concept of a starting five should be dumped

[Ogaju]

If any NBA coach is really doing his job with a loaded roster like the Celtics have this year the concept of A starting five is not thinking out of the box.

It is said ad nauseum that basketball is a game of matchups. If this is true then why stick to a fixed starting five rotation when it does not always give you favorable matchups night in night out. If a coach is really doing his job he should be able to mix up his starting five to get the best matchups each night. It is probably true that for some teams that may mean the same starting five for all 82 games (highly doubtful) but it definitely cannot mean the same rotation.

Finally, starting is just an ego thing because it is who plays more minutes that really matters not who starts.

The first minutes of a basketball game in the regular season feature the teams trading baskets and feeling out each other - why is it necessary to have your best players on the floor for the opening minutes?

Think out of the box coaches, revolutionallize the game.

EDIT: Analogy deleted R H is right.

[lightspeed5]

we basically have a starting like 8 or 9 anyways.

[Roy H.]

The Constitution is just fine.  Let's stick to basketball, please.

I think some teams would benefit from approaching lineups like you suggest.  For other teams, though, I think there's a benefit to players knowing their role and settling into it.

[the_Bird]

I think some teams would benefit from approaching lineups like you suggest.  For other teams, though, I think there's a benefit to players knowing their role and settling into it.

It's kind of like "closer by committee" in baseball.  Makes sense in theory - but players are human, they perform better when they have a clearly defined role. 

[indeedproceed]

Anyone who has ever played a competitive varsity sport knows that a starting spot, 'ego thing' as it may be is a pretty powerful thing.

Even if they don't play the majority of the minutes, it sets a strong tone. Tells you who the leaders are, how the pecking order sorts out, tells you how the coach expects you to play.

And after saying that, I'm thinking that starting Avery Bradley over Ray Allen might have played a way bigger role than I thought it did.

[Finkelskyhook]

NBA players have way too much control over their franchises for this concept to have legs.  We see solid NBA coaches run out because a "superstar" doesn't like his role.  We got an example of how fickle players can be this offseason...When, at best....The 4th best player on our team showed us.  Starting role is too big an ego thing.

Coaches can tinker some with playing time based on matchups...But alternating starting lineups will never happen in a league where superstars....Or even perceived superstars control the brand....If the coach wants to remain coach

 

[Celtics4ever]

I just don't see egos being set aside for the good of the team.   I present Ray as a case study, he spoke the right words but it was obvious that he resented what he perceived as a demotion.   For that  reason I don't think it would ever work.   Coming off the bench takes a special mindset and not all player can do it.

[masteremile123]

It is not about superstars or ego , basically a team has 82 games in a season so they can get the chemistry going and so that each player will know his role and what he has to do in his team . Having the same starting five and the same substitution pattern will get players to get used to playing together , not knowing who you consistently have to start with and being part of different units each game really hurts the chemistry and the schemes you try to do !

[fitzhickey]

We have, like eighth people who could start....