View Poll Results: How much better would they be?

Voters
42. You may not vote on this poll
  • 10 games better

    1 2.38%
  • 5 games better

    27 64.29%
  • undefeated

    3 7.14%
  • same

    11 26.19%
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 25 of 25
  1. #16
    Senior Member The Thriller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    On the Booz Cruise
    Posts
    9,585
    Total Rep Points
    9052
    Rep Adjustment Power
    48
    I know that Sloan had a bad rap for not playing young guys... But...

    #1 I can't see Sloan being "down" with our offense the way it currently is structured. Now.... No offense with Big Al on it is going to look like the Showtime Lakers, Running Suns, or the Jazz when they they had Dwill, Booz, and Money Memo (or the Stock/Malone Jazz) in their primes. But our offense this season (and through much of last) sucks. Sloan would have only improved it. It would be impossible for him not to.

    #2 I don't see Sloan completely banishing Burks and never playing Kanter. In fact, Enes Kanter would probably be a "Sloan guy." Same with Carroll. Both are "junkyard dogs." In my book, more PT for Kanter and Carroll can only be a good thing. Burks, with his defense, would have seen PT.

    #3 After our ass kicking by the Pacers last night, Ty said it's, "only 1 game." Big Al said, "it's not the end of the world." Jerry, in his post game interview after benching the starters, screaming at them at the half, and then picking up 2 techs to be ejected in the 3rd, would have said something like... "I feel sorry for the fans who paid good money to watch this. The starters showed up in tuxedos. That's why our starters only played 10 minutes each for the game and I benched them. And if Al, Paul, and Mo keep pulling this BS, I'll keep playing Kanter and Burks 30+ minutes."

    Probably theeeee biggest difference Sloan would have made is probably theeeee #1 quality we lack...

    TOUGHNESS.

    It's difficult to quantify the difference Sloan would have made. It's certainly not difficult to qualify the difference he would have made.

    All Jazz teams under Sloan played hard and weren't pansie asses.

    We're pansie asses. Lets admit it. We prefer to chuck 3s than to actually fix it up inside, get to the FT line, or knock somebody on their butt on defense.
    Lakers Suck.

  2. #17
    I Like Warm Hugs Stifle Tower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Saving up for League Pass
    Posts
    14,932
    Total Rep Points
    26820
    Rep Adjustment Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by sgt.mac.1981 View Post
    Sloan knew how to use true 3pt shooters when he had them (Hornacek). Wouldn't need the 3pt shot as much with a true vision on offense. Al would have been forced to play defense or ride the bench
    Because Boozer was often benched for not playing defense?

    Sloan wouldn't do a heck of a lot better with this team...perhaps 3 games better. Jerry would still be playing the vets heavy mins. and not giving much time to Favors and Kanter. Sloan has a better grasp of the offense, but his defensive philosophy was terribly outdated. His strategy was based on funneling guys inside, where our "defensive shot-blocker" would shut them down (ummm, Jerry...Eaton retired quite some time ago) and leave the 3-pt shooters open since that's such a low-percentage shot.

    I don't miss Sloan that much. He drove me crazy with his substitution patterns and allegiance to aging vets. What I wanted was an established coach. Instead we got Sloan Jr. Nearly identical philosophies, but worsened by inexperience.

  3. #18
    Senior Member Cy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    27,730
    Total Rep Points
    17232
    Rep Adjustment Power
    79
    Probably the same. Sloan would make the offense run smoother, but he would probably make the defense even worse.
    :^D

  4. #19
    Senior Member fishonjazz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    K-TOWN
    Posts
    17,519
    Total Rep Points
    39507
    Rep Adjustment Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by MoTown16 View Post
    Because Boozer was often benched for not playing defense?

    Sloan wouldn't do a heck of a lot better with this team...perhaps 3 games better. Jerry would still be playing the vets heavy mins. and not giving much time to Favors and Kanter. Sloan has a better grasp of the offense, but his defensive philosophy was terribly outdated. His strategy was based on funneling guys inside, where our "defensive shot-blocker" would shut them down (ummm, Jerry...Eaton retired quite some time ago) and leave the 3-pt shooters open since that's such a low-percentage shot.

    I don't miss Sloan that much. He drove me crazy with his substitution patterns and allegiance to aging vets. What I wanted was an established coach. Instead we got Sloan Jr. Nearly identical philosophies, but worsened by inexperience.
    Agreed.

  5. #20
    Senior Member gregbroncs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Here! Wait is this a roll call?
    Posts
    3,909
    Total Rep Points
    4039
    Rep Adjustment Power
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by Cyrone Torbin View Post
    Probably the same. Sloan would make the offense run smoother, but he would probably make the defense even worse.
    When was a Sloan coached team worse defensively than this one? This team gives up more easy layups than any Jazz team I can ever remember seeing.
    Welcome aboard Snyder, Exum and Hood. Here is to hoping this season is more entertaining than the last 3.

  6. #21
    In pursuit of #9 PKM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    47,183
    Total Rep Points
    49273
    Rep Adjustment Power
    100
    1 or 2.
    #dumptruckin

  7. #22
    Senior Member vslice02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    1,847
    Total Rep Points
    2512
    Rep Adjustment Power
    25
    There isn't a more ridiculous or inaccurate myth amongst Jazzfanz than the one that states Corbin and Sloan both utilized rigid and unflexible substitution patterns, blind allegiance to aging veteran players, and possess identical basketball philosophies.
    "It's a loss. It's one loss on our home floor that we aren't happy with." -Ty Corbin, 12/26/12.
    "It's one loss." -Ty Corbin, 1/11/13.
    "Whether you lose by one or by 45 like we did tonight, it's one loss." -Ty Corbin, 1/28/13.
    "It's one loss." -Ty Corbin, 4/3/13.
    It's disappointing any time you don't make the playoffs." -Ty Corbin, 4/17/13.


  8. #23
    Senior Member NAOS's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    5,860
    Total Rep Points
    4992
    Rep Adjustment Power
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by gregbroncs View Post
    When was a Sloan coached team worse defensively than this one? This team gives up more easy layups than any Jazz team I can ever remember seeing.
    The late-Sloan Force-Middle-And-Foul teams were as atrocious.

    The difference now, though, is that we have better defenders. They're just getting too few minutes. Corbin made the right adjustments, he's just not policing them with his distribution of minutes.

    I think the full line change is also bad for defense. You've got to have a consistent thread of bad-ass attackers in there who set the tone for the guy(s) coming into the game.
    ___#! Rudy Fan___
    [size/HUGE] RUDY [/size]

  9. #24
    Senior Member NUMBERICA's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    13,395
    Total Rep Points
    15837
    Rep Adjustment Power
    71
    It is literally impossible for me to care less.
    Quote Originally Posted by every forum dreg
    I think he can play SF

  10.  

     

  11. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    5,331
    Total Rep Points
    7639
    Rep Adjustment Power
    43
    Quote Originally Posted by Cyrone Torbin View Post
    Probably the same. Sloan would make the offense run smoother, but he would probably make the defense even worse.
    Huh?

Posting Permissions

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