LIneup trends around the league
Re: LIneup trends around the league
23 lineups tonight. Starters with Edey were very great... in 7 minutes of use. Then next 6 most used lineups were terrible to super horrendous. 6 more brand new.
Re: LIneup trends around the league
How many different ways are there to try to "win" a lineup matchup?
At every position can consider size, speed, IQ as applied to offense / defense, on ball / off ball, shot distribution / efficiency, rebounding, passing & pass defense, foul drawing and giving. And all these things in context of how a particular lineup operates. Those are a lot of considerations to get right / weight the day before or in the moment over and over.
On average Coaches guess right and get positive results 35-45% of the time.
Do all that detail gymnastics in head from memory and opinion or rely on historical data? That's the choice.
Consider / use many hundreds of variations or a few dozen mainly?
The case for using 500-1000 is not strong imo. Often weak.
At every position can consider size, speed, IQ as applied to offense / defense, on ball / off ball, shot distribution / efficiency, rebounding, passing & pass defense, foul drawing and giving. And all these things in context of how a particular lineup operates. Those are a lot of considerations to get right / weight the day before or in the moment over and over.
On average Coaches guess right and get positive results 35-45% of the time.
Do all that detail gymnastics in head from memory and opinion or rely on historical data? That's the choice.
Consider / use many hundreds of variations or a few dozen mainly?
The case for using 500-1000 is not strong imo. Often weak.
Re: LIneup trends around the league
How many lineups "suggestions" or directives did Taylor Jenkins get? Ratio of accepted, really accepted on a sustained basis vs. half hearted or blew off?
How many lineups used in a season, in a game made sense to GM?
No notable change with new Coach. Is lineup management his to decide totally? Or is he just doing it that way, regardless of any instruction?
Do Coaches assume / demand total lineup managenent control? Only accept suggestions if they want to? Are they explicitly given total control or given it except for rare interventions as strong suggestions or demands?
With all the insiders and ex-insiders out there, is there even one willing to speak on the topic in general terms?
Knowing what "is" would help. And lead to discussion / decision on what "should be".
Imo a GM should make it clear that suggestions and demands on lineup management will come to some degree and they should be implemented and evaluated. Debate before and after but implemented. Failure to do would be considered unacceptable and possible grounds for dismissal. I'd probably do that with any Coach but certainly any under 5 years and under 2nd or 3rd round of playoffs achievement. Waive such rights to intervene effectively if you want to. I probably wouldn't.
How many lineups used in a season, in a game made sense to GM?
No notable change with new Coach. Is lineup management his to decide totally? Or is he just doing it that way, regardless of any instruction?
Do Coaches assume / demand total lineup managenent control? Only accept suggestions if they want to? Are they explicitly given total control or given it except for rare interventions as strong suggestions or demands?
With all the insiders and ex-insiders out there, is there even one willing to speak on the topic in general terms?
Knowing what "is" would help. And lead to discussion / decision on what "should be".
Imo a GM should make it clear that suggestions and demands on lineup management will come to some degree and they should be implemented and evaluated. Debate before and after but implemented. Failure to do would be considered unacceptable and possible grounds for dismissal. I'd probably do that with any Coach but certainly any under 5 years and under 2nd or 3rd round of playoffs achievement. Waive such rights to intervene effectively if you want to. I probably wouldn't.
Re: LIneup trends around the league
If a Coach has a good or brilliant analysis about the right lineup for a situation, have it in advance or well in advance of that specific usage. Lay it all out before season and before every month or week. Use it in similar situations if it works on average in a half decent sample. Use your ideas in half decent and decent samples. If you don't use an idea in 40+ or 100+ minutes, was the idea that worthwhile? Was the idea so specific that trivial use does not tell on degree of confidence in the idea?
Have talked a little in past about when to give up on an idea. It depends on situation in season and availability of other ideas that intrigue more. There are limits, tight limits of how many ideas can get more than trivial time. Pick and show confidence in that selection... and show results or reason for persistence or willingness to change intentionally when continuing is not particularly or remotely supported.
Have talked a little in past about when to give up on an idea. It depends on situation in season and availability of other ideas that intrigue more. There are limits, tight limits of how many ideas can get more than trivial time. Pick and show confidence in that selection... and show results or reason for persistence or willingness to change intentionally when continuing is not particularly or remotely supported.
Re: LIneup trends around the league
Under new leaders, Nuggets could alter minutes, lineups.
I'd give Nnaji more time. Largely by giving Strawther less and pushing other folks down the lineup. Probably continue to play Pickett after Murray's return by completely eliminating Strawther and reducing Westbrook's time, probably the non-Jokic part. Playing the starters a bit less could also be considered even if that goes against the normal grain of playoff thinking. Subject to closer study.
Starters and one change from it lineups should get as big a share of minutes as feasible. 2-3 change lineups need to be selected carefully. Maybe more carefully than this season or recently.
Jordan could perhaps play a bit more. With Jokic is something I would have wanted to check for the heck of it.
I'd give Nnaji more time. Largely by giving Strawther less and pushing other folks down the lineup. Probably continue to play Pickett after Murray's return by completely eliminating Strawther and reducing Westbrook's time, probably the non-Jokic part. Playing the starters a bit less could also be considered even if that goes against the normal grain of playoff thinking. Subject to closer study.
Starters and one change from it lineups should get as big a share of minutes as feasible. 2-3 change lineups need to be selected carefully. Maybe more carefully than this season or recently.
Jordan could perhaps play a bit more. With Jokic is something I would have wanted to check for the heck of it.
Re: LIneup trends around the league
Wizards starting lineup tonight had never played before.
565 others used before it.
565 others used before it.
Re: LIneup trends around the league
Suns:
549 lineups used.
None over 1.5 minutes per game.
6 of most used lineups negative.
8 of 9 most used pairs negative.
Beal with Booker and with Durant were the clear worst at the top. The trio together was more mildly negative.
Durant or Beal alone were the best combinations and should have been used hard as long as that continued. Booker - Durant was used hard but was only a mild positive. Might not have looked good or made "sense" to use just one a lot and it might have been small sample variance but I'd rather follow the numbers than overrule them. Make the samples bigger before dismissing them.
Booker alone was moderately bad.
Most combinations of the 3 were positive the previous season.
This is probably a case where roster, systems and effort go before lineups but lineups were still pretty poorly managed.
Coaching geniuses should know their best lineups and use them. If you don't and flail thru 549, that's on him and the front office for failures of insight and oversight and general chaos.
Dunn was used heavily, too heavily given the very mild defensive metric return and bad offense.
Gillespie and Bol probably should have been used more.
Other trades probably have been made after December. January saw bounce back but maybe not so real as 3pt fg% differential got pretty big and was perhaps at least somewhat random.
Gossip paints an unflattering image of Budenholzer. But so do the numbers without going there.
Easier to see what went wrong than to make it better. IF tasked with making it better, need to impact what gets tested and how much.
The 3 best big minute trios all had Jones. They ranked high in use but there was room to use more and perhaps with a different mix of finishing pieces.
I could look longer and probably find more, but not right now. What to do in 2025-26 depends on who is there.
549 lineups used.
None over 1.5 minutes per game.
6 of most used lineups negative.
8 of 9 most used pairs negative.
Beal with Booker and with Durant were the clear worst at the top. The trio together was more mildly negative.
Durant or Beal alone were the best combinations and should have been used hard as long as that continued. Booker - Durant was used hard but was only a mild positive. Might not have looked good or made "sense" to use just one a lot and it might have been small sample variance but I'd rather follow the numbers than overrule them. Make the samples bigger before dismissing them.
Booker alone was moderately bad.
Most combinations of the 3 were positive the previous season.
This is probably a case where roster, systems and effort go before lineups but lineups were still pretty poorly managed.
Coaching geniuses should know their best lineups and use them. If you don't and flail thru 549, that's on him and the front office for failures of insight and oversight and general chaos.
Dunn was used heavily, too heavily given the very mild defensive metric return and bad offense.
Gillespie and Bol probably should have been used more.
Other trades probably have been made after December. January saw bounce back but maybe not so real as 3pt fg% differential got pretty big and was perhaps at least somewhat random.
Gossip paints an unflattering image of Budenholzer. But so do the numbers without going there.
Easier to see what went wrong than to make it better. IF tasked with making it better, need to impact what gets tested and how much.
The 3 best big minute trios all had Jones. They ranked high in use but there was room to use more and perhaps with a different mix of finishing pieces.
I could look longer and probably find more, but not right now. What to do in 2025-26 depends on who is there.
Re: LIneup trends around the league
LaVine - DeRozan, -4.2pts / 100p, worst among 20 most used lineups. Worse, LaVine - Sabonis at 20th most used. Next 3 worst all had LaVine or DeRozan.
Scorer names are not necessarily helpful.
DeRozan 12th on team +/- on court, LaVine 19th. Nearly the same on / off. Both mid to low on Bulls. Modestly better but far far from elite leaders.
LaVine - DeRozan, -11.1pts / 100p in 2023-24. GM and Coach then and now either didn't care, know or feel they had option to not go that way.
Push for these vets came from Owner, GM and original Coach or some combination. If it was Coach and / or GM it didn't save jobs. They wee all culpable.
This pairing was not a close call to being a good or acceptable idea. It was neutral 2-3 years ago in regular season but very awful in 2 playoffs. This is a failure to use data responsibly and / or failure to come up with & execute better ideas.
Scorer names are not necessarily helpful.
DeRozan 12th on team +/- on court, LaVine 19th. Nearly the same on / off. Both mid to low on Bulls. Modestly better but far far from elite leaders.
LaVine - DeRozan, -11.1pts / 100p in 2023-24. GM and Coach then and now either didn't care, know or feel they had option to not go that way.
Push for these vets came from Owner, GM and original Coach or some combination. If it was Coach and / or GM it didn't save jobs. They wee all culpable.
This pairing was not a close call to being a good or acceptable idea. It was neutral 2-3 years ago in regular season but very awful in 2 playoffs. This is a failure to use data responsibly and / or failure to come up with & execute better ideas.
Re: LIneup trends around the league
https://www.pbpstats.com/wowy-combos/nb ... 81,1629632
Bulls sub-lineup management
3 combinations given most time, all bad.
4 bigger minute successes got 1/3rd as much time.
How do you walk into and stay in this track?
Appears you can run a good perimeter rotation with Huerter, Ball, Giddey, White but not the way they did.
Giddey - Collins is the only Giddey big man pair that was a success. Same for Coby White. Ball is positive with Vucevic and even J Smith but by far best with Collins.
If Vucevic is retained he should play with Ball and Huerter off the bench. But I'd try to find a useful trade. Buzelis should play with this group as well. And perhaps Horton-Tucker if retained.
I have a first cut 9 man, 4 lineup rotation as a base, built off sub-lineup data. It might need a bit of tweaking, depending on Ball availability and ability to take minutes, whether Vucevic is traded and whether to use Julian Phillips or somebody else, current or new.
Whatever base, probably have to tweak to system and opponent to some degree and for absences. Review and revise after 3-6 weeks and periodically.
Bulls sub-lineup management
3 combinations given most time, all bad.
4 bigger minute successes got 1/3rd as much time.
How do you walk into and stay in this track?
Appears you can run a good perimeter rotation with Huerter, Ball, Giddey, White but not the way they did.
Giddey - Collins is the only Giddey big man pair that was a success. Same for Coby White. Ball is positive with Vucevic and even J Smith but by far best with Collins.
If Vucevic is retained he should play with Ball and Huerter off the bench. But I'd try to find a useful trade. Buzelis should play with this group as well. And perhaps Horton-Tucker if retained.
I have a first cut 9 man, 4 lineup rotation as a base, built off sub-lineup data. It might need a bit of tweaking, depending on Ball availability and ability to take minutes, whether Vucevic is traded and whether to use Julian Phillips or somebody else, current or new.
Whatever base, probably have to tweak to system and opponent to some degree and for absences. Review and revise after 3-6 weeks and periodically.
Re: LIneup trends around the league
Less than 4 games into playoffs, teams are averaging 10.5 brand new playoffs lineups every game. Slightly less than 1/3rd of total are positive.
A bunch of teams only used 30 lineups. Griz went for 60.
A bunch of teams only used 30 lineups. Griz went for 60.
Re: LIneup trends around the league
A lot could be learned about key lineups from big data analysis of play by minute of stint and against opponent lineup types and degree of "leverage" and perhaps other criteria.
Re: LIneup trends around the league
The 2 by far worst performing big minute lineups in 1st round were both for Bucks.
Re: LIneup trends around the league
Chicago Bulls lineup management notes:
Principle starting lineup was 20th most used on league and 2nd most negative in that group.
LaVine was in 4 of 7 best bigger minute lineups and pairs.
685 lineups used. 4 over 100 minutes, 614 for 10 minutes or less for season.
Best concentrated rotation based on lineup and sub-lineup data? I can do a first draft on that and as many refinements as time allows / motivation prompts.
First draft involves 7 lineups and 9 players. Plenty of room for refinements but a starting point. If say a team official was interested.
Principle starting lineup was 20th most used on league and 2nd most negative in that group.
LaVine was in 4 of 7 best bigger minute lineups and pairs.
685 lineups used. 4 over 100 minutes, 614 for 10 minutes or less for season.
Best concentrated rotation based on lineup and sub-lineup data? I can do a first draft on that and as many refinements as time allows / motivation prompts.
First draft involves 7 lineups and 9 players. Plenty of room for refinements but a starting point. If say a team official was interested.
Re: LIneup trends around the league
Jerome - Allen on court together had best team +/- of any pair with 100+ minutes in playoffs at +36pts / 100p. Jerome in pair tied for 2nd, Holmgren is other pair tied for 2nd and 3rd. Thunder with 4 of top 6.
Allen in some trade gossip, Jerome not wanted by some, may not stay even if wanted.
Knicks' top pair takes 8th with the improbable Brunson - McBride. Wolves take 17th, Pacers 20th.
Nuggets take 4 of bottom 10 involving each of the starters except Gordon. Watson in 3, Westbrook 2.
Andrew Wiggins in 2 of 4 worst. Herro in 3 of 9 worst, Adebayo in 2.
Lakers with 5 on bottom 30, all but one involving Hachimura. Doncic - James 42nd worst of 239 qualifiers.
Wagner - Banchero 43rd worst.
Top 10 pairs involve 12 guards, 4 forwards, 4 centers.
Who knew / knows? Who "cares"?
Allen in some trade gossip, Jerome not wanted by some, may not stay even if wanted.
Knicks' top pair takes 8th with the improbable Brunson - McBride. Wolves take 17th, Pacers 20th.
Nuggets take 4 of bottom 10 involving each of the starters except Gordon. Watson in 3, Westbrook 2.
Andrew Wiggins in 2 of 4 worst. Herro in 3 of 9 worst, Adebayo in 2.
Lakers with 5 on bottom 30, all but one involving Hachimura. Doncic - James 42nd worst of 239 qualifiers.
Wagner - Banchero 43rd worst.
Top 10 pairs involve 12 guards, 4 forwards, 4 centers.
Who knew / knows? Who "cares"?