I'm not really sure how this applies and what your definition of a traditional lineup is. However, I think you are missing the point.
If you want to have a chance at contending, you're going to need post offense and post defense. Having tweeners who can't defend can leave you vulnerable and have generally never worked out in the past. Successful teams have their go-to guys and then surround them with defenders. That's been the blueprint of a successful team from the beginning. Lately, post defenders haven't been as essentially considering the lack of skilled big men in the league. Therefore, teams that play these smallball lineups can get away with it and produce a good record in the regular season. However, the more complete teams (and thus the more competitive teams) have skilled big men, so when these smallball lineups go up against these teams, they hit a wall and are unable to compete.
A team like GSW has success playing a small PF because that PF happens to be an excellent defender. In general, most undersized PFs are lacking defensively. However, the anomaly that is Draymond gives them an advantage because of his play on the defensive end and the ability to stretch the floor and handle the ball on offense.
Just because there is an undersized PF on a successful team, doesn't mean that is where the league is headed. If there were Draymond Green's lying around everywhere, I bet we would see more successful teams with a small PF. Unfortunately, Green is a very unique player. Insinuating that teams are capable of winning with a small PF is not technically untrue (LeBron, Green), but if you have to bank on finding a LeBron or Draymond to play PF, you're going to be s*** out of luck. Those players are rare. Why not build a team the more conventional way that has already proved to be a winner in the past?
I'm not sure how you highly disagree with that, but please, feel free to take a stab at it.
I don't think I'm missing the point. Like Green, Nik is a very unique player with a versatile skill set. He has the ability to handle the ball and create for his teammates. He also has the length to guard positions 1-3, but he doesn't have the size. There's no reason why we couldn't play a lineup of McLemore and Stauskas together.
You said:
I know a lot of Kings Fans get sucked into this "positionless" basketball idea, but I would prefer to stay the course and not play players out of position. Especially when they're delicate rookies.
I provided you with playoff teams that play out of position in starting lineups. My point is that there is nothing wrong with having a starting lineup without a traditional PG-SG-SF-PF-C at each and every position.
I'm thinking that we have different definitions of "positionless basketball".
I think positionless basketball is when a starting lineup doesn't have a traditional 1-2-3-4-5 at every slot.
For example, I pulled out the Raptors. They have Lowry-DeRozan-Ross-Johnson-Valanciunus. This is positionless basketball because Ross is out of position. He's more of a SG who's playing SF. That is a magnified tiny example of positonless basketball. It's what we'd see if we had Nik in the starting lineup.
An example of a heavy positonless basketball team are the Bucks.
They have MCW-Middleton-Giannis-Ilyasova-Zaza
Middleton is a combo SG/SF. He has the length and size to guard positions 1-3, but he plays as the "2" here because of his teammates around him. Giannis is 6'11 and ATHLETIC, but he can't shoot too well yet, and he doesn't have the weight..so he plays the "3". Ilyasova is a lengthy "4" who has a lot of game around the perimeter. He's a "stretch 4" in this lineup.
None of those three players are natural at their current positions if you're going by the traditional 2-3-4. They're just put together in a lineup because they compliment another.
That right there, is positionless basketball imo. A lot of the league has at least 1 player out of position in their starting lineup. People over look this because it's not a huge change. Many people think of 5 guards at the same time, or 4 D-Wills on the floor at the same time when they think about positionless basketball, but that's not how I see it.
Even if Green is a unique player, the Warriors STILL have positionless basektball incorporated into their team. Green is not a traditional 4, and he's really more of a small forward/elite wing type of player.