View Full Version : Crunchtime lineup

Jon Theodore
10-21-2005, 05:04 PM
What do you all think will be the lineup in the 4th quarter of close games.

This is all just speculation, but I think this lineup could do some good things.


Ok, so you can sub someone else for Bender if you think he sucks. But, if he's producing like we know he can, I think he's got to be in here.

Another major question is can Sjack guard point guards or can he run a team. If not Artest could possibly do it. I don't think this team really needs a point guard who can dribble circles around people. As long as Sjack/Ron could bring the ball up that's all we need.

Now the major benefit of this lineup, is defense. That might be the best defensive lineup in the history of the game. (of course, assuming Bender is playing real Bender basketball) And in the 4th quarter you NEED stops.

I don't pretend to be a basketball guru, so if you totally disagree you can save the hostility and simply state what you believe to be wrong with this.

10-21-2005, 05:11 PM
I'd have Sarunas, Jackson, Artest, Granger, O'Neal

10-21-2005, 05:12 PM
I'd have Sarunas, Jackson, Artest, Granger, O'NealI don't think you could get much better than that.

Roy Munson
10-21-2005, 05:13 PM
I think that lineup would struggle bringing the ball up the floor against pressure, and getting into an offense quick enough. IMO, they would need one good ball handler in that lineup.

10-21-2005, 05:26 PM
I'd have Sarunas, Jackson, Artest, Granger, O'Neal

I would have that same one too. I think we could definitely rely on that lineup.

10-21-2005, 05:34 PM
I'd have Sarunas, Jackson, Artest, Granger, O'NealI'd go for that lineup, tempered not by the defensive liability of Saras against the elite PGs.

I wouldn't worry about us being able to get the ball up the floor. We could always have Jackson or Artest bring it across the line if Saras has problems.

But if some combination of JO, Granger or Artest is experiencing foul trouble, then I worry about Saras or Tinsley either one playing the PG position. I think either one of these guys, because of their defensive liabilities, opens up the risk of our interior players fouling out of close games. And this is particularly true against the elite PGs, the ones who will definitely recognize the weakness (defensively at PG) and exploit it.

10-21-2005, 06:25 PM
IMHO, I would have Tins, Jack, Artest, O'Neal and Foster.
**(before you boo, tel me explain.)

Foster has an uncanny ability to come down with every big rebound. In a close 4th Q, I want a defensive lockdown. Cabbage has to prove his ball handling abilities before I put him in. I know Tins can beat pressure and as others have stated, Jack and Artest could help here.

Granger... well, I need to see more. I would rather err in experience late in the game rather than pin my hopes on a rookie with limited PT.

Given his history, I'd also believe anything Rick says at this point. If Rick puts Pollard, Bender Gill Johnson and Harrison on the floor, I would leer at him skeptically, but accept his judgement. :>

10-21-2005, 07:05 PM
I think this is a pretty good question myself. One additional question I always ask though is, WHO IS GOING TO SHOOT YOUR FREE THROWS???? Think about it. When we are up by two and trying to nurse a lead, and Gary Payton goes looking for the ball to foul the handler, who's hand do we have the ball in?

10-21-2005, 07:49 PM
Once Foster is healthy, I definitely believe he should be in.

10-21-2005, 08:03 PM
Right now, I'd take Tinsley over Sarunas, but I haven't seen Runi yet. Tinsley's plenty clutch, though.

It's really coming down to Granger vs. Foster. That's hard.

10-21-2005, 08:39 PM
Bender or Granger

If we are ahead, I would say Granger. You know, Crunchtime can be both ways. If we are behind. Bender is automatic offense.

10-21-2005, 09:27 PM
JO Foster

I love both what I've seen from Saras and Danny, but I don't think that we should put our completley capable center on hold for a guy that we aren't sure can react accordingly to clutch situations.

10-21-2005, 11:33 PM
Jackson (Maaaaaybe Granger, although Jax has proven to be clutch, so I'd choose him for now)

However if Harrison's rebounding is still lacking...


Also, Saras could sometimes be put in for Jax, if he has had one of his ugly nights.

10-22-2005, 06:02 AM
as everyone knows by now, saras had a reputation in europe for taking over the game (offensively) in the fourth quarter (because he, well, actually did take over games in the fourth quarter)

question of course remains whether he can do that in an nba game (there were already some good signs in a couple of preseason games); regarding the pressure i think he will do fine but defensively he can be a liability. tinsley would probably be a better choice if you look at ball handling and defensive ability; but saras' passing (his 3 point shooting too of course, but his passing even more i think) can be an enormous weapon in the crunch : easy baskets are still the ones that can make you win basketball games

for now i d go with


when everything goes well with our rookies, in the playoffs id go with


10-22-2005, 06:58 AM
and the one everyone is overlooking:

Tins; Saras; Jax; Ron; JO

where Jax is interchangable and Hulk, Foster or Granger (or even Fred) can move in

But the last thing that would surprise me is Tins and Saras on the floor together.

Tins has proven last year beyond a shadow of a doubt that he is clutch, not only with a 3, drive, floater but also in taking FT's (sinking 3 in the fan-jam)

If I would look at players in and out of the "clutch time" rotation I would say that Jax is the first to rotate, Saras second, but that the chances that Tins, Ron or JO are not in are extremely slim.

10-22-2005, 09:32 AM
It's all about chemistry, and that will only work out over the course of the season and a whole bunch of minutes. Doesn't matter what mix of talents it looks like.

10-22-2005, 01:23 PM
I like this line-up against small teams:
Tinsley, Jax, Artest, Granger, O'Neal
...and this against large teams:
Tinsley, Granger, Artest, O'Neal, Harrison