How would we do with a different starting lineup

[doc shivers]

C Lopez / Frye / Collins
PF Stat / Amundson / Clark
SF Duds / HIll
SG JRich / Barbs
PG Nash / Dragic

Lopez seems to play way better with Nash and would help defensively against good starting C's and get some Boards. We could have duds starting to help spread the floor, and JRich would be more involved at the beginning because Nash wouldn't be looking for Hill as much. This would give us some more offense off the bench as well with Frye and Hill coming in.

[RunDogGun]

C Lopez / Frye / Collins
PF Stat / Amundson / Clark
SF Duds / HIll
SG JRich / Barbs
PG Nash / Dragic

Lopez seems to play way better with Nash and would help defensively against good starting C's and get some Boards. We could have duds starting to help spread the floor, and JRich would be more involved at the beginning because Nash wouldn't be looking for Hill as much. This would give us some more offense off the bench as well with Frye and Hill coming in.

But you are guessing. Frye gets those open threes because of Nash, and Hill is not nearly as effective coming off the bench. Plus Lopez hinders the floor spacing we get from Frye. What we really need is Amare to man up and start to play defense like he said he would. I would much rather start Duds at the two if we wanted more defense.

[Jimmy76]

last year it was clear Hill does much worse coming off the bench

also I prefer frye in the starting lineup because he provides the spacing that helps out our starting offense a lot and i like lopez on that scrappy second unit he gets in foul trouble too quick to be a starting C right now

[MaryvalesFinest]

C-Frye
PF-Amare
SF-Clark
SG-J-Rich
PG-Nash

[doc shivers]

C Lopez / Frye / Collins
PF Stat / Amundson / Clark
SF Duds / HIll
SG JRich / Barbs
PG Nash / Dragic

Lopez seems to play way better with Nash and would help defensively against good starting C's and get some Boards. We could have duds starting to help spread the floor, and JRich would be more involved at the beginning because Nash wouldn't be looking for Hill as much. This would give us some more offense off the bench as well with Frye and Hill coming in.

But you are guessing. Frye gets those open threes because of Nash, and Hill is not nearly as effective coming off the bench. Plus Lopez hinders the floor spacing we get from Frye. What we really need is Amare to man up and start to play defense like he said he would. I would much rather start Duds at the two if we wanted more defense.

I don't know, to me it seems like a lot of teams are giving Frye the open look and it is our last option if nothing else is open. I think he could get those looks off the bench as well. I think Hill could be more effective off the bench because he would be one of the only scorers on the floor with the 2nd unit, plus he could help dragic by handling the ball more.

[rsavaj]

last year it was clear Hill does much worse coming off the bench

also I prefer frye in the starting lineup because he provides the spacing that helps out our starting offense a lot and i like lopez on that scrappy second unit he gets in foul trouble too quick to be a starting C right now

[RunDogGun]

C Lopez / Frye / Collins
PF Stat / Amundson / Clark
SF Duds / HIll
SG JRich / Barbs
PG Nash / Dragic

Lopez seems to play way better with Nash and would help defensively against good starting C's and get some Boards. We could have duds starting to help spread the floor, and JRich would be more involved at the beginning because Nash wouldn't be looking for Hill as much. This would give us some more offense off the bench as well with Frye and Hill coming in.

But you are guessing. Frye gets those open threes because of Nash, and Hill is not nearly as effective coming off the bench. Plus Lopez hinders the floor spacing we get from Frye. What we really need is Amare to man up and start to play defense like he said he would. I would much rather start Duds at the two if we wanted more defense.

I don't know, to me it seems like a lot of teams are giving Frye the open look and it is our last option if nothing else is open. I think he could get those looks off the bench as well. I think Hill could be more effective off the bench because he would be one of the only scorers on the floor with the 2nd unit, plus he could help dragic by handling the ball more.

Hill already does that, when we bring in Goran. I also don't want to put the burden of scoring on Hill. He already does so much for us, and he will be wiped out if we force him to be the scorer off the bench. He has a player option, and he wants to play with Nash. I think he has earned that.

Frye would not get nearly as many open shots.

Amare and JRich are the ones that need to step things up, and if anyone should go from the starting lineup, it should be them before others.

[doc shivers]

Well, to me the problem seems to be that Amare and JRich only seem to play well when they are going well early. They need to be directly involved early in the game running plays for them ect. so that they stay interested. Seems like when Amare is scoring a lot he starts rebounding and playing defense better. same for JRich, when he gets going early he stays aggressive.

[Miklo]

Hill needs to start - he's at his best when he starts and he puts the "-tangibles" into intangibles.

And I agree with

But you are guessing. Frye gets those open threes because of Nash, and Hill is not nearly as effective coming off the bench. Plus Lopez hinders the floor spacing we get from Frye. What we really need is Amare to man up and start to play defense like he said he would. I would much rather start Duds at the two if we wanted more defense.

and

last year it was clear Hill does much worse coming off the bench

also I prefer frye in the starting lineup because he provides the spacing that helps out our starting offense a lot and i like lopez on that scrappy second unit he gets in foul trouble too quick to be a starting C right now

BUT

I say start Lopez for a game. I'm always a fan of experimenting with different starting lineups. It's a strategy Coach K (Duke coach) has always used and IMO a great way to troubleshoot difficulties. I mean on most teams you have at least 7-8 guys that COULD potentially start to fill some type of role. There are so many possible lineups there - lots of opportunity to experiment with your players' roles.

[Mr. Sun]

My starting for certain teams:

Lopez
Frye
Rich
Dudley
Hill

[lilfishi22]

I want to see Lopez start, Amare always plays tougher when he has a defensive big next to him because he doesn't have to expend as much energy playing D.

[doc shivers]

I think that Lopez would have probably started if he hadn't injured himself in preseason.

[statisback]

I don't know, to me it seems like a lot of teams are giving Frye the open look and it is our last option if nothing else is open. I think he could get those looks off the bench as well. I think Hill could be more effective off the bench because he would be one of the only scorers on the floor with the 2nd unit, plus he could help dragic by handling the ball more.[/quote]

Hill already does that, when we bring in Goran. I also don't want to put the burden of scoring on Hill. He already does so much for us, and he will be wiped out if we force him to be the scorer off the bench. He has a player option, and he wants to play with Nash. I think he has earned that.

Frye would not get nearly as many open shots.

Amare and JRich are the ones that need to step things up, and if anyone should go from the starting lineup, it should be them before others.[/quote]


Probably the dumbest thing Ive heard in a while. YOU ARE GOING TO SEND AMARE TO THE BENCH? Thank God you are not the coach.

[MrVince]

I think our line up good as it is right now. I don't see a single problem with it. It's just that some of our players aren't playing up to expectations.

Moving Frye to the bench wouldn't be that good of an idea and plus Lopez as a starter? Not yet.