Got the halftime score text right as I was hitting the sack last night....was quite impressed and felt pretty good. Then I got up this morning and saw the final and was like, what the heck happened in the 2nd half? After reading this thread, apparently, there again was some "experimenting" going on that provided the difference in the halves.
As far as some of the comments in the thread:
There is a definitite difference between playing aggressive and playing stupid. Apparently, Salley's T (again) was an example of the latter, not the former. You can play aggressive without playing stupid, it's a matter of self-control and temperament (or knowing when you can get away with something and won't get caught. Kids, don't pay attention to this one).
As much as the 2nd half apparently stunk, perhaps Coach Les used the opportunity to "practice" or "evaluate" some different lineups, defenses, plays, etc. It's one thing to do that in practice against guys who know what's going on and everybody's strengths and weaknesses, but against a real opponent, you can get a better feel for the effectiveness of your theories. In fact, this might turn into a new question for the coach.....anyways, if this was the intention, I'm OK with that.
As far as the "we won, who cares/why so critical" (general quotes, not specific) opinion, that attitude stinks. If you do not remain critical of every performance and take a real evaluation of the performance, you are doing yourself a disservice. Just because you "won" doesn't mean that everything was perfect or excellent. There are always things that can be re-evaluated and improved. There's nothing "doom and gloom" about it to be critical of a performace, even after a win.