What's new
By:

what would you run for a small ball line up?

Chargers Jazz Angels

Chargers Jazz Angels

Well-Known Member
it seems the trend to run some small ball line ups. I know with the heat and having a player like lebron makes it easier but new York has with carmello and Denver. I bet golden st will some this year.

the idea is to space the floor make the other team work harder so the tire more and sooner.

just as a quick thought I was thinking

Burke
burks
rush
Hayward
favors
 
Jako said:
it seems the trend to run some small ball line ups. I know with the heat and having a player like lebron makes it easier but new York has with carmello and Denver. I bet golden st will some this year.

the idea is to space the floor make the other team work harder so the tire more and sooner.

just as a quick thought I was thinking

Burke
burks
rush
Hayward
favors
Click to expand...

Too small I think.

I go burke, burks, god, marvin, favors.

But really the lineup I like is burke and the core 4..... with hayward at the 3 its kinda small, but not really.


Or go with the big lineup and have burks, hayward, rush/marvin, fav, enes.
 
It's not about being 'small' regardless what they call it. It's about being fast and athletic.

Basically, you want to be as big and strong as possible without losing speed and athleticism.
 
I'd prolly take

JLIII (38% 3s on 6.6 attempts/36 last year)
Ian Clark/Brandon Rush (A promising and a proven shooter, select one)
Gordon Hayward (Good alternate playmaker/shooter)
Jeremy Evans (Transition anyone?)
Kanter (Deceptively mobile for his size/weight, good midrange stroke when open)

The sense of small ball lineups is usually to cover up for weaknesses by exploiting a mismatch. eg if you think your current rotation can't beat the opponents lineup playing conservative you go small and try to outrun/shoot them.
That's why I chose these guys. They have excellent spacing and shooting and a guy who can catch lobs no matter how bad the pass was.
Plus you still have a legit Iso choice in case your first play in the halfcourt doesn't work.
 
BTP said:
I'd prolly take

JLIII (38% 3s on 6.6 attempts/36 last year)
Ian Clark/Brandon Rush (A promising and a proven shooter, select one)
Gordon Hayward (Good alternate playmaker/shooter)
Jeremy Evans (Transition anyone?)
Kanter (Deceptively mobile for his size/weight, good midrange stroke when open)

The sense of small ball lineups is usually to cover up for weaknesses by exploiting a mismatch. eg if you think your current rotation can't beat the opponents lineup playing conservative you go small and try to outrun/shoot them.
That's why I chose these guys. They have excellent spacing and shooting and a guy who can catch lobs no matter how bad the pass was.
Plus you still have a legit Iso choice in case your first play in the halfcourt doesn't work.
Click to expand...

Not bad, and good explanation.

**** JL111 doe
 
PKM said:
It's not about being 'small' regardless what they call it. It's about being fast and athletic.

Basically, you want to be as big and strong as possible without losing speed and athleticism.
Click to expand...

I should have explained better but yea the idea is to run them out of the building. get quick transition points and force their guys to run. small is a figurative term.
 
I see no reason why a team like ours should go small ball. The other teams just go small ball to get their best players on the floor, but when our best players are our big men (hopefully) I see no reason to really run a small lineup. Make teams play to our strength. If teams go small on us don't adjust by playing small, I say stay big and punish them inside.
 
dipship31 said:
I see no reason why a team like ours should go small ball. The other teams just go small ball to get their best players on the floor, but when our best players are our big men (hopefully) I see no reason to really run a small lineup. Make teams play to our strength. If teams go small on us don't adjust by playing small, I say stay big and punish them inside.
Click to expand...

That's a good suggestion as long as we can isolate with Kanter down low.
Problem with small ball lineups often is they can switch every screen and I'm not comfortable with that happening as long as 3B can't finish near the basket or hasn't shown he can run the PnR in elite fashion.
 
dipship31 said:
I see no reason why a team like ours should go small ball. The other teams just go small ball to get their best players on the floor, but when our best players are our big men (hopefully) I see no reason to really run a small lineup. Make teams play to our strength. If teams go small on us don't adjust by playing small, I say stay big and punish them inside.
Click to expand...

Only reason would be foul trouble combined with the right matchups, otherwise, I agree completely.
 
PKM said:
Only reason would be foul trouble combined with the right matchups, otherwise, I agree completely.
Click to expand...

Yep, I think it would be very rare, but there would be certain match ups like if the heat go small that we would have to adjust to
 
Favors and Kanter mover really well (Rudy, too). If Kanter stretches his range out to near the three-point line, then we have all the advantages of "small ball" while also being big.*


*i agree completely with PKM's definition of small ball (above)
 
Not sure about other teams but against Miami, going small ball exactly what they want imo. It's nothing but suicide.

But if it's really necessary on some occasions, I'd go with,

Burke
Burks
Hayward
Evans
Favors

A fast and athletic team with good blocking presence.
 
I like

Burke
Hayward
Rush
Marv
Favors

Got some shooters, to create space for Favors. Got some D with Hayward at the 2, Rush at the 3, & Favors at the 5.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top