Arguments for 5 changes in the NBA starting lineup | News, results, highlights, stats and rumors

Discussions about the starting lineup are likely to elicit eye-rolls from many NBA fans who consider themselves above debate.

“It's not about who starts,” they might say, adjusting their monocle with one hand and swirling their bourbon glass with the other, their pinky pointing skyward. “It's about who finishes!”

However, it also depends on who starts.

Opening fives are no longer the unsolvable givens they once were. Rotations are more flexible than ever and depend not only on availability, but also on opponent constellations and stylistic preferences.

And yet starting lineups usually represent a central part of a team's identity. They determine, if not dictate, who plays the most and who is on the pitch in the decisive phase.

If a starting lineup is considered more flexible or a placeholder that allows for different staggering patterns, it is still important. At the very least, these opening tip combinations set the tone and determine whether you are working from the back or the front, so changing them should not be taken lightly. However, sometimes it is worth a try – if not necessary.

The goal of this exercise is to identify the teams that could benefit from a change. The starting lineups most commonly used last year will serve as a baseline – unless they are outdated due to injuries or new additions.

The New York Knicks, for example, will have a new opening quintet after the signing of Mikal Bridges. His arrival will not be under scrutiny. This space is reserved for cases where changes are less certain and/or more controversial.