I'm not saying he or yall are wrong, I just dont have a problem with it is how I view it. Not because i'm a Spurs fan, but because they dont have to play players bwcause it satisfies the payinf customer. The thing is, Spurs arent the only team to do this or the first team to do it, they just bold enough to tell you they resting players and not hiding it like other teams will do by saying player is "injured". If it is a strategy they wanna do thinking it gives them the best chance to win LONG term, how can you fault them or attempt to penalize them?
And thats where the issue I have comes into play
-Is there any precedence or study that supports sitting guys out equals greater long term success? I dont want to make this all about the Spurs, I hated it when the Heat had Wade on that maintenance plan a few years ago. I just think it cheats the game, especially in a late season marquee matchup like this, i think fans of the game would like to see all the guys playing.
, I just you know, don't really care cause it does give the back ups extended playing time and able to get that confidence up which you CAN say does help them
. The Spurs have had a great bench for quite some time and that seems to because Pop DOES give them a lot of burn part of that seems to be because Pop gives them a lot of extended burn during the reg season
