The lineup is completely based on the matchup from series to series. The Kings have a big man (miller) who is a giant puss and wants to shoot from the outside coupled with a guard (artest) and forward (wells) who are tough as nails and want to pound it in on the rim. I know you want to see the big lineup out there, but the problem with that is that none of our 7 footers can guard wells or artest on the outside. Because the Kings' have guys at these positions who can both take it off the bounce as well as post it makes it extremely difficult to match up with. I agree with Pop that the best lineup is a small lineup that can match up better on the outside. The main reason is that this smaller lineup is much quicker and can rotate on the defensive end much quicker than a big lineup. The problem in game 3 and 4 is that the defensive rotations were horrible and either slow or non-existent. Defense takes energy, and the Spurs brought energy and hustle to game 5 that they didn't to games 3 and 4. The lineup is fine, they just have to come with energy to win.
Against a bigger team that plays a more traditional set then the Spurs would most likely use their bigs more and count on our 7 footer defensive wall. We tend to match up much better against those teams. The Kings are like a knuckle ball pitcher in baseball in that they play a very unorthodox lineup that you don't see very often (also like a Texas Tech Football Offense). It is hard to adjust to and play when you aren't used to having to play it.