Question of the day: Should the Thunder bench Perk?
|
|
Perkins has become the scapegoat in the Finals, after game two. He has started both games, and by no fault of his own the Heat have dominated the opening period in both. They outscored the Thunder by seven in Game 1, and began Game 2 on an 18-2 run. You can blame Perk,but he's playing his best at this point given the lineup's that the Heat have used. The Heat are playing small ball, and the Thunder are unable to use Perk in that case.
Many talk show's, and other forums have discussed this, and the conclusion by many is that Perk needs to sit. The Thunder haven't used Perk in the final minutes of the first two games in the Finals. They stormed back in-game one to win without Perk. They came back in-game two as well, even though they came up short. So what do you think guys? Should the Thunder change their game plan, and sit Perk?
Categories: None
Post a Comment
Oops!
The words you entered did not match the given text. Please try again.
6 Comments
jlil89 says...
As Rondo said, "They need to hit the deck too"
As frustrating as it is to watch Perkins blow bunnies, it's important to have a genuinely tough guy in the middle who actually cares about patrolling the paint. Collison is an 'energy guy'. He's best coming off the bench. He's definitely more productive than Perk, which is why he often finishes games, but that has been true all along. Perk didn't finish games with us either.
The Thunder started off ridiculously soft against the Heat. Why do teams STILL not get it that you cannot start games or halves soft against them? The Heat are a team that is at its best in the early going.
It's like Seabiscuit facing War Admiral. If you let the Heat blow you away coming out of the starting gate, you've lost the race.
Oops!
Oops, you forgot something.