View Poll Results: Pick 2 3pt shooters you would choose

Voters
26. You may not vote on this poll
  • Steve Novak sf

    5 19.23%
  • Brandon rush sg/sf

    11 42.31%
  • Daniel green Sg

    1 3.85%
  • Chase budinger sf

    1 3.85%
  • Courtney lee sg

    3 11.54%
  • Ray Allen sg

    4 15.38%
  • Jarod bayless pg

    0 0%
  • Willie green combo g

    1 3.85%
  • Marvin Williams sf/pf

    0 0%
  • Matt Carroll sg/sf

    0 0%
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 37 of 37
  1. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    5,781
    Rep Power
    0
    Why isn't that guy named CJ Miles on the list?











    holy ****.... that really wasn't funny.

  2. #32
    Senior Member Hotttnickkk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    15,413
    Rep Power
    67
    Quote Originally Posted by infection View Post
    I see it from the other way around. With Boozer we kept going to him and refused to bench him because "lol hes the cronerstone of are offense git real bro". Despite his inability to come through down the stretch, we kept feeding him. Despite that numerous times while we kept Millsap on the bench we kept watching Boozer fumble the ball, shoot jumpers, and get his ass blocked. Everyone (well, a lot of people) kept making the argument that we can't bench Boozer for Millsap because his offense was just too important.

    We got bumped from the playoffs by the Lakers three years in a row in successively less games without making a single adjustment, despite even having a small amount of diversity sitting on the bench. Boozer kept getting owned by anyone on the Lakers frontline, both on offense and defense, and we never attempted anything different because apparently Boozer's offensive intangibles (which is the only thing you could argue because his offense alone wasn't getting anything accomplished) were just too important to our offensive system. Fesenko, despite having no offensive skill and was completely clueless most of the time, seemed to shake things up but we refused to play that card. Obviously, you can't bring up Fesenko without everyone getting their jockstrap in a bunch and have them respond to some charicature of your opinion as if you think Fesenko is the next Mutombo. Bottom line is that Boozer's offense was overrated, despite a large portion of the fanbase hating him, yet we kept insisting that he needed to be on the floor, needed to play in the crunch, and needed to be fed the rock.

    As far as Korver, we never tried to play to that strength. He was supposed to come in and basically play the role of every other SG we've had. But, unlike every other SG we've had since Hornacek, Korver could actually shoot. Because of this, he'd actually hit his shots and so it appeared we were playing him different than we played any other idiot we'd throw out at the 2 spot. Despite Korver being one of the best shooters in the league, we never set him up. How often did we set Matt Harpring up? Also, for whatever reason it may be, everyone failed to acknowledge that he was in fact our best wing defender because he was the only person who actually played D away from the ball. He also had the ability to stay in front of his man better than any of the other wings, which really isn't saying a whole hell of a lot. We rarely had him guard the tough matchup, instead thinking Brewer was some kind of defensive stopper. Also, if you recall that San Antonio was also trying to obtain Korver at the same time we were. Had he wound up in San Antonio we'd probably all have a much different perspective on him. The Spurs, often with the Jazz's help, can make Bonner look like Memo. Imagine what Korver would have looked like. Yes, a lot of that is the other guys they have to work with, but a lot of it is also understanding players' strength and playing to it rather than trying to force some other arbitrary system on a situation that it won't work on.

    Memo, I thought, was played decently, though I believe we could have been a bit more solid if we relied on him offensively more than Boozer. Him and Boozer together on defense were obviously bad. Also, in the last San Antonio series it would have been nice to see a bit more of Araujo (cue the laughs). He was the only one who did/could push Duncan out of position. But, since the status quo was "too valuable" to experiment with anything else, we sat Hoffa and let the status quo get the results it got. Now, I know everyone who got a C- or above in introductory statistics wants to rush to the "dude sample size.. i know about sample size iz iz smrt" to defend the fact that we kept playing deficient lineups when they proved to be failures.

    Last draft I had expected us to pick up Kawhi Leonard when he was available come our pick. Later, I heard Phil Johnson (as much as I admire and respect him) mention that he's not the prototypical SF for the Jazz system and that he's more of a PF-esque SF rather than SG-esque SF and that the Jazz use the more traditional wing forward in their system. Now I'm not arguing drafting Leonard or not drafting Leonard (though that's who I would have taken), what I am taking issue with, however, is that there's an implication that we need to take guys who fit into the "system". Now if the system means guys who are good teammates, hard workers and are willing to pass the ball then yes, I believe always having a "system" needs to come before anything else. What this demonstrates, however, is that the system is more than just a philosophy of basketball, but rather it is a very arbitrary view of precisely how basketball needs to be arranged and that there is a set formula that you mussn't vary. Obviously Johnson likely wasn't privy to the whole situation, but the underlying feeling persists -- that is that we must fit our pieces into our schema rather than shape our schema around our pieces.

    So, back to the topic, a one-dimensional three-point shooter in no way fits into our schema. They can be a three-point shooter, and that's great, but their role will be something else. Mehmet Okur has thus far been the only exception to this. So we can go ahead and get our three-point guru, but his time will always be limited by guys like Raja who are defensive stoppers, or guys like Howard who have the experience, or guys like Jefferson who are just too important to the system to take minutes from.
    Not even going to attempt to reply to everything you've said above, just want to make 1 point. It's OK if your team have 1-2 of these 'one dimensional guys'. If we look at Championship teams they all have them: Steve Kerr, Robert Horry, etc, etc. But when you have a whole 'collection' of these guys in the starting line up it becomes too difficult. Boozer & Okur is just bad defensively, let alone having to play them together for 35+ min. per game.
    KkKkkKKkkkKkKkkKKKkkkKkkkKkk
    #Hungry
    #LoveYourNeighbour

  3. #33
    Senior Member infection's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    1,948
    Rep Power
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by Hotttnickkk View Post
    Not even going to attempt to reply to everything you've said above, just want to make 1 point. It's OK if your team have 1-2 of these 'one dimensional guys'. If we look at Championship teams they all have them: Steve Kerr, Robert Horry, etc, etc. But when you have a whole 'collection' of these guys in the starting line up it becomes too difficult. Boozer & Okur is just bad defensively, let alone having to play them together for 35+ min. per game.
    I don't think we're disagreeing.

  4. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    894
    Rep Power
    16
    Courtney Lee - great defender.

  5. #35
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Tabor Heights
    Posts
    12,581
    Rep Power
    0
    Robert Horry was not one dimensional. He was also a very good defender.

  6.  

     

  7. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    175
    Rep Power
    14
    2013 offseason has several unrestricted free agents that could be considered 3-pt specialists.

    Dorell Wright
    Morrow
    Korver
    D. Cook
    G Neal

    there are probably other decent shooters that will become available but these guys stood out to me.

    I also like the idea of signing Lawson or Curry (depending on his ankles) to an offer sheet and see if their teams match. both those guys are great shooters as well and solid young pgs.

  8. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    791
    Rep Power
    11
    Under what scenario could you envision Ray Allen signing with the Jazz. Besides the Jazz overpaying.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •