Jazz starting linup, should it be set? NBA veterans or Jazz veterens?

The Jazz have come up with an extremely interesting team so far in the off-season. But, I'm worried that our trades may force us to rely on decent players that aren't in tune with each other. All of our trades have brought us great players that have had great moments in the NBA-- but none of them are superstars. We haven't acquired any game changers, just a group that can hold their own against other NBA players. Do we need a dominant player to be succussful? I hope not, because we don't have any.

But, we also have a lot of players that match up well against other teams in any given situation. Should we abandon an NBA norm of starting the same players game after game? Should we have a revolving door strategy where we start playing the matchups before the tipoff? I don't think the Jazz have a big enough (or good enough) staff to make it happen.

Should the Jazz rely on their core of Jazz players? Who should start for the Jazz? I would say the Jazz should play match-up by match-up for every four quarters. How can you tell Marvin Williams he isn't starting in any given game? How can you tell Millsap the same? Anyone want to tell Big Al Kanter is starting? Try telling Big Al that he will still play 35 minutes, but not start! Still, I think that's our best hope: start the game with our best match-ups, and go from there.

I kind of got thrown to the wolves when I proposed the same approach, (match-ups before tipoff) thinking very much like you that the Jazz have an edge that could be exploited by being so deep. As I recollect, ahem, I got the argument back that "guys need to know who is starting", stuff about player egos, and no other team does it. I'd like to hear a coach's answer to the question because it is true that one typically doesn't see that sort of thing. But in the age of money ball, why is it so far-fetched?

Nonetheless, it intrigues me no end, and from what I know about life is innovation doesn't emerge from herd mentality. I mean seriously, why wait 5 minutes or 3 quarters to exploit favorable match ups; just to do it so a guy starts? So many possibilities with the Jazz - put in the tall trees or go smaller quick ball, depending on the advantage. When you think about it the Jazz have at least 8 players who could start on a lot of teams, (GH,Mil, Al,Burks,Marv,Favors,Mo, Foye) and guys like Kanter and DC who bring unique talents to the table, (hustle and rebounds in this case). At the end of the day the best players will still get the most minutes and most starts.

I think the most glaring need to start the same 5, and to have units that always play with each other is the cohesion. Basketball isn't like moneyball-baseball, where you can just plug anyone in. There's passing and defense, where the better you learn your teammates tendencies, the better your game is too. Easy answer is John and Karl. They just eventually knew what each other would do. Thats a huge asset to victories. Basketball involves 5 guys that the better they know each other, the more successful you can be. Just knowing where guys are going to move to, where they like the ball to make "that" move etc.

Matchups can be exploited throughout the game and later on, but to be successful you gotta have a grouping of some of your 5-7 top players that always start together. Basketball is just different than some sports.