I used to hate small ball like you. Then we took 4 free agents...to the roster

[bfrombleacher]

We acquired the Jet and Lee...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6eaHCEjF7o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sp_4bTds8wY

We re-acquired Wilcox and JG...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1lmHvntXN8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmqFcTBJ9Fo

Now, take a combination of:

Rondo/AB/Jet/Jeff Green/Brandon Bass/Chris Wilcox (maybe even Chris Joseph and Fab Melo¹)

And imagine them on the fast break...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYoQnFFnr-0

Suddenly, I don't hate small ball so much anymore. Instead of Glen Davis trying to defend a huge player, instead of small ball being a need, we also have it as an advantage.

[bfrombleacher]

¹Fab Melo can really run too by the way:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgOj-PV1LBc&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PL5B9170E2ED3C7D0E

[nickagneta]

I don't hate small ball. It has its time and place in the arsenal of every coach. And there are certain teams you have to play small ball against or risk getting your big men run off the court. Lots of times this year Doc went to small ball with people screaming in the game threads that small ball sucks and blah blah blah. But it worked a ton.

Small ball was responsible for the greatest 4th quarter comeback in NBA Finals history when the C's came back on the Lakers in 2008. Small ball is a necessary weapon to have in today's NBA where you have guys like KD, LeBron, Pierce and a host of other large guys with the ball handling skills of PGs and the strength and size of PFs. The Heat just won a championship based on small ball.

[bfrombleacher]

I don't hate small ball.

Well, when I think small ball, I keep having flashbacks of BBD trying to defend bigger bigs and struggling on the offensive end. I pull my hair out just thinking about it.

And I was trying to reference the Skyrim meme (I hate what I've become haha).

[Jon]

I've posted about this a lot over the past few days.  It's a reality of today's game and will be a reality of this year's Celtics.  Unless the Celtics want to play their 6-9th best players a lot less in favor of playing their 10-12th best players more, they're going to have to go small, and go small quite a bit.  

Without going into an extensive minutes breakdown, unless they want to grossly underplay Lee, Bradley, and or Green in favor of playing the likes of Jason Collins, they're going to have to play Lee at the 3 and Green at the 4 for more than just a little while each game.  

I think it's fine.  Do we give up rebounding and size?  Yes.  However, we also get to play our most talented players more and create or own mismatches.  Will Jeff Green get knocked over by Carlos Boozer down low?  Yes.  But will Green run Boozer into the ground on the other end?  Yes.  There's a give and take both ways.  And it's not like putting Collins (who I like) on Boozer is some sort of great move.  He might prevent a Boozer basket or two more than Green, but will be such a deficit on offense that he'll negate that contribution.  

Small ball will be the name of the game whether people like it or not this year.  

[GreenEnvy]

Not a big fan of the "fast break" team. Sure its fun to watch and can beat some teams on any given night, but they routinely get broken down in the playoffs. Give me a C who can set picks and finish down low, another big who can play inside and out, a wing who can drive and shoot, another wing shooter to stretch the floor, and a PG who can set everything up.

You can have the track team, I'll take the half court offense and bigs who can rebound.

[Jon]

Not a big fan of the "fast break" team. Sure its fun to watch and can beat some teams on any given night, but they routinely get broken down in the playoffs. Give me a C who can set picks and finish down low, another big who can play inside and out, a wing who can drive and shoot, another wing shooter to stretch the floor, and a PG who can set everything up.

You can have the track team, I'll take the half court offense and bigs who can rebound.

Well, sure, anyone would take that team.  But that's not the team that we have.  There's no sense in playing inferior players just because they have size.  It was this philosophy that destroyed teams' drafts in the late '90s, early 2000s as they attempted to draft "Shaq stoppers."  They would have been far better playing an offensively capable 6-10 230 guy who could have made Shaq work on offense than a 7-0 300 monster who gave Shaq a break on defense and couldn't stop him anyway.  

Furthermore, let's remember that Doc was able to win a title  with James Posey playing the 4 at the end of games.  I see no reason why they can't with Jeff Green, who is more of a power forward and a much better player.  

I'd love to have Gasol and Bynum, but when you have KG and a bunch of talented wings, you might as well maximize talent.  

[Who]

I like small-ball lineups and having lineup versatility so long as you have the players to make it work.

I generally dislike being small in multiple areas at the same time though. For example, if you go small with a combo forward at PF, I like to have big wings alongside him rather than an undersized backcourt. I don't like to go small at PF with a combo forward there without a legitimate center alongside him. Stuff like that.

So I am not wild about the prospect of undersized backcourts (Terry, Bradley, Rondo) + an undersized forward combo with Lee at SF alongside Jeff Green at PF + non-centers like Wilcox or Sullinger manning the five in a small-ball lineup while Garnett rests.

I believe lineups like that create multiple (too many) vulnerabilities in terms of defense and rebounding ... and unless they offer a huge improvement offensively to out-weigh those losses, they'll end up causing more problems than solutions if used as part of an everyday rotation.

So ... we'll see what Doc does. How he chooses to use this depth and lineup flexibility. It's a great asset for the team if used appropriately but could end up causing some problems if not. All eyes on Doc (who has done a great job in recent years and gives me confidence heading into next season). 

[GreenEnvy]

Not a big fan of the "fast break" team. Sure its fun to watch and can beat some teams on any given night, but they routinely get broken down in the playoffs. Give me a C who can set picks and finish down low, another big who can play inside and out, a wing who can drive and shoot, another wing shooter to stretch the floor, and a PG who can set everything up.

You can have the track team, I'll take the half court offense and bigs who can rebound.

Well, sure, anyone would take that team.  But that's not the team that we have.  There's no sense in playing inferior players just because they have size.  It was this philosophy that destroyed teams' drafts in the late '90s, early 2000s as they attempted to draft "Shaq stoppers."  They would have been far better playing an offensively capable 6-10 230 guy who could have made Shaq work on offense than a 7-0 300 monster who gave Shaq a break on defense and couldn't stop him anyway.  

Furthermore, let's remember that Doc was able to win a title  with James Posey playing the 4 at the end of games.  I see no reason why they can't with Jeff Green, who is more of a power forward and a much better player.  

I'd love to have Gasol and Bynum, but when you have KG and a bunch of talented wings, you might as well maximize talent.  

I believe we have the personnel to play traditional. I think Doc has a lot of options with many of our top 10 able to play multiple positions.

Shaq was arguably the most dominant player since Wilt. I don't blame teams for going for broke looking for an answer for him.

How well did Posey really do at the 4? He was good at the 3 and defended 2's well. Terrible rebounder at PF and significantly weaker defender.

Throughout the regular season I'm sure we are gonna see small ball. But come playoff time, I think we see less and less, and even going big at times to address rebounding (RR/PP/JG/BB/KG).

[snively]

I like small-ball lineups and having lineup versatility so long as you have the players to make it work.

I generally dislike being small in multiple areas at the same time though. For example, if you go small with a combo forward at PF, I like to have big wings alongside him rather than an undersized backcourt. I don't like to go small at PF with a combo forward there without a legitimate center alongside him. Stuff like that.

So I am not wild about the prospect of undersized backcourts (Terry, Bradley, Rondo) + an undersized forward combo with Lee at SF alongside Jeff Green at PF + non-centers like Wilcox or Sullinger manning the five in a small-ball lineup while Garnett rests.

I believe lineups like that create multiple (too many) vulnerabilities in terms of defense and rebounding ... and unless they offer a huge improvement offensively to out-weigh those losses, they'll end up causing more problems than solutions if used as part of an everyday rotation.

So ... we'll see what Doc does. How he chooses to use this depth and lineup flexibility. It's a great asset for the team if used appropriately but could end up causing some problems if not. All eyes on Doc (who has done a great job in recent years and gives me confidence heading into next season). 

That 05/06 Phoenix team might give a little room for optimism if we do go the route of all-small.  Those Nash/Barbosa/Bell/Marion/Diaw (or Thomas) line-ups were tiny all-around but still pretty potent.

[KGs Knee]

Kobe will be sharting himself with having to face a Pierce/Green wing combo.

Wade wants no part of Bradley.

Nash couldn't cover Rondo in his dreams.

LeBron is my only worry.  Hopefully Jason Collins busts his a**, and that's that.

[mctyson]

I don't consider it small ball at all.

KG is 7-feet tall, with a ridiculous wingspan.  He is not small.  Maybe he is thin, but he is not small.

Anytime he is in our lineup we matchup with nearly any other lineup in the league in terms of length, height.

Bass, while maybe a bit shorter than some PFs in the league, is also not small, since he is built like a truck.

Pierce is not small.

Lee, for a SG, is not small.

Rondo has the wingspan of someone 8 inches taller than him.  He is the best rebounding PG since Kidd in his prime, then Magic.  He is not small.

Terry you could argue is the first person in our rotation who is small for his spot (SG), but he will also play some PG, where he is a perfect size.

Jeff Green is a big SF, and a thin PF.  But even at PF he has the length/height to compete.  He is definitely not small.

Wilcox is a big PF, just a tad short for a Center but has plenty of height/length for the 5.  He is not small.

Sullinger is perfect for the PF.  He obviously has the size, weight, and wingspan.  For a Center, he is short, no doubt.  I will give you the "small ball" definition when he is defending Centers and is posting them up.

That is basically our rotation for the season/playoffs right there.  The "smallest" lineup we could throw out there would be Rondo-Terry-Pierce-Green-Sullinger.  I don't think we will see that more than a handful of times this season.

No small ball.

[boscel33]

i don't see small ball in the future.  we have more size than small and definitely drafted for size.

[xmuscularghandix]

I don't consider it small ball at all.

KG is 7-feet tall, with a ridiculous wingspan.  He is not small.  Maybe he is thin, but he is not small.

Anytime he is in our lineup we matchup with nearly any other lineup in the league in terms of length, height.

Bass, while maybe a bit shorter than some PFs in the league, is also not small, since he is built like a truck.

Pierce is not small.

Lee, for a SG, is not small.

Rondo has the wingspan of someone 8 inches taller than him.  He is the best rebounding PG since Kidd in his prime, then Magic.  He is not small.

Terry you could argue is the first person in our rotation who is small for his spot (SG), but he will also play some PG, where he is a perfect size.

Jeff Green is a big SF, and a thin PF.  But even at PF he has the length/height to compete.  He is definitely not small.

Wilcox is a big PF, just a tad short for a Center but has plenty of height/length for the 5.  He is not small.

Sullinger is perfect for the PF.  He obviously has the size, weight, and wingspan.  For a Center, he is short, no doubt.  I will give you the "small ball" definition when he is defending Centers and is posting them up.

That is basically our rotation for the season/playoffs right there.  The "smallest" lineup we could throw out there would be Rondo-Terry-Pierce-Green-Sullinger.  I don't think we will see that more than a handful of times this season.

No small ball.

I'm pretty sure he was talking about going three guards with Rondo/Jet/Lee with Lee at SF, a SF/PF at the 4 and a natural center. That's pretty small.

[Chief]

I hate small ball. It rarely works. Especially with the wrong personnel. When Pierce is playing the 4 and Bass is playing the 5, you might score but are going to give up just as much or more.