Re: Pole: More important Starting lineup. The Celtics won with three future HOFers and really nothing else.
Re: Pole: More important You win with your best players period. I get so sick and tired of all of this 10 man rotation shit. Play your top 5 players 30-35 minutes a game, and your next 3 the rest. If players are too similiar then trade two of them for one better one. Miller - 32 Roy - 35 Batum - 30 Aldridge - 35 Oden - 35 Rudy - 28 Webster - 22 Joel - 18 Outlaw, Howard, Blake - 5 They are also the guys that might play if there is an injury or foul trouble. Oden can slide to the 4 for bits if we need it.
Re: Pole: More important in the playoffs, lineups are condensed. While home court is an advantage, once you're in the playing field is levelled i.e. an 8th seed need not win more games than a 1 seed (like in football) to win the finals.
Re: Pole: More important no, no, no! The way to win is to stockpile 2nd rounders, and then sign them all! You could even go to a 12 man rotation if your team is DEEP! /attempted sarcasm Some of us have been waiting for a consolidation trade for a LONG time. Basically, KP has never made one. edit: Ouch, you're Baylessless.
Re: Pole: More important With the votes so far, it's obvious what focus we really need. How about we make damn sure our "Starting Line-up" is the best in the league, then build the role players around it. Not saying we need to trade our young guys for veterans, just making sure the focus of KP is directed on strengthening our starters.
Re: Pole: More important I am just not buying the idea that you need to have heavy minutes for your 5 best players in the NBA. That might work for a season or two - but you are going to fall apart after that. It's a freaking 82 games season + playoffs. Depth is a great advantage - and if you use it properly - you can keep your stars/best players to play heavy minutes when they need it and be fresh doing it. It's a marathon, not a sprint - not using the depth you have is a big mistake.
Re: Pole: More important Well when you go into the playoffs, the rotations are much smaller. Usually teams shorten their rotation to 8 or 9 players.
Re: Pole: More important I have no problems with playing your best players heavy minutes in the playoffs, I just think it is a folly to do it for a long regular season and expect them to have a lot in the tank during the playoffs.
Re: Pole: More important At the same time, how long are most teams dominant for when they reach their peak? A couple of years at the max. Win it why you can. Ride your horse's while you can. I argue that the best teams play about 7 to 8 guys, with a few of the guys being very good at several positions. There hasn't been a platoon subbing team that has won anything in years.
Re: Pole: More important Well we must factor something more of a personal level. I mean with all this talent, I expect many on the team wanting more playing time. How will that fare during the post season, while 4 players able to start on most teams watch from the bench during the "playoffs"? I can see some accepting that role, but some of the younger talent may not during contract years.
Re: Pole: More important Um... I'm pretty sure if you're starting line-up sucks, then your bench will probably suck as well. You play your best players.
Re: Pole: More important better starters win playoff games, better benches get you more regular season wins and smooth out rough spots due to injury ... Starter's all the way baby.
Re: Pole: More important No it's not about "Sucking" kind sir. It's about having 15 players that could very well start on other ball clubs. Not being the best, but being good players. So the "poll" or "Debate" is based on having 10 starter quality players or 5 star caliber players with more "role players" on the bench.
Re: Pole: More important It depends on what your goal is. If you want to win a championship this year, you may be right. If, however, you want to position yourself to do it next year, it'd be nice to have as many tradeable assets as possible. If you cut Outlaw, Przybilla and Blake's minutes to that extent, you're going to naturally decrease their value. Plus, by exposing your best players to so many minutes, you're taking greater risks on injury. Maybe not a big deal if you've got older guys like Boston, and you want to get the most out of them before they retire. But if you've got a center with injury history, maybe he doesn't need to play 35 mpg quite yet. Especially if you have such a capable backup.
Re: Pole: More important The Spurs won their first title in 1999 - some people still consider them the 2nd best team in the west this year. If LAL managed to keep Shaq/Kobe longer - they would have had a 6 years run easy. In other words - I think that keeping your stars fresh for the playoffs and important games is a luxury and it would seem silly to run Andre 35 minutes per game when Steve Blake can easily fill in 20 minutes per game, it is silly to run Brandon 35 minutes per game if you can keep him at 32 and throw some extra minutes Rudy or JB's way. There is no need to run LMA 35MPG when you can give an extra 3 to Howard/Outlaw - and limiting Greg for 28-30 MPG with that massive body of his is again a good idea - when Joel can fill in so well. Championships are not won in the regular season and crushing OKC by 30 points, while very satisfying - is worth just 1 in the W/L column, just like a 12 points win... If, on the other hand we need to run Brandon, LMA, Miller and Greg for 38 minutes to crush them bastard in the piss and purple during the regular season - why not?
Re: Pole: More important I'm not sure either of these is entirely accurate. I really think your top 3-4 guys are the most important. It doesn't really matter if they start or are on the bench (for example, Manu on the Spurs, LO on the Lakers), though in most cases they start. It just matters than you have 3-4 really good players that you can really rely on. Then you just need some good roleplayers around them, even if it's a rotating group of roleplayers (again... see the Spurs).
Re: Pole: More important Well if you don't have a great starting lineup you probably are not going to go far nor are you going far without a bench. Now if the question is should you start your best players or have some coming off the bench than that might be a different matter.
Re: Pole: More important One of them they had Walton coming off the bench. He might have been the difference that year.
