meloshouldgo wrote:
When Kanter came in (by himself) a minute and a 1/2 or so later the lead had become 9.
The lead was 7 not 9. So by the time second bench player made it in the starters had built a 7 point lead, with zero contribution from teh bench.
No, no.
The lead was 7 when he came in and became 9 shortly AFTER he came in.
4:41 Enes Kanter enters the game for Noah Vonleh 67 - 74
4:04 Enes Kanter makes two point shot 69 - 76
Now Burke (he came in when the lead was five) and Kanter are in the game, and no, the momentum and complexion hasn't changed.
The lead is still increasing.
Yes Lead did go to 10 and it was the starters scoring that took it there - the bench didn't extend the lead as you suggested multiple times. Only bench contribution in that 10 point lead since Ntilikina left was dunk by Kanter. I think it's clear who has confirmation bias.
It IS clear.
7:03 Trey Burke enters the game for Frank Ntilikina 67 – 72 +5
4:41 Enes Kanter enters the game for Noah Vonleh 67 – 74 +7
3:09 Lance Thomas enters the game for Damyean Dotson 69 – 78
3:09 Mario Hezonja enters the game for Mitchell Robinson 69 – 78 +9
1:51 Tim Hardaway Jr. makes 29-foot three point jumper 71 – 81 +10
51.6 Trey Burke makes 26-foot three point jumper 76 – 84 +8
Burke was in the 3Q for 5 minutes and the lead went from 5 to 10 then 8 another minute later.
Kanter was in the 3Q for 3 minutes and then lead went from 7 to 10 then 8 another minute later.
Thomas and Hezonnja were in 3Q for 2 minutes and the lead went from 9 to 10 and then 8 another minute later.
That's not even mentioning the bench helped maintain a tie with the defending world champs through the first 24 minutes.
The starting unit did not build a 10 point lead. "Chucker" Hardaway was the only starter present for entire 10 point lead.
And nowhere does the actual circumstances of the game suggest that somehow the insertion of the second unit players suddenly change the game on a dime. It did not.
WRONG it was the starters lead and the bench did blow it. Here what your precious bench did.When Thomas and Hezonja came in we were up by 9 at 3:09 mark in the third
From then it was no defendse bench plus THJR who is also a no defense chucker.
From that to going down by two pints it was all second unit.
Then Mitch came in along with THJR at 8:15 in the 4th (already down by 2)
When Vonleh,Frank and Dotson returned to join Mithc and THJR - hence the starters being back on the floor we were down 104-96 - GET IT? GOOD!
Yes, I got it. I already acknowledged the change turned with the second unit in the game. You're trying to gravitate this towards the idea I'm denying who was playing when the lead changed, I'm not. I'm disputing anything could have been done about it.
It was not like the game's "momentum" or "complexion" changed all of a sudden. A totally typical NBA game occurred.
I also get the best team in the world got hot (really one of the best 1-3 players in the world got hot) and what you seem to be suggesting is Fizdale should have played the starting unit for all of if not most of the entire second half... in an October regular season game.
Exactly when was it okay for him to use the bench of not in the latter 1/3 of the 3Q and the first 1/3 of the 4Q when the second unit is very typically used?
You're clearly blaming Fizdale for when he played his bench in the second half. So when should he have played them?
At all?
Not even mentioning ANY NBA game is a game at 8 points with 6 mins left.
You're absolving the starters of what happened after they came back.
That's agenda talking.