Rob Carr - Getty Images
Doug coaches with Stick 'Em on his hands.
When Jodie Meeks took over the starting role from Jason Kapono/Andres Nocioni/Evan Turner last December, it was a temporary move to shore up the team's abysmal outside shooting, which allowed defenses to clog the lane and force jump shots. When Jodie continued to hit shots and the team won games, his position in the starting lineup was solidified. Doug Collins is nothing if not loyal and the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" proverb probably hangs in his kitchen somwhere.
It's clear that Doug appreciates Jodie for coming out of nowhere and contributing nicely to the team last season. He wants to reward him for that, not bench him after five games of terrible shooting and defensive liabilities. Evan Turner is a better player NOW, and his upward trajectory is infinitely more important than making sure Jodie Meeks, a 8th or 9th guy on a good team, gets to see the tip-off up close. Turner has been playing better basketball thus far and he should be getting 30 minutes a night. Whether those minutes are in the starting lineup or from the bench really doesn't matter much.
I go back and forth between the idea that starting influences a player's psyche. I agree that it changes the role of the player on the team, but once they're on the court, it doesn't matter who started and who didn't. Doug likes bringing a second unit in that features Turner, Louis Williams, and Thaddeus Young and the argument has been made that Meeks wouldn't fit in as well with that second unit. This isn't hockey. It's not like Collins ever switches out the entire starting lineup for the bench, so I don't see a huge difference in why Turner and Meeks switching roles would have much difference chemistry wise.
What has been noticeable is how slow the first unit has been to start the games so far this year. They've been outscored by 14 points through five games this season, including two games where they were down double digits going into the second. Last night against the Hornets is a prime example of why that is. According to Depressed Fan, Eric Gordon shot 6-8 for 17 points while Jodie was covering him, primarily in the first and third quarters. When Turner, Holiday, or Andre Iguodala matched up with him, The Commissioner went 2-14 for a meager 5 points. Defensively, there's no argument. Getting into holes and having the bench bail you out is not a strategy and it'll fail more often than not.
If Jodie isn't hitting shots (thus far he's got a .389 eFG and a .411 TS%), he is the worst starter in the league. He does not do anything else that can be called average. The only thing (save shooting) that makes him better than Willie Green is that Willie Green doesn't realize he's Willie Green. He needs to make shots not only to save his spot in the starting lineup, but also his spot on the team.
Turner should start over Meeks. Does it matter much? Not really. As long as ET is getting more minutes and being allowed to create, it doesn't really matter who plays first. It says something to me about how the Sixers feel about Turner when he's not starting, but that's a whole other bag of hair.
0 recs | 61 comments
AGREE
i agree with you
Amaru Raisho - January 5, 2012
This basically sums up how I feel about the situation. Could Turner being named a starter increase his confidence? Maybe, but he seems to be doing fine off the bench. I’d like to see him be a starter just because it sounds nicer lol. However, in the end as long as he’s getting more minutes than Jodie I’m fine with it.
James_C - January 5, 2012
Agreed, minutes more important than starting
The way I see it, there are 144 minutes to go around at the 1, 2, and 3 split between 5 players. Right now, the minutes breakdown for the first 5 games has been as follows:
Jrue – 36
AI9 – 33
M33ks – 21
ET – 26
Sweet Lou – 26
The minutes seem appropriate with the exception of Turner and Meeks. The way Meeks has been playing, he shouldn’t be sniffing the court for more than 10-15 minutes per game. Those extra minutes should go to Turner and maybe some more to Lou on nights he’s feeling it. Last night was a good example in that even though Turner had a very good first half, he didn’t come back in until 3 minutes remaining in third. Then, it wasn’t even for Meeks as Jodie played the entire third quarter. What was Meeks doing that warranted such an extended run? Getting burnt by Gordon? Not hitting wide open shots that our distributors were creating for him? Collins has always had a short leash on Turner, which is OK sometimes as Turner has certainly had some very poor games over his Sixers career. But the same leash principle should apply to Meeks but does not for whatever reason.
SKtheGhost - January 5, 2012
The difference between starting and not is really about floor balance. Which players fit together better.
The real issue is the Sixers getting out of the gate better, this has been a weakness for the team since Doug took over, and Meeks isn’t a solution, he was just better last season. I am not so much disappointed that the team got rid of Speights as I am that Meeks is still here.
Jodi isn’t a great defender and isn’t much of an offensive player. As such, he hurts the first team, and since he isn’t a good fit with Lou, or the rest of the 2nd team, it’s time to get rid of him. It was time before the season started. Bad non-move by the team.
RickoT - January 5, 2012
“…it’s time to get rid of him. It was time before the season started. Bad non-move by the team.”
To me this seems like a case of second-guessing only because the results are bad. Inserting Jodie into the starting line-up last year really changed the way this team was able to play—his shooting ability clearly opened up the floor for guys like Jrue and Iggy to go to work and probably prevented some double teams getting sent Brand’s way in the post. Probably also contributed to Thad’s success with a more open lane.
Going into this year, there was no reason to not expect more of the same. Sure Jodie was streaky at times last year, but he always was a threat that the opposing defense needed to respect when he was on the floor.
I think the bottom line is that we need a shooter on the floor to start games. Maybe Jodie is no longer that guy. but if he’s not, who is? Is Jrue’s shot good enough (I think it could be close to there)? Is Iggy’s early success from 3 for real (doubt it)? Did Turner’s shot improve enough under Herb Magee this offseason (probably not)?
All in all, I think his potential to space the floor if he can get things going and the tremendous benefits that come with that are worth waiting on for another week or so. With the lockout, he may be taking a while to get back into rhythm to shoot in actual games. He certainly seemed like a better defender last year too (average rather than below average), so maybe he came into the season a little under-fit and will be back up to speed in a week or so. No reason to wreck his confidence until it’s clear he’s really regressed. As the post pointed out, Turner seems to be doing well off the bench, so the extra time for Meeks isn’t hurting him too much.
ChestyLaRue - January 5, 2012
Agree
I do not like the implication that starting and coming off the bench doesn’t matter, as long as you get the minutes. While I understand the core of that statement, things are actually different. Playing with worse players makes you worse unless you’re Lebron or similar players. Evan, while it is nice when they hand him the controls in the second unit, i feel like they don’t do it to the degree that is necessary to maximize his strengths. So what’s the point?
I think the point of a coach is try to find the correct lineup that allows everyone to play as well as possible with each other, with wins being the ultimate goal. Playing Jodie is not a winning move for the future, and more importantly it isn’t a winning move now, which would be the only reason to play/start him as such.
Evan showed last night and in spurts throughout his career that he is a a player, like we all knew here as sixer fans. He is a big peice of our future as we all know as sixer fans that want titles. Getting him into the starting lineup playing 32-35 minutes a night is paramount to hastening that realization of quality within himself and the team as a whole.
The only wrinkle in this whether he can play with Iguodala. I don’t believe there will be a problem at all, but at the very slight chance there is we need to find out NOW.
I understand the idea minutes matter, but getting Turner in the starting lineup and playing with his best teammates that he will play with for some or a lot of years to come also matters. A lot.
saveourbluths - January 5, 2012
I think it’s absurd that you’re 4th best guard is starting. Whether Doug uses Lou or Turner with Holiday, the team is better. If there is 96 min for the guards in a game, there’s no reason each of them can’t play 32 min. a game, leaving Jodi with none. That’s not that many minutes and these guys are usually better then their opposites. Jodi is a weak link, he’s someone you go to when your better players aren’t performing, he’s not someone who should start.
If anything, you use Jodi against the other team’s 2nd string, where he’s be less likely to be outclassed. At the very least it’s a smart move for Doug to experiment with starting Lou or Evan and seeing if the first quarter offense improves.
RickoT - January 5, 2012
When one factors the defensive end of the floor, and the importance of ball sharing early in the game so everyone gets their touches, it seems to me that the argument for ET in the starting lineup is much stronger than for Lou. I don’t mind Lou’s defense when he’s playing 20 minutes and has fresh legs. When he’s playing closer to 30 minutes, it becomes a problem.
Lou is not over-pounding the rock as much as last year, is playing less point (thank God), and looks like an even more dangerous scorer. But I do think he would screw up the ball sharing mo-jo with the starters. Jrue probably needs to become this team’s leading scorer. That’s another argument for not starting he and Lou together.
wannabgm - January 6, 2012
Yeah, this is just false. Last season they trailed when the first unit (Hawes, Brand, Iguodala, Meeks, Holiday) came out of the game in the first quarter 24 times, including playoffs. And they had a cumulative /- of +85 in their runs to open the first quarter. This year, it’s been much worse (-23), but this is not a trend carried over from last season. And they’ve been excellent starting the third quarter this season (42).
depressedfan - January 5, 2012
Excellent post
I think that Meeks in the starting lineup was entirely justified last year, and that what is going on thus far this year is not a continuation of a trend. What I think we are seeing is that due to a combination of reasons (team collective perimeter shooting improved, Iguodala looking for his shot more early in games, Hawes gobbling up more of the offense with the starters, and a few other wrinkles) that the team no longer desperately needs Meeks’ catch and shoot ability in the starting lineup. That being in the case, his bad 1 on 1 defense becomes a more glaring problem. ET should probably start even if his role with the starters is just to defend, rebound, make a couple layups, and help Jrue get open for an occasional catch and shoot 3 pointer.
wannabgm - January 6, 2012
Meeks provides less than does ET on BOTH ends of the court. Regardless of who is starting, I think we can all agree that the team would benefit from giving less minutes to Meeks.
Clearly, ET is the obvious main benefactor of those extra available minutes, and the team D will improve, accordingly. As an added bonus, more minutes means more progress for ET.
There will be times when ET sticks his elbow to the side during his jumper like a third grade lefty trying to learn cursive (are you feeling me, fellow southpaws?). That’s when m33ks can earn his embarrassingly low contract money (roughly 1/8 of Nocioni’s).
Also, when perimeter scoring is needed, I’d like to see some experimentation with Lou at the point and A 6’4" Jrue at the 2. I think Lou’s penetration would open up some beautiful spot up 3s for Jrue. And I love the idea of Lou slipping around off the ball and finding free spaces like in the corners where Jrue can then dish it back to him. Big Ups to Dr. Seuss: Sweet Lou to Jrue back to Lou…for two?
Blunt Philly Guy - January 5, 2012 via iPhone app
WHy, that would be a toss that would be quite BOSS!
dweebowitz - January 5, 2012
With this upcoming home stretch against teams like the pistons and kings, i think it’s likely well see a game where meeks scores at least his ppg avg from last year. He just seems timid and jumpy when his playing, hopefully he gets his shooting form back soon, its too early to pull him from the starting role
clp2190 - January 5, 2012
We’ve all heard so much about Evan’s confidence/taking time to feel comfortable.. so it would only make sense to have him start and improve that. Let’s be real, the psychological impact of starting vs coming off the bench is there even if the effect varies. For veterans like JET or even the bo$$ its less of an effect but for a high draft pick w the expectations of a city on him its most likely magnified
Guzillionaire - January 5, 2012 via mobile
No, but it could mess with the rotations that are currently used, and more time with Meeks and Lou together in the backcourt = bad basketball.
jefu - January 5, 2012
Meeks and Lou together in the backcourt = bad basketball
Good point, but starting one backup guard in order to avoid having him on the floor at the same time as another backup guard…that seems to counter universal bball philosophy that goes back to the days of Naismith. That being said, I do respect your point.
Blunt Philly Guy - January 5, 2012 via iPhone app
That wasn’t the full point, though. The original idea of having Meeks in the starting lineup was to have him as a potential perimeter threat, which can be useful when trying to initiate half-court offense at the beginning of games. With that said, his defensive deficiencies can also be hidden between Jrue and Iguodala, but not when the lineups gets shifted and Lou comes in to replace Jrue, etc. If Meeks is hitting his shot, which he hasn’t been doing, and is at least mediocre on defense, which he hasn’t been, he is passable alongside the other four starting players. After only five games, let’s wait and see. Just because Turner is better doesn’t mean it’s best to have him starting. Manu Ginobili might agree with this, anyway. I’ll go ask him.
jefu - January 5, 2012
I’m with BPG. I think you start your best 5 and play them the most minutes. Getting too cute with the lineup feels like overcoaching and a waste of time.
Michael Levin - January 5, 2012
interestingly enough, 82games.com says the 5-man lineup with the best +/- is our starting lineup
Granted, with only five games played we’re talking about small sample size, but since we’re talking about shifting the starting lineup after only five games, small sample size seems to be the talk of the town these days. I’m not even convinced that Meeks is the best fit with these other guys as a starter, but I’m not willing to jump on a Turner+better than Jodie+upside= automatic starter bandwagon.
jefu - January 5, 2012
I don’t think I agree with how you’re reading the 82games list. If Holiday-Meeks-Iguodala-Brand-Hawes needed 57 minutes to be +21, but Williams-Turner-Iguodala-Young-Hawes only needed 17 minutes to go +20, isn’t the latter lineup clearly better? That’s why 82games gives the latter lineup a win % of 100 versus 50% for the starters.
splinter27 - January 5, 2012
Did you notice how I was pointing out the fact that it’s small sample size, and reading in to such small sample sizes/discussing this altogether due to small sample sizes is not very relevant as of yet?
Regardless, the rotations with the most minutes usually give the most accurate measures.
jefu - January 5, 2012
Yes I noticed that you wrote small sample size, but I still think that you misread the 82games list. It does not say that the starting lineup is our best lineup, even though you claimed it did. 82games says our best lineup is the Williams-Turner-Iguodala-Young-Hawes lineup.
splinter27 - January 5, 2012
I disagree with your interpretation of what I said. The rotation that has the most minutes this early into the season has the most weight toward being accurate. That is, a 57-minute rotation is more of an accurate measure of effectiveness than a 17-minute rotation. If you gave Williams-Turner-Iguodala-Young-Hawes the most minutes, there is no guarantee that they would have a +20 plus/minus, or the best plus/minus, and vice versa. Anyway…
My point was, that you may or may not have missed, was that any rotation should be ignored this early into the season. This includes our starting lineup, and most definitely includes a rotation that only played 17 minutes. My mentioning the starting line up as having the best +/- (notice I said best +/- and not best lineup, as you somehow interpreted my saying) was only to point out that this five isn’t as dismal as may be perceived from watching games. I then used that to lead in to the fact that this is all small sample size and should be overlooked for now.
I understand that you think Turner should be the starter, and this belief is fueling your argument, but don’t twist my words around.
jefu - January 5, 2012
I did miss where you said “best +/-” I thought you just said “best.” My mistake there. I still think it should be analyzed at a +/- per minute rate, but either way we both agree it’s too early to make any definitive conclusions on lineups. My only strong conviction is that Meeks should be starting.
splinter27 - January 5, 2012
meant should NOT of course :)
splinter27 - January 5, 2012
of course :)
jefu - January 5, 2012
Turner could have missed every shot he’s taken this year. Based on upside alone, I start him over Meeks every single day of the week.
Michael Levin - January 5, 2012
You must give more weight into the whole psyche from starting thing. I don’t, but it doesn’t really matter. I think Turner will be the starter eventually, but Meeks earned this spot from his play last year. Turner has to take it away from him, and five games isn’t enough time to prove that. Let’s wait.
jefu - January 5, 2012
Referring to your first point, I don’t actually. There’s just no denying Turner has infinitely more potential and, speaking as a person who doesn’t care if they won a couple games last year when the statistical norms evening out coincided with Jodie’s position in the starting lineup, I would have played ET 35 minutes from the beginning. I’d still do it now. Meeks is a non-entity. He shouldn’t be playing much, thus he shouldn’t be starting.
Like, it doesn’t matter but it matters. You totally know what I’m trying to get across here, I’m sure of it. /doofusface
Michael Levin - January 5, 2012
Mr. Levin, it seems to me that you’ve completely contradicted yourself in this post.
“Getting into holes and having the bench bail you out is not a strategy and it’ll fail more often than not.”
and
“it doesn’t really matter who plays first.”
If getting into holes will “fail more often than not,” then clearly it does matter who plays first, by your own words?
splinter27 - January 5, 2012
It was more me trying to advocate for both sides, but in the end concluding that starting matters a little bit, but playing more minutes is ultimately more important.
I think the first bit, taken literally, stands on it’s own. Having a dependable bench is nice but actually depending on them to dig you out of holes will not consistently work.
Michael Levin - January 5, 2012
Agreed. Yeah I feel the first bit definitely. It’ll wear on the team if they have to make comebacks every game. It’s not the end-all-be-all but I definitely think who starts matters, and after the first 5 games it’s clear that Meeks should not be starting (or frankly, even playing).
splinter27 - January 5, 2012
Turner's confidence
I don’t know if this is the “right” move, but I wonder if Collins is taking into account Evan’s psyche. Last year, his confidence (or lack thereof) was a huge issue. Perhaps Collins believes that elevating Turner to a starter will break his confidence and motivation again, and that he can get the most out of ET by bringing him off the bench.
Personally, I think you throw Turner out there and see how he handles the pressure, but I’m not the head coach.
One thing I am very happy about: The Sixers have Evan Turner and not John Wall. What an awful career for Wall thus far.
PhillyWarrior - January 6, 2012
Great point: Jrue + ET seems like an infinitely better combo than Jrue + Wall and better than Cousins/Favors/Wesley Johson/etc.
If we are committed to Jrue as a foundation piece, which we clearly are, the choice of ET works nicely. Cousins could’ve worked well, too. But I’d rather have Jrue/ET/Thad than Jrue/Meeks/Cousins for the foreseeable future.
Blunt Philly Guy - January 6, 2012 via iPhone app
Two things
If anything, moving Evan into the starting lineup would arguably raise his confidence level. Armchair psychiatrist isn’t advisable either way.
I would trade Turner for Wall in a second and it’s not even close.
Michael Levin - January 6, 2012
Justify Wall
I watch this kid constantly on league pass. 6-16 on an average night, jacking bad shots, can’t hit threes, turns the ball over like it’s going out of style. Before you say it, the “has nobody to play with” is a weak excuse for a #1 pick. He’s undersized, he plays out of control.
Basically, he’s a rich man’s version of Lou Williams, who is a poor man’s version of Iverson.
Levin – I just don’t get your fascination with headcase athletes with freakish skill but no brain attached.
PhillyWarrior - January 6, 2012
All of this is incorrect. I’m not going to deny the fact that yeah, he’s been bad so far. But he’s also 21 years old on a terrible team, so it’s not like he doesn’t have time to develop and improve.
He’s 6’4. How is that undersized?
He’s a better passer with better vision right now than Iverson/Lou ever was.
He’s also the opposite of a headcase. I don’t know where you’re getting that.
I don’t get your fascination with impatience, middling talent, and staying mediocre.
Michael Levin - January 6, 2012
Wall def has a higher ceiling than Turner. My biggest concern with Wall is him staying healthy, which appears to be a bit of an issue.
I don’t know what Jrue and Wall would do together in the back court, but it would probably be scary as hell to try and defend once they both get their feet wet in the NBA.
Turner is currently “starring in his role” for the Sixers better than Wall in D.C., but this Sixers squad with Wall on it might be scary. They are both probably long and strong enough when considering their wingspans, that Wall and Jrue could probably finish most games together in crunch time even if we wouldn’t necessarily want them spending every minute together on the floor.
wannabgm - January 7, 2012
Btw, can we agree that the SacTown drama has settled the argument that we should not trade for Cousins? Collins has had heart problems without Cousins. I shudder to think what Demarcus would do to his health.
Blunt Philly Guy - January 6, 2012 via iPhone app
He got the coach fired, but Westphal should have been fired anyway. It should be noted he went for 19 pts and 15 boards during his first game after Westphal.
I will have to disagree on Cousins. His contract is very small, and his upside is greater than Speights, and Doug gave Mo Speights a chance last year, and he botched it. Every so often a guy comes along that is worth the headache, and might mature given a little bit of time. If you’re the Sixers and you are short of big men anyway, nothing to lose.
The difference between Cousins and Wall is that the Sixers already have a PG of the future in Holiday. We have literally nothing at PF.
PhillyWarrior - January 6, 2012
While 15 points is obviously very good, scoring 19 points on 18 shots isn’t all that impressive. It should be noted that he also had 4 turnovers (to zero assists) and fouled out in 28 minutes of play.
yosoysean - January 7, 2012
15 rebounds*
yosoysean - January 7, 2012
Why not start LOU, instead?
Thanks for this post MIcheal, needless to say I agree with you on pretty much everything, and the Willie Green comparison is money. Very well done.
Only thing I’d like to put to your attention: why not starting Lou at SG? I know he’s a more of a 6th man etc etc, but with Jrue-ET-Iguodala we could make a run for the worst outside shooting starting back court of the league (please forget Dre’s current 3 pt %)
So I’d say put LW in immediately, despite his defensive liabilites (not that Meex is better at that…) and give ET all the minutes he deserves, at both SG and SF positions, including the 4th Q min
Just my thought
Ricky - Sixers4guidos - January 6, 2012
You start Evan Turner over Lou Will because you always start defense and bring offense off the bench.
jhollaz - January 6, 2012
good point, but then Meex should be buried UNDER the bench !!
right?
Ricky - Sixers4guidos - January 6, 2012
There’s still easily 12-15 minutes for Meeks without any rotation headaches if he’s coming off the bench.
wannabgm - January 7, 2012
Amen.
Blunt Philly Guy - January 6, 2012 via iPhone app
If Lou starts, I’ll break the internet.
Michael Levin - January 6, 2012
You break the internet, you break Al Gore.
jefu - January 6, 2012
You deliver Snowflake, I’ll deliver Marino.
Michael Levin - January 6, 2012
No worries, The Sixers are committed to marketing Lou, so he’s unlikely to be traded anytime soon, it appears to me. However, no way Collins would be that dumb.
wannabgm - January 7, 2012
I’m not sure what you mean.
Michael Levin - January 7, 2012
Collins wouldn’t be dumb enough to start Lou even though he and a core group of fans love him to the point that they would be highly reluctant to ever trade him. Sorry for the lack of clarity.
wannabgm - January 9, 2012
Ah ok. I wasn’t sure if you meant wouldn’t be dumb enough to trade him.
Michael Levin - January 9, 2012
Starting matters! Better to play with a lead and try to keep it than to start from behind have have to catch up
We all agree that Evan Turner has more offensive upside, more defensive upside, more leadership upside than Jodie Meeks.
I disagree with those who think that Turner has a problem moving without the ball and those who think he has any lack of confidence – he doesn’t. Turner’s game thrives when we have BALL MOVEMENT whether he initiates it or not. When we fail to move the ball around effectively, his game suffers. Turner is the smart player who positions himself to collect rebounds, anticipates angles and executes plays. When we go wild west, we handcuff his strengths. Collins needs to get a starting five that will initiate ball movement and defend – period.
bridgecoach - January 6, 2012
You should really change your name to BallMovement.
Michael Levin - January 6, 2012
you know what will fix all of this (wishful thinking)...trade andre igoudala
phitePSEF - January 6, 2012
I’ll start, you guys. OMG JODIE MEEKS 21 POINTS CHAMPIONSHIP
Michael Levin - January 6, 2012
Well, I guess that settles that. Allow me – ahem, cough cough……. MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEKS!!!!!!!!!!!!
evolutionary - January 6, 2012
is iggy going to play the point forward this year?
i wonder how that would affect evan turner’s role, or even jrue holiday’s role.. actually, i dont remember, how did it affect their roles last year?
juggadore - January 7, 2012
LOL @ reading this post and my comments now..
At least it brought good luck.
Micheal please make a similar one with “Vucevic should start over Brand” before tonight’s game, I’ll leave another couple of ignorant comments there
(seriously, of course I still stay with my thoughts even after the Det game)
Ricky - Sixers4guidos - January 7, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Liberty Ballers to post a comment.