Musselman and his bench

[Superman]

But, when he doesn't use guys like Skinner/Sampson (I liked what I saw from him), who would of provided added size, defense, athleticism, rebounding up front. That's when I didn't like him.

I can understand that. Rick often would go small - and stay small - when we had the opportunity to put a big man in who could alter some shots, grab some rebounds and give some fouls. I didn't like that guys like Skinner, Ostertag, even Gerald Wallace wouldn't get time because they weren't the type of offensive players (shooters, to be exact) that he liked to use.

However, I don't think we need to worry about being the deepest team in the League. It's not often the deepest team that wins. It's the team that has the dominant player(s), the team that's healthy, and that is able to bring together all the necessary components to win a championship at the same time. We were the deepest team in the League in 2003, and it got us through the regular season with 59 wins. But all that depth didn't mean anything when we lost our star player.

The Lakers couldn't function without Karl Malone in the Finals two years ago, and lost to the Pistons. (I still don't think they would have won, but I doubt they'd have been dominated the way they were.) The Pistons couldn't survive the Heat without Rasheed Wallace.

And so it goes in the NBA. Depth is only important if your core is healthy. Your 9th player, regardless of how good he is or the fact that he might start on another team, isn't going to win you a championship.

 

[Kings113]

k...

I'm not saying to be the deepest, nor am I saying that is a must. Just would of liked some utilization of the bench for most of the season (Skinner/Sampson).

Also, I'm just wanting a couple decent back-ups for Miller/Bibby. That would help a lot.

 

[VF21]

I agree, Kings113. I don't need to see every player on the court every night but I'm hoping we'll see a little more roster flexibility for the 8 through 10 players.

 

[BMiller52]

I can understand that. Rick often would go small - and stay small - when we had the opportunity to put a big man in who could alter some shots, grab some rebounds and give some fouls. I didn't like that guys like Skinner, Ostertag, even Gerald Wallace wouldn't get time because they weren't the type of offensive players (shooters, to be exact) that he liked to use.

However, I don't think we need to worry about being the deepest team in the League. It's not often the deepest team that wins. It's the team that has the dominant player(s), the team that's healthy, and that is able to bring together all the necessary components to win a championship at the same time. We were the deepest team in the League in 2003, and it got us through the regular season with 59 wins. But all that depth didn't mean anything when we lost our star player.

The Lakers couldn't function without Karl Malone in the Finals two years ago, and lost to the Pistons. (I still don't think they would have won, but I doubt they'd have been dominated the way they were.) The Pistons couldn't survive the Heat without Rasheed Wallace.

And so it goes in the NBA. Depth is only important if your core is healthy. Your 9th player, regardless of how good he is or the fact that he might start on another team, isn't going to win you a championship.

I agree with most of your post but look at Dallas-they are very deep and versatile. They seriously have a ton of depth. I mean Harris/Daniels/Stackhouse/Van Horn/Dampier all get playing time.

I don't think we need to worry about being the deepEST team but I think we do need more depth just so Mike and Brad don't have to play so many minutes. I mean I would take a quality bench with 3-4 guys capable of being 6th men like the Mavs over a bench like Memphis' with a lot of "decent" guys any day.

I got mad at Adelman because when he went to the bench he went small a lot instead of putting in a shot blocker/shot alterer.

 

[CaminoChaos]

I like Adelman but his decision not to bring in Skinner, Williamson or even Price into a game after they had a good game was beyond me. Skinner was, if you all remember, our most consistant preseason player. Williamson was always ready to play and gave it his all. Price came in as a back-up to Hart when Bibby was out a few games and played extremely well. So hopefully Muss uses the talent we have.

 

[Superman]

I agree with most of your post but look at Dallas-they are very deep and versatile. They seriously have a ton of depth. I mean Harris/Daniels/Stackhouse/Van Horn/Dampier all get playing time.

Doesn't matter if Dirk goes down.

I don't think we need to worry about being the deepEST team but I think we do need more depth just so Mike and Brad don't have to play so many minutes. I mean I would take a quality bench with 3-4 guys capable of being 6th men like the Mavs over a bench like Memphis' with a lot of "decent" guys any day.

Like Brick said, the only teams consistently playing 9+ guys are the ones that don't have 5 quality starters. I wouldn't mind seeing a deeper rotation either, but I'm not hankering for a DEEP bench just because it sounds good to say we're deep.

I got mad at Adelman because when he went to the bench he went small a lot instead of putting in a shot blocker/shot alterer.

Exactly. We need a backup point guard/shooting guard, a backup swingman, and a backup big man who can rebound and block shots. Either that, or you start the big man and bring Shareef off the bench to give us some offense.

Our 8 man rotation:

Bibby, Bonzi, Artest, [big man], Miller + [backup guard], [backup swingman], Shareef. That should get us through the regular season and into the playoffs.