Two Perspectives On The Rotation

HawkStr8Talk has a long piece exploring why this:

“I did something last night I haven’t done all year in terms of playing six guys,” [Woodson] said. “I really thought we could beat those guys like that but it backfired on me because their second unit beat us.”

and this:

“I had to see something for myself,” Woody said. “I condensed things last night almost like it was a playoff game, when your backs are against the wall and you have to have one. I blew out six guys trying to do it. I can tell you it won’t happen again.”

don't really make any sense. The key excerpt:

Not only do I question the tactic, but I also question the reasoning - it just doesn't make sense. teams are getting better by bolstering their teams 1-11 or 12 and you made the decision to SHRINK the bench on the road in a non-essential game and that was supposed to turn out well..how! Not only that - what message does that send to the bench? I can see sending a message that says - BENCH go win us a game without the starters that even if you lose, you might win, but the reverse is assuredly more likely. You can win the battle and lose the war.

In less serious analysis, Floyd Mayweather, Jr. tells Nima Zarrabi of SLAM Online that Mike Woodson might be costing the team upwards of 12-and-a-half points a game by not starting Jamal Crawford:

"What the Atlanta Hawks need is this: we need to let Bibby come off the bench and let Jamal Crawford start. Anytime a guy can come off the bench and score 50 points in a game—he needs to be starting! He might be putting up 30 a night if he’s starting!"

Floyd also thinks the Hawks should acquire Amare Stoudemire (as is typical of hypothetical Hawks trades he does not specify how this would be done) and that losing Stoudemire would cost Steve Nash six assists per game. I suspect Floyd was a big Shawn Marion fan five years ago.