Horford to start?

[PAOBoston]

Interesting little tidbit from Mazzulla the other day l talking about the backup bigs. Said it “starts with Luke”. Does that mean Cs  leaning with the double big starting lineup of Porzingis/Horford and White to come off bench as 6th man? What do we think?

https://x.com/JaredWeissNBA/status/1710709160558391344?s=20

[celticinorlando]

Ugh. I don’t think luke could play dead in a horror movie let alone be a rotation player

[Roy H.]

I don't think he meant Luke is literally the first big off the bench.  I think that White will probably end up being the primary starter.

[cman88]

I think he just meant luke is going to have to be a rotation player

Porzingus should be managed due to his durability issues and Horford is old.

For the regular season it should be fine. I mean we went on that huge run last year with Luke and our primary big..

[JBcat]

I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s matchup dependent. If we are playing the Cavs or Wolves for example we might want to start both Porzingas and Horford and have White come off the bench, conversely if we are playing a smaller team we might start White with Horford off the bench.

[tonydelk]

Pending the Matchup ID think.  Al may start 30 games and come off the bench in the rest. 

[PAOBoston]

I am pro starting two bigs. Horford likes/prefers starting. Think they come out with a better tone if they start big as well. I expect Horford to be first sub out for White. White will get his 30 mpg as well and likely play with the closing lineup.

Only way to see if Kornet and the rest of the bench gang has any promise is to play them and see what sticks.

[BitterJim]

I don't think that comment has to do with Al starting, but I can definitely see it happening. An older player like him can really benefit from going straight from warming up to playing, as opposed to warming up and then getting cold on the bench before playing. White will start when Horford sits out.

What I definitely don't see us doing is changing our starting lineup based on (regular season) matchups. We have the best starting lineup in the league: other teams need to adjust to us.

[green_bballers13]

Honest question (not trying to sound sarcastic or anything): Does it matter who starts the game? I've always thought that finishing the game demonstrated a bigger endorsement from a coach.

Starting a player shows respect to your veteran leaders. Ending a game means you're one of the best 5 players on the team.

[droopdog7]

I pretty much think that Al has to start, otherwise our starting lineup is tiny.  We'd have great perimter defense but that doesn't matter much when the back line can't protect the rim.  Plus, I don't want to be small at the guards and the four. 

[Vermont Green]

Honest question (not trying to sound sarcastic or anything): Does it matter who starts the game? I've always thought that finishing the game demonstrated a bigger endorsement from a coach.

Starting a player shows respect to your veteran leaders. Ending a game means you're one of the best 5 players on the team.

People can talk about starting line up or closing line up and all that but every team has a line up that is most used and that line up is usually the starting and closing line up.  Last season, the most used line up for the Celtics was:

Smart
White
Brown
Tatum
Horford

That line up played 432 minutes and was +103 overall.  The second most used line up was the same but Grant in for White, 179 minutes, -5.

The most used line up in the league last season was SAC:

Fox
Hueter
Barnes
Murray
Sabonis

That unit played 900 minutes for a +56.  Continuity of the most used line up is generally a pretty good indicator of team success.  Teams that are able to keep a core "best" unit on the floor the most, tend to win the most or at least play to their fullest potential.  It is not a perfect correlation of course, but a pretty good one.

That point about unit continuity is why I don't think it is a good idea to try and change your units from game to game based on match ups.  A team should know what their best unit is and that unit should be on the court the most, and in most cases, start and close the game.  Let the other team adjust to you.  Injuries and other factors can force a team to use different line ups and when that starts to happen, teams tend to not win as much.

Even at the end of the game, in most cases, you should close with your best unit.  There can be situations due to fouls or who is hot or maybe you are behind and are trying to change things up, but in general, the best thing for a team is to close with their best unit, not try to adjust to match up to the other team

[ozgod]

He did say not to take what he does with lineups in the preseason as a guide to what will happen in the regular season, because the preseason is the time to experiment and figure out lineups with synergy. He also said that the 2 big vs the smaller lineup is going to be based on matchups with the other team's starting lineup. And they can start with a particular lineup but that might only be used for 10% of the game, again depending on matchups. VG brings up a good point about having the "best" static lineup no matter who they are facing like in the old days but I think these days with analytics they all look for lineups that statistically have an advantage and they change accordingly.

[cman88]

I think they are just easing Jrue holiday in.

I mean this guy only got here last week.

[JumpingJudkins]

I honestly can't think of a single good reason to start Horford over Derrick White.

White is younger and better at everything on offense except for maybe the corner three. He's second team All-Defense and even a better rim protector than Horford at this point. He had the best plus-minus in the Eastern Conference.

If we have Horford come off the bench, that means there's always a strong big coming in for Porzingis. It means more minutes for Pritchard and fewer for Kornet, which is a win.

Also, if we start Horford, that means we'll be going back and forth between a big lineup and a small lineup every time Al or Porzingis have to sit during a back-to-back.

I mean, showing respect for a trusted veteran is the best excuse I can come up with for starting Horford, but the Celtics are simply a better team when Derrick White is on the floor.

[ozgod]

I honestly can't think of a single good reason to start Horford over Derrick White.

White is younger and better at everything on offense except for maybe the corner three. He's second team All-Defense and even a better rim protector than Horford at this point. He had the best plus-minus in the Eastern Conference.

If we have Horford come off the bench, that means there's always a strong big coming in for Porzingis. It means more minutes for Pritchard and fewer for Kornet, which is a win.

Also, if we start Horford, that means we'll be going back and forth between a big lineup and a small lineup every time Al or Porzingis have to sit during a back-to-back.

I mean, showing respect for a trusted veteran is the best excuse I can come up with for starting Horford, but the Celtics are simply a better team when Derrick White is on the floor.

According to Joe he's not had a two-big lineup with Porzingis and Horford before, who can both shoot, pop out of pick and rolls, and can both pass the ball to cutters very well. Having them on the perimeter pulls the other big/s out in a way that Timelord couldn't, which frees the paint up for drives and drive and kicks. I suspect that's the main reason he's starting them both. But if the other team only starts one big that's probably when you will see White and Holiday together starting.

And it's not just starting, it's when the other team has two bigs on the court is probably when we will see that two big lineup of our own, to take advantage of matchups.