not forget KG) and
their development of Perkins and Powe. Williams is now taking advantage fo this deep resource and making the most of it.

Question now is do we trade one of them down the line during the season or next year or cut time from someone else besides Baby? Feedback Please!

tough situation. glad i'm not Doc! but i think Doc should go with Shelden Williams first. after all, he's earned his minutes so far in that he's playing well. i'm confident tho that DA is constantly looking for moves to make. i don't think i'd be upset receiving a first round pick actually for one of our bench guys.

112288,

Glen Davis is BYC, so trading him won't be easy this season. I think once Davis comes back, Scal is the one who won't get much playing time.

Ain't it great, worrying about PT for our 3rd, 4th and 5th big?

gyso

"Problems" of this nature are not an big issue. Long season and things will work out somehow.

beat

To me, it is not tough at all. Davis blew his chance, Williams was given those minutes to keep until Baby came back – but in the interim, he has played good basketball and earned the right to keep those minutes until someone beats him out for them.

Doc’s job is to keep winning, not worry about the development of one player over another. Davis can get some of those minutes back, all of those minutes back, or none of them back. I couldn’t care less at this point as long as the team keeps winning.

LilRip wrote:tough situation. glad i'm not Doc! but i think Doc should go with Shelden Williams first. after all, he's earned his minutes so far in that he's playing well. i'm confident tho that DA is constantly looking for moves to make. i don't think i'd be upset receiving a first round pick actually for one of our bench guys.

That makes the most sense to load up on first round picks.

112288

LilRip wrote:i don't think i'd be upset receiving a first round pick actually for one of our bench guys.

Maybe at the end of the season, but last year shows that you need as many healthy big men on deck as possible. It would be foolhardy to make a move involving Davis or Williams during the season.

First round pick from a poor team for sure!
Would be nice to get into the lottery again and perhaps those little white things might bounce our way.

beat

mrkleen09 wrote:To me, it is not tough at all. Davis blew his chance, Williams was given those minutes to keep until Baby came back – but in the interim, he has played good basketball and earned the right to keep those minutes until someone beats him out for them.

Doc’s job is to keep winning, not worry about the development of one player over another. Davis can get some of those minutes back, all of those minutes back, or none of them back. I couldn’t care less at this point as long as the team keeps winning.

mrkleen, from my view, I completely agree with your comments. It's obvious that Shelden's problems in the was too much pressure as a 5th pick which probably created a lack of confidence. Playing with this group, Shelden appears to be playing "loose" where his confidence is growing daily. It would probably set him back with a difficult recovery if he is shelved too quickly in favor of Glen Davis' return. Glen should start out on the bench and be forced to earn any minutes that Doc can find. If not, we may lose Shelden and get a dissatisfied Davis at the same time.

David

Does anyone see any way Davis and Williams could play together? Would a lineup of those two plus Sheed, Eddie and 'Quis be any good? Obviously it wouldn't work against all teams, but could it work against some?

Kelly

Why not?

beat

Davis brings more offense to the table than Shelden. It should be an offense/defense situational decision for Doc. When Glen is needed to lean on someone using his bulk to guard, he is the choice. When positioning and finesse is what's needed tap Shelden for duty-IMO-(MD.)

Beat, I couldn't think of a reason either. Yes they are both a little undersized, but they play a lot bigger than they are. That lineup would put 5 shooters on the floor that can get it done inside and outside. Plus it would relieve all of the starters rather than leaving one or two on the floor for extended minutes.

KellyGreen17 wrote:Beat, I couldn't think of a reason either. Yes they are both a little undersized, but they play a lot bigger than they are. That lineup would put 5 shooters on the floor that can get it done inside and outside. Plus it would relieve all of the starters rather than leaving one or two on the floor for extended minutes.

I like the idea of being able to give ALL of our starters a breather and cut back on their minutes a little, but i think that Doc's philosophy of keeping a starter out there with the 2nd unit isn't based on a lack of back up personnel. i looks to me like that's just the way he prefers to do it, no matter who he could turn to on the bench if he wanted to.

Michael in Denver

I do not think that Davis has lost his opportunity to play. He has earned his minutes based on his development the last two years and especially during the playofs last year. He came into came this year a very good shape.

Having 5 bigs who can all play is a luxury we have never had. With both William and Davis fighting for minutes the minutes will probably go back to Davis if Doc maintains his pecking order approach to game minutes.

I also think Boston has the ability to win games by large margins thus providing more opportunities for Williams and Davis to get on the court.

Lastly, If one of the bigs gets injured (baby is injured now) the depth and versatility will continue to be significant.

dboss

Michael I agree that Doc's philosophy since the Big Three has been to leave at least one or two starters out there, but do you really think it's because that's just how he likes it, or do you think he's done it in the past because we haven't really had a strong bench? Even in the championship season our bench really wasn't that great. They were good, much better than last year, but no where near the level of quality we have now. I don't think our bench needs to be baby-sat by the starters this year. I think we have the experience and skill to put 5 bench players on the floor at one time.

I do not like the 2nd unit concept. I would prefer to see the rotation players integrated with the starters.

For example i would like to see Perk, KG and PP playing with Eddie House and Daniels. And I would likle to see Rajon and Allen playing with Sheed and Willams and Daniels.

I would also like to see Rajon in there with House and Daniels and KG and Sheed.

There are countless combinations to consider whch are much more interesting than the 5 in 5 out notion.

dboss

Dboss, those combinations may be more interesting, but it also makes it a lot harder to find chemistry when you are constantly playing with different people.

Kelly
Agreed to a point BUT an injury to anyone will mean the same thing. There will be times that we have anywhere from 5 to no starters in the game. Getting use to playing with different mates should not really be that big an issue if the system is right and the roles and expectations are reasonable.

We will have an ankle tweek here or a sore hammy their even if we have nothing significant.

Of course I didn't really do well in real Chemistry class but I see these guys doing whatever to make it work for ALL of them.

beat

dboss wrote:I do not like the 2nd unit concept. I would prefer to see the rotation players integrated with the starters.

For example i would like to see Perk, KG and PP playing with Eddie House and Daniels. And I would likle to see Rajon and Allen playing with Sheed and Willams and Daniels.

I would also like to see Rajon in there with House and Daniels and KG and Sheed.

There are countless combinations to consider whch are much more interesting than the 5 in 5 out notion.

dboss

Most coaches don’t implement a second unit concept because they don’t have the horses to do it. They need to keep a few starters in the mix to keep the team above water. I bet if you asked any coach, would he like the luxury of taking out his entire starting 5 and maintaining or increasing the lead with 5 bench players, he would say YES and be thrilled about it.

Think about how demoralizing it must be for a team like the Timberwolves to hold the starters down, only to have the bench come in and chip away at the lead and eventually tie it. Now not only is the game deadlocked, but you know the well rested reserves are actually hall of famers and all stars, ready to come back in and drop the hammer.

Many times already Doc has kept Ray Allen or Pierce or Rondo in with the 2nd unit, or Sheed and Daniels in with a few starters – but having two distinct units that are both strong in their own right is as much a psychological edge as a physical one.

Beat, that makes sense, but injuries are exceptions and when you are forced to play a different combination of players because of injuries it's generally on a temporary basis. Why make it harder on yourself and constantly be readjusting to different players when there is no injury to speak of? If you have the tools, why not allow a standard 5 guys to learn each others nuances and stick with it?

Oh Kelly is it were only that easy.

Unplug the toaster and plug in the canopener.

As other teams throw different folks at us we absolutely need to incorperate counter measures. Preferably we are the ones making them react to us. We are talking about 12 guys (15 total) who have roles. This bunch has more flexability than any team Doc or perhaps the entire league has seen in a long time. We are deep in every position because of this. Due to the age of some minutes MUST be limited.
There is no other way but to mix and match different combosof players. Some will go off and play well without a hitch others will struggle somewhat.

Our starting 5 will go a good chunk of the first quarter of every game baring 2 quick fouls. A sub will come in perhaps 2 then in a minute or so another sub or 2 leaving a PP or RA to finish the quater. After that Doc has many options to choose from depending on the flow of the game.

I just can't see a predetermined "play these 5 together" as it's just not that realistic and would not benefit the success of the team.

beat

Beat: Isn't the 2 unit concept the kind of substitution pattern employed by Dean Smith at North Carolina for so many years. The second unit was called the "Blue Team". If it's good enough for Smith, doesn't it follow that it could be applied on the professional level also?-MD.

MD

I have no clue only that having a full 5 players at the scorers table in pro ball ready to go in at one time just does not happen. Or at least I don't rercall it happening.

beat

Beat, I didn't mean to suggest that we start with 5 players and then replace all of them with 5 new guys all at one time. Obviously the rotations need to be staggered and there needs to be times where there are a few bench guys in with the starters (i.e. foul trouble, injuries, match-ups), but the idea of ALWAYS having a starter on the floor seems unecessary to me. This is why I wanted peoples opinion on whether Davis and Sheldon can play together. If they can, than this will reduce the starters minutes even more