RealGM

Posted: **Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:46 pm**

That is to say, what are the advantages or disadvantages to going with these starting lineups.

Garnett, Pierce, R. Wallace, Daniels and Ray
Garnett, R. Wallace, Perkins, Daniels and Pierce

Given the ages of the veterans, I could see some tired legs. I don't see these unorthodox lineups as realistic for an entire regular season. But I don't think that's the intention behind employing this as an idea or strategy.

I believe Rivers could mix and match here and there at times during games to just throw teams off or exploit mismatches.

The ideal starting lineup should be: Garnett, Pierce, Perkins, Rondo and Ray. I doubt Rivers would deviate from this. I like the chemistry and continuity.

Celtics coach Doc Rivers has been described by Rasheed Wallace as a “mad scientist’’ for his experimenting with lineups. And Rivers is apparently ready to go with a mixture in which 6-foot-5-inch Ray Allen would be the shortest Celtic on the court.

“It was a very difficult matchup and that was when we stretched the lead, with that lineup,’’ Rivers said. “We didn’t stay with it long, because I liked it. We’ll show it more in practice, then use it in games. What we thought would happen happened. They had to figure out who they were going to put on Marquis and who they were going to put on Ray. And we got a couple baskets before they could do that.’’

But Rivers backed off from his pregame promise of going with an even taller lineup.

“I didn’t want to do that,’’ Rivers said. “I thought the bigs were playing too well and I didn’t want to screw them up, put one of them at the ‘3,’ so I actually liked the one ‘big’ lineup and that was good enough for me.’’

Before the game, Rivers said of the proposed “big’’ lineup, which would pair Daniels and Pierce in the backcourt, with Garnett, Kendrick Perkins, and Wallace up front: “We may not get up and down the court very quickly, but at least we’ll be big.’’

http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball ... p?mode=PF#

Posted: **Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:49 pm**

I don't like the idea of squeezing a big into the 3 spot. maybe BBD on a lark, but certainly not KG or Sheed.

otoh i like the 1st lineup. that's a huge mismatch problem for the other team. if rondo fouls out or something i could definitely see us going with that lineup to close out games, depending on matchups. the only question is whether we have the quickness to defend the perimeter.

Posted: **Mon Oct 19, 2009 10:02 pm**

We have the best rebounding point guard in the league. A dude who regularly beats power forwards in jump balls, and is a freak of nature overall. Seriously, a "big lineup" is not an issue out of the point guard spot for us. Rondo plays like he is 6'7".

Posted: **Mon Oct 19, 2009 10:10 pm**

What I read into Docs comments, was that the big lineup was an "in case of emergency, break glass" type of thing, and not something that would be rolled out as a starting lineup. Main point would be to catch teams unawares, and the more tape there is of the big lineup, the more coaches can prepare for it.

I like the catching teams off guard thing. I think back to the Detroit game 2 years ago where Davis came in and Detroit didn't know what to do about him, and the Celts stole a win. And think back (regretfully) to the different Detroit game 2 years ago when House's ball handling skills first came into question because Hunter destroyed him for a few minutes. I think that sort of thing will be the purpose of the big lineups, just to be used selectively as a good coaching move to steal a game or two.

Posted: **Mon Oct 19, 2009 10:24 pm**

Personally, I'm not going to be the Boston fan who overrates or exaggerates the skills of Rondo. Because Kidd is still the best rebounding point guard in the league. Rondo would rank just behind him together with C. Paul.

Actually, if your point guard is your rebounding leader. What does that say about the ineffectiveness of your front court players? I don't feel Boston has that problem. Especially, with the addition of R. Wallace.

Rondo is tenacious. He isn't afraid to get near the basket in order to fight for the rebound against taller players. But I wouldn't say he regularly beats out power forwards for rebounds. He has had his occasional highlights of stealing a rebound from a taller player. Nowitzki's name comes to mind. But your point guard shouldn't be asked to risk his body for a rebound instead of a bigger, tougher center or forward doing so.

Posted: **Mon Oct 19, 2009 11:06 pm**

Offensively.. Quis, Ray/Paul , KG, Sheed, Perk works fine

if the opposing SF is no speedster it could work too... i like this line up against a team like Orlando if they are running Shard at the 3.. have KG roaming the permiter on him, then have Sheed or KG playing slightly further out on O

not a regular thing obviously.. but its an option

Posted: **Tue Oct 20, 2009 1:37 am**

I love the idea of the big lineup - especially against LA. Would love to see Kobe forced to guard Paul on one end and try to win as a jump shooter with Wallace, Garnett and Perk defending the paint. I think KG could handle Odom at SF spot with Bynum Gasol getting man handled by Wallace and Perk down low.

Posted: **Tue Oct 20, 2009 2:12 am**

Definitely a good option to have. As much as I liked the chemistry between Leon and Baby out there, running those two as your PF and C in spots just isn't going to cut it for every situation. 3 viable 6'10"-7 foot bigs is going to reap many rewards this year. Add to the mix a 6'7" athletic guy coming off the bench who can guard swingmen, which is something else that was lacking a year ago.

It seems like there were situations where the team had to deal with being undersized at 3, even 4 different positions at times in the past few years, basically once we had to get into the bench rotations. I don't see how that will be a problem this year against any team. Hooray versatility!

Posted: **Tue Oct 20, 2009 2:23 am**

I am much more exicted about some big lineups then say a House/Rondo combo..

Posted: **Tue Oct 20, 2009 2:28 am**

Hate the idea of having a big at sf. Slightly intrigued at Daniels at pg, but have to see more of Daniels. It's not like he brings that much better shooting from Rondo though.

Posted: **Tue Oct 20, 2009 4:34 am**

GreenDreamer wrote:We have the best rebounding point guard in the league. A dude who regularly beats power forwards in jump balls, and is a freak of nature overall. Seriously, a "big lineup" is not an issue out of the point guard spot for us. Rondo plays like he is 6'7".

This^^

Posted: **Tue Oct 20, 2009 5:24 am**

I like the first lineup of Rasheed, KG, Pierce, Allen and Daniels because we still have four shooters (MD) on the floor and can post-up post-up at four positions (RA). Doc should experiment with that lineup by subbing-in Sheed and Daniels together for Perk and Rondo rather than KG and Allen. It would be better to use this lineup early. Rondo and, depending on matchups, Perk are better options than Daniels and Sheed to end the game.

I'm not sure if it would work but an even bigger lineup as mentioned with either Big Baby, KG or Rasheed @ the 3 would be interesting to say the least. With that lineup the best matchup is Pierce in the post.

Posted: **Tue Oct 20, 2009 5:31 am**

Rondo's rebounding will slip with KG's return. Rondo was getting alot of rebounds that BBD should have been..

Posted: **Tue Oct 20, 2009 6:19 am**

I remember when the Lakers put Kobe on Rondo. If Kobe's guarding Daniels, I don't like Daniels chances... Especially, since he isn't a point guard.

Posted: **Tue Oct 20, 2009 3:40 pm**

that lineup is reall good against perhaps the lakers big lineup or cavs. but most often if they are playing young athletic teams it will be turnover central with ray allen running the point or quis

Posted: **Tue Oct 20, 2009 7:06 pm**

I like the idea.....it makes the other guy have to adjust.....on both ends.

8-)

Posted: **Tue Oct 20, 2009 8:54 pm**

Like sam-i-am and other said, this is a necessity for when and if we play LA in the finals. When LA plays a starting 5 of ....Kobe, Artest, Odom, Gasol, and Bynum, we will need to match up. I just like having the option.

Posted: **Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:35 am**

Washington can employ a taller lineup as well.

Blatche, Jamison, Haywood, Arenas and Butler
Blatche, Jamison, Oberto, Foye and M. Miller

Posted: **Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:35 am**

bonsaiflipflops wrote:I remember when the Lakers put Kobe on Rondo. If Kobe's guarding Daniels, I don't like Daniels chances... Especially, since he isn't a point guard.

What is the best way to combat that, anyway?

That sort of defensive lineup, along with the refs, was the main reason the Bulls won their last 2 titles. I remember Pippen shutting down Mark Jackson, Ron Harper taking the next toughest guy, and Jordan loafing/being rested and concentrating on offense.

If Jackson's lack of speed was a main reason that defense worked well, is speed (like Rondo's) the antidote?

Kobe would be capable of slowing anyway, so I doubt burning him would be the solution. Making him work very hard might help though. And having a bigger 2/3 dominate Fisher might be the answer.

But the Lakers aren't the Bulls; Kobe on Rondo is more about conceding the jump shot and cheating off/helping/freelancing, whereas Pippen on Jackson was about exploiting a size difference to shut down the PG.

Posted: **Wed Oct 21, 2009 1:07 am**

That first line-up would interesting to see Daniels exploit smaller, slower PGs like Fisher with the Lakers, Blake with the Blazers and maybe even Bibby with the Hawks.

RealGM

How do you feel about a big or taller lineup?

How do you feel about a big or taller lineup?

Re: How do you feel about a big or taller lineup?

Re: How do you feel about a big or taller lineup?

Re: How do you feel about a big or taller lineup?

Re: How do you feel about a big or taller lineup?

Re: How do you feel about a big or taller lineup?

Re: How do you feel about a big or taller lineup?

Re: How do you feel about a big or taller lineup?

Re: How do you feel about a big or taller lineup?

Re: How do you feel about a big or taller lineup?

Re: How do you feel about a big or taller lineup?

Re: How do you feel about a big or taller lineup?

Re: How do you feel about a big or taller lineup?

Re: How do you feel about a big or taller lineup?

Re: How do you feel about a big or taller lineup?

Re: How do you feel about a big or taller lineup?

Re: How do you feel about a big or taller lineup?

Re: How do you feel about a big or taller lineup?

Re: How do you feel about a big or taller lineup?

Re: How do you feel about a big or taller lineup?