Starting The 3 Small Guard Lineup Thoughts?

[dlts20]

Im probably still against it but Ill tell you that Gil & Kirk have played so well & Al has played so bad lately that I wouldnt be shocked if Flip goes with it despite wanting otherwise and I might not even disagree with him. I know one thing, even if Al does start he will be pulled super quick in every single game if he doesnt play like he did early.

Also, its not even all about the 3 little guards but alot of it is about NY. Alot of people think he's the odd man out when we get Wall back but all the guards including him are playing mad well while Al is struggling. I just wouldnt be shocked to see us start the little 3 or start NY or start Al but pull him quick every single game if he's not getting it done. I still dont like having 3 guards on the floor per say because all of them seem to be a little better "with" the ball and 3 guys means they wont have the ball that much. It has to be 2 in that respect but Al better step up

[nate33]

It makes no sense whatsoever to start a 3 guard lineup. Wall and Arenas should only play 36 minutes max considering their injury history - and I'd be more comfortable with Arenas playing 32. If you give Hinrich all the backup guard minutes, he'll play 28. Why start him in a non-conventional lineup that gives us a matchup disadvantage on defense if he's already going to get 28 minutes anyhow? There may be times in the course of the game when the matchups are right so that we can go with a 3-guard lineup, but the starting tip off is not one of those times.

If you truly believe Thornton shouldn't start anymore, then Young should start at SF. I'm fine with Thornton starting. He defense has been valuable even if his offensive style is a poor fit in Flip's system.

[AceDegenerate]

Thornton's defense is way better than anything else we have at SF. If we ran the 3 guard lineup out there last night it would have been Tayshaun Prince lighting us up instead of Rip.

Arenas/Wall need to be the starting backcourt with Hinrich off the bench.

[dlts20]

Nate, its actually 24min leftover for Kirk. Again, Im not advocating this. Im just asking. I think its dumb for the most part but at the same time, if your SF is playing like crap then you almost have no choice. One thing is for sure, we better start Gil. Gil made some strange comments after the previous game saying how when Wall comes back its his show and he will take his foot off the gas. He said that he will go back to the bench. I hope he's just trying to be a good teammate because it would be stupid to make him a bench player. If Flip is hell bent on starting Kirk then it better be over Al and not Gil

[nate33]

Nate, its actually 24min leftover for Kirk.

I'm assuming Arenas plays 32 instead of 36.

[hands11]

Im probably still against it but Ill tell you that Gil & Kirk have played so well & Al has played so bad lately that I wouldnt be shocked if Flip goes with it despite wanting otherwise and I might not even disagree with him. I know one thing, even if Al does start he will be pulled super quick in every single game if he doesnt play like he did early.

Also, its not even all about the 3 little guards but alot of it is about NY. Alot of people think he's the odd man out when we get Wall back but all the guards including him are playing mad well while Al is struggling. I just wouldnt be shocked to see us start the little 3 or start NY or start Al but pull him quick every single game if he's not getting it done. I still dont like having 3 guards on the floor per say because all of them seem to be a little better "with" the ball and 3 guys means they wont have the ball that much. It has to be 2 in that respect but Al better step up

All good points. I guess we are going to have to see. AT did start off nicely but games with 1 or 2 rebounds doesn't cut it.

Getting player back may actually present more challenges than it fixes in the short run. All depends on how Flip lines them up. This is where you have to make the tough decisions instead of just putting the playing out there that seems obvious. Its how they play as a unit that counts.

Someone is going to have to come off the bench but hey Manu does it. So do other good players.

My guess is Flip does the obvious to start and goes with Wall, Gil, AT, Dray and McGee. I think the three guard things will happen as maybe the first rotation.

What will be interesting is who does he pulls first, Wall or Gil ?

Whats different about this team is we have a team of players who for the first time there isn't one player that I would dread being out there. We have no Mike James or DS. There aren't older limited players that you don't want out there over younger developing players.

So who gets deactivated for Yi. I guess Hudson. Hamady was already deactivated for Wall even though Wall didnt play.

But SF is an interesting position on this team until Howard comes back and plays up to he potential.

AT, NY, Kirk, Booker, Yi and J Howard That is a lot of players you could line up there.

[nate33]

One thing is for sure, we better start Gil. Gil made some strange comments after the previous game saying how when Wall comes back its his show and he will take his foot off the gas. He said that he will go back to the bench. I hope he's just trying to be a good teammate because it would be stupid to make him a bench player. If Flip is hell bent on starting Kirk then it better be over Al and not Gil

I don't understand why you care so much who starts. I want Wall to play 36 minutes, Gil to play 32, and Hinrich to play 28 or less (depending on if Nick plays well). My only other stipulation is that I want Flip to make sure one of Arenas or Wall is on the court at all times and I want Gil in the game at crunch time.

[jimij]

One thing is for sure, we better start Gil. Gil made some strange comments after the previous game saying how when Wall comes back its his show and he will take his foot off the gas. He said that he will go back to the bench. I hope he's just trying to be a good teammate because it would be stupid to make him a bench player. If Flip is hell bent on starting Kirk then it better be over Al and not Gil

I don't understand why you care so much who starts. I want Wall to play 36 minutes, Gil to play 32, and Hinrich to play 28 or less (depending on if Nick plays well). My only other stipulation is that I want Flip to make sure one of Arenas or Wall is on the court at all times and I want Gil in the game at crunch time.

I'm with Nate on having either Gil or Wall in at all times and Gil in at crunch time. The one thing that's bothering me right now is that without Wall it seems like Hinrich plays more PG than Gil when they are in the game at the same time. I want Gil as the PG and Hiney at SG especially in 4th quarters. As well as Gil can do off the ball, I feel far more comfortable if he's initiating the offense instead of Kirk.

[Nivek]

The 3-guard lineup is a net -6 in 28 minutes. They score well -- 1.16 points per possession -- but get scored upon easily (1.27 points allowed per possession).

[dlts20]

One thing is for sure, we better start Gil. Gil made some strange comments after the previous game saying how when Wall comes back its his show and he will take his foot off the gas. He said that he will go back to the bench. I hope he's just trying to be a good teammate because it would be stupid to make him a bench player. If Flip is hell bent on starting Kirk then it better be over Al and not Gil

I don't understand why you care so much who starts. I want Wall to play 36 minutes, Gil to play 32, and Hinrich to play 28 or less (depending on if Nick plays well). My only other stipulation is that I want Flip to make sure one of Arenas or Wall is on the court at all times and I want Gil in the game at crunch time.

because I totally disagree with you. You act like guys are the same no matter what. That is not true. Some guys are clearly less effective as bench players. I dont think Gil will be the same stud if he's coming off the bench. I also disagree with you about minutes. I want Gil to play 36-38mpg. He's not really injury prone like you or others try to make him out to be. He tore his knee up & came back too early over & over again.

He played 32 games last year without problem, got some rest with the suspension, and now is back healthy again. He can play big minutes. The knee thing is over. Also again, all minutes arent the same. You can play 30 minutes that seem like 48 if you have to do everything for your team or you can play 38min that seem like 25 if you have good teammates that allow you to coast. If we are healthy then Gil can play an easy 36-38mpg because he wont have to do everything on the floor and wont have the ball at all times.

I also think its crazy for you to keep saying that either Gil or Wall are on the court at the all times like there are no other good starting backcourts in the league that manage to keep guys on the floor. It can be done and if there is a 3min stretch in each half when they are not on the floor then who cares? Kirk & NY is not a bad alternative in that case

[dlts20]

The 3-guard lineup is a net -6 in 28 minutes. They score well -- 1.16 points per possession -- but get scored upon easily (1.27 points allowed per possession).

28min is nothing and that was with a rusty Gil who was shooting 1 for 100 at the time

[dlts20]

Again guys, dont get it twisted. No one ripped Flip more for the 3 guard lineup than me and I would clearly still start Al, next would be NY, and I may even give Booker a look after that but if Flip plans to bench Gil for Kirk then Id rather have the 3guard thing

[nate33]

because I totally disagree with you. You act like guys are the same no matter what. That is not true. Some guys are clearly less effective as bench players. I dont think Gil will be the same stud if he's coming off the bench.

You state this like it's a fact, but there is no data that backs it up. Arenas posts better numbers without Wall because he has the ball more, but there's nothing that suggests that he's intrinsically better as a starter than he is coming off the bench. Gil is a pro. He'll do whatever is asked of him.

And none of this is an argument for a 3-guard lineup. The data shows that Kirk is MUCH worse at SF than he is at guard. His PER at SF is just 10.0, and his counterpart PER is 15.6. Meanwhile, he is outplaying his counterpart by a significant margin at both PG and SG.

I also disagree with you about minutes. I want Gil to play 36-38mpg. He's not really injury prone like you or others try to make him out to be. He tore his knee up & came back too early over & over again.

It's not me you disagree with. I remember the organization saying they would try to keep Gil's minutes down. Certainly, if he can play effectively for more than 32 minutes, he should.

[dlts20]

because I totally disagree with you. You act like guys are the same no matter what. That is not true. Some guys are clearly less effective as bench players. I dont think Gil will be the same stud if he's coming off the bench.

You state this like it's a fact, but there is no data that backs it up. Arenas posts better numbers without Wall because he has the ball more, but there's nothing that suggests that he's intrinsically better as a starter than he is coming off the bench. Gil is a pro. He'll do whatever is asked of him.

And none of this is an argument for a 3-guard lineup. The data shows that Kirk is MUCH worse at SF than he is at guard. His PER at SF is just 10.0, and his counterpart PER is 15.6. Meanwhile, he is outplaying his counterpart by a significant margin at both PG and SG.

I also disagree with you about minutes. I want Gil to play 36-38mpg. He's not really injury prone like you or others try to make him out to be. He tore his knee up & came back too early over & over again.

It's not me you disagree with. I remember the organization saying they would try to keep Gil's minutes down. Certainly, if he can play effectively for more than 32 minutes, he should.

Im not just talking about Gil. I think most star players are like that. Gil is probably even bigger because his game is the kinda game that needs it. He's a shooter that can cool off is sitting too long. He also is the type to get a little nervous and so on. Kirk has been a bench guy. Doesnt matter though since Gee has come up

[Dat2U]

One thing is for sure, we better start Gil. Gil made some strange comments after the previous game saying how when Wall comes back its his show and he will take his foot off the gas. He said that he will go back to the bench. I hope he's just trying to be a good teammate because it would be stupid to make him a bench player. If Flip is hell bent on starting Kirk then it better be over Al and not Gil

I don't understand why you care so much who starts. I want Wall to play 36 minutes, Gil to play 32, and Hinrich to play 28 or less (depending on if Nick plays well). My only other stipulation is that I want Flip to make sure one of Arenas or Wall is on the court at all times and I want Gil in the game at crunch time.

I think it is important who starts. The first quarter usually sets the tone for the whole game. Like it or not Arenas is still our best player. Why would we continually put ourselves behind the 8ball by not putting out the best possible lineup on the court to start the game? Plus while it makes sense to have Arenas or Wall on the court at all times, it would make even more sense to allow Arenas & Wall to build some chemistry together.

I hate the idea of a 3 guard lineup though. Hinrich isn't showing he can stop anyone, much less SFs. Maybe you could get away with Young at SF but not Hinrich. Adding Gee into the mix should help though.

[pineappleheadindc]

While I think the thought of the 3 small guard line-up isn't going to come to pass in reality (thank god), I see a big difference of opinion on starting vs not starting here.

I come down on Nate's side - thinking that it is less important who starts than who finishes. (I wonder if that kind of mindset is indicative of generational differences. Old guys like Nate and I - sorry Nate - think one way, younger guys a different way).

?

[dandridge 10]

Count me as an old guy that thinks its more important who finishes than starts.

[Wizardspride]

While I think the thought of the 3 small guard line-up isn't going to come to pass in reality (thank god), I see a big difference of opinion on starting vs not starting here.

I come down on Nate's side - thinking that it is less important who starts than who finishes. (I wonder if that kind of mindset is indicative of generational differences. Old guys like Nate and I - sorry Nate - think one way, younger guys a different way).

?

I don't know what you consider "older" guys but I'm 34 and I think Gil should eventually start as well.

[pineappleheadindc]

^

Yeah...maybe it's just us old guys thinking this way.

BTW - Dandridge 10 - I sat a row behind your namesake at the Wizards/Cleveland game. IF there was a better looking, more distinguished gentleman at the game, I didn't see it. He was very patient and generous with his time with a woman seated to his left who talked at him a while - including when the game was going on.

If Bobby D was at the game b/c of Uncle Ted's outreach to former Bullets and Wizards, then I'm really happy about the outreach program. Washington basketball has alumni who are really great role models for the community and it's good to see them back in the arena.

[Nivek]

Who starts is important. Research at 82games, and then replicated elsewhere, suggests that good teams usually get off to a good start (win the first quarter), win the third quarter, and hang on during the 2nd and 4th quarters.

That doesn't necessarily mean you start the 5 best players. You start the best 5-man unit, then work from there. But, who starts games is pretty important.

That said, the 3-guard lineup is a gimmick. Use it now and then for a specific purpose, but it should not be a base lineup.