Source
r/nba•
Chimerical_Entity

Question on Substitution Methods

It seems almost every NBA team follows what I call a "drip" method when it comes to subbing in players. They start with a starting 5 and then remove 1 or 2 players at a time.

Why is this so? Players never fully form any chemistry as a 5 man unit because it's constantly being changed little by little. Instead, why not start with your usual 5 and then sub out the whole starting 5 at once with a new unit. That way an entirely fresh starting 5 comes in ready to go. And they have more time as a unit to form chemistry.

Is there a downside to this? Why don't more teams consider doing this, insteading of subbing out individual players one by one?

Posted Oct 9, 2019, 3:24 AM UTC

49
JBEastmanTrail Blazers•

The downside is that players get on rolls, get into the flow of the game. If you sub out your entire team then the new guys are all coming in completely cold

13
Chimerical_EntityOP•

That's a good point. That is one downside to this method.

3
Statshelp_TA•

Because it would require having 10 really talented players which isn’t common. Further, those 10 players would need to be equally talented or else the 5 man sub strategy would lead to your best players playing less than they should.

7
[deleted]•

[deleted]

2
Chimerical_EntityOP•

but their starting 5 would be fatigued, after going to battle with your starting 5 and then you would sub in a fresh 5 who have more experience playing as a unit together.

3
[deleted]•

[deleted]

1
Chimerical_EntityOP•

You're partly right.

But this method would only work with teams that have a lot of depth. I feel like there are some teams that could pull this off and take advantage. Especially in the regular season.

3
[deleted]•

[deleted]

1
[deleted]•

[deleted]

1
[deleted]•

[deleted]

1
vetminWarriors•

People have already mentioned the logistical issues, but I’ll add that strategically — if your team is well rehearsed and everyone knows what everyone else’s role is — having 20 different lineups is a lot more of a headache for the other team than just 2 (starters + bench platoon). You’re more kind of looking at it from the flipside of it being difficult to execute, but if you can execute, it’s actually an advantage, and one that most elite teams would try to use.

2
shayaniscool[TOR] Kris Humphries•

a lot of times the 7-10 spots on the bench aren't really that good and play the 5-10 bench players all at once it wouldn't hold up well against the opposing team

1
samueladams6Celtics•

Good teams have talented players who need to sacrifice aspects of what they are individually capable of doing in order to fit together.

There isn’t a realistic way to build a good team with like 8-10 equally talented players.

You are either overrating how important chemistry is or overstating the amount of game time needed to form it.

There is just no way where the benefits of playing one 5 man line up 30ish MPG would outweigh having one bad lineup on the court for 18ish MPG, when you can have multiple lineups with good chemistry and stager the minutes of good players to more fully use their talents.

1
fuckbrocolli•

If you sub out your entire starting lineup then you're going to get cooked by the starters that the other team left in

1