Close games: Good or bad?

[DERRENMATTS]

So many nail biters to start the season. Every game so far has been close and has elevated our blood pressure to dangerously high levels.

Are these good or bad for our young team?

My answer is that it is good for this team. Many of our young players are getting first hand opportunities to see what it takes to get it done in close games. Some of them are even playing in the 4th quarter, which gives them even more hands on experience. But even the ones on the bench are able to witness how much determination and how much energy needs to be put forth to seal the victory.

Seeing how we lost 2 games because we couldn't pull through, it should serve as a stepping stone for this young team And soon, we'll start coming through in the 4th with a tougher mentality and we'll close out tight games.

[Celtic17]

I agree Derren.
The only other thing we need to compliment these close games...
A couple games with big leads so our young guys can get some extended minutes on the floor.

[DERRENMATTS]

We actually start the game very strongly, and start the 3rd quarter very strongly. The first unit usually gets off to a good start because both Pierce and Blount get the offense going. But from midway through the 3rd quarter and for some of the 4th, we lose our momentum, or focus, and we let the game get out of our hands. This has a lot to do with the second unit coming in.

They're going to need time developing their roles. Jefferson and Gomes will be key offensive players and rebounders, and Dickau should help steady the PG play. Perkins and Justin Reed are going to be our defensive players. Scalabrine should also improve his play as the season goes on.

[BCHISTORIAN]

good no doubt. builds character and execution. and nerves too

[Roadrunner]

derrenmatts said:

We actually start the game very strongly, and start the 3rd quarter very strongly. The first unit usually gets off to a good start because both Pierce and Blount get the offense going.

One karma point for Blount.

[esco33]

They are definitely good overall. I do not know how good it is for me though as a fan, blood pressure, temper, etc.

I think it helps the younger guys more though. I think the more experience they have with "nailbiters" the better prepared they will be in the future for any type of situation.

The ONLY bad thing is that this will definitely tire our team out in the long run. They need to be playing hard every night of course, but it seems like every night they have to crawl back into the game to stay alive or at least keep it close by giving it 150%. A few 10 point or 20 point wins would be nice especially for the vets, so that they can have confidence that this young team is actually able to put teams away. We still need that type of game where we dominate the whole game, although overall I'd definitely rather lose close games then get blown out like last night.

(We could easily be 4-1 right now)

Sucks that we are 2-3 .

[VI_CelticsFan]

I'm gonna have to agree with all of you. Close games are great for a team, especially with how young our team is. Close games show you how to get it done in crunch time. But, eventually, I'll want us to start winning some games by more than 2 points.

[meltinjohn]

Too many close games aren't good. Especially if you watch most of them.

[freshnthehouse]

Anyone remember that nationally televised game between us and the Kings? Chris Webber hit a # to win the game? That was an old fashioned ball-buster.

[meltinjohn]

At least C-Webb will bew retiring soon or reduced to a role player in 3 years.

[freshnthehouse]

NOt until next year though. He is ripping it up on my fantasy team. On the subject of Philly, I think they are gonna be a much better team than I thought originally.

[Celtic17]

lol...Freshunderarms

[meltinjohn]

Yea our team will be better than theirs. They wont be gonig anywhere.

[The Eye of the Q is upon you!]

Close games = Very Good........

Gets the kids up to speed faster by playing against strong competition.

[meltinjohn]

Maybe I suppose.