Yesterday, 12:35 PM
(Yesterday, 03:56 AM)meistermatze Wrote: If we want to employ three great centers because we assume playing time will work itself out due to injuries, well, that’s an argument — but then your roster construction is questionable from the beginning (relying on injury-prone players, that is). But I cannot see why we would start two centers and bench a perfectly fitting piece (PJ) just to feed Lively’s ego — which, as far as I know, isn’t even a thing.
What am I missing here?
This is not my suggestion, fwiw.
If I were making this decision, I'd start (and close) with AD at the 5 and bring Lively off the bench, with a little bit of them playing together in situations wherein it's an obviously good move. So, I'd start PJW, but to be honest, I'd be looking for a 1, 2 or 3 to add to the mix through trade who could possibly slide Flagg to the 4 and PJW back to the bench.
In lieu of all of that, I'm fine with them starting AD and Lively together, so long as that's not the primary lineup in terms of minutes played, especially if it fails as spectacularly as I'm worried it will. If nothing else, it's something different that opposing teams have to think about/plan for. Not the end of the world.
The end of the world (and I admit, this is only a problem when all three are healthy) is forcing yourself to play AD at the 4 in situations you know you shouldn't as an effort to get some sort of consistent minutes for Gafford.