GSW Model vs JAZZ Model

[green]

Doesn't matter how many minutes your young guys get if there is no offensive scheme, no coaching, and no improving...

[Core4]

OK, I'll attempt to settle this once and for all...

[PKM]

I'm warming to Rondo. As long as the Jazz are dedicated to the 3 (otherwise).

About FT.

[Hotttnickkk]

OK, I'll attempt to settle this once and for all...

I choose neither...

[Hotttnickkk]

I am not assuming any such thing. I am asking you to explain your assumption that this has been a significant factor for the Warriors this year, when it had not been a facotr in previous years, is not helping the Raptors, etc. I am pointing out that selectiong this years Warriors as your example is cherry-picking.

I'm only interested in the comparison for the past year because:

- we had a group of developing young players
- we were approaching a very deep draft class and you can get a decent player up around the 25th pick
- we were about to lose Millsap & Jefferson anyway, so there is a pressing need to develop young players quickly to fill that void.
- in fact, we could have traded Paul&AL at the dateline for a couple of late round picks & move up. And moving up would have been easier due to the amount of talent late in the draft.

In my opinion all those factors mean that the GSW Strategy (or Toronto or Cleveland, or whatever you want to call it) was more suited to the Jazz than the one we settled on.

Granted it won't work every year, but if there was a year that we should have used it, it would have been last year.

[One Brow]

I'm only interested in the comparison for the past year ...In my opinion all those factors mean that the GSW Strategy (or Toronto or Cleveland, or whatever you want to call it) was more suited to the Jazz than the one we settled on.

Then, bring Toronto and Cleveland into your original analysis. The only reason I can see for you choosing the Warriors, specifically, is because they have been winning recently, and you wanted to use that as justifrication to promote your preferred development strategy.

[silesian]

Confirmation bias. The strategy you outline was a recipe for the Warriors playing badly for many years. Taking one year where they seem to have things together in the first third is selective perception.

Spot on. Also "immediacy bias" -- reacting emotionally to the most recent data and ignoring the longer-term fundamentals/ trends.

[Hotttnickkk]

Then, bring Toronto and Cleveland into your original analysis. The only reason I can see for you choosing the Warriors, specifically, is because they have been winning recently, and you wanted to use that as justifrication to promote your preferred development strategy.

Do you know why I didn't bring Toronto or Cleveland into the mix?

Because GSW actually had a decent team that could have contended at least for the 8th seed (which is similar to the Jazz). But for some reason, Curry & Lee conveniently got "injured" and were out for the remainder of the season.

It was GSW's strategy to "suck" for the remainder of the season - and their intention was pretty obvious given that they'll get our pick if they "suck" badly enough. So there is an incentive there. Now I can't say for certain that that's what Toronto or Cleveland did. Why? Because Toronto finished above GSW even though they actually had a worse roster to begin the year with. Cleveland also didn't have nearly as good a roster as GSW to begin the year with. If you want to expand the pool you can include the Hornets which finished the year strong, but lucked out in getting Davis. Bobcats were just bad to begin with too so they didn't even have to "tank".

See most of these teams didn't even have to try to "tank" - they're just bad naturally. That's not the strategy/model I'm talking about. What I'm talking about is a decent team playing bad. With GSW, near the end of the season, Jackson would pull Thompson & Jenkins out of the 4th quarter just because they were playing too well. He was questioned about this by local and National Media at the time - all he could say was, he needs to give other guys "experience".

GSW's strategy was so deliberate, it clearly changed as the season went on. I can't say the same for Toronto, Cleveland, Hornets, Bobcats, etc.

[One Brow]

Do you know why I didn't bring Toronto or Cleveland into the mix? ...Curry & Lee conveniently got "injured" and were out for the remainder of the season....GSW's strategy was so deliberate, it clearly changed as the season went on. I can't say the same for Toronto, Cleveland, Hornets, Bobcats, etc.

So, playing young players more minutes only improves them if you are deliberately tanking, but not if you need to play them because you don't have any better players?

[Hotttnickkk]

So, playing young players more minutes only improves them if you are deliberately tanking, but not if you need to play them because you don't have any better players?

I guess what I'm saying is the GSW model can be summed up in 1 word: Flexibility.

- They had a decent roster
- They owe us a top 8 pick
- It was a loaded draft class
- They had some young players

So they assessed the situation and were flexible enough to make the most of their situation.

- They got our pick.
- They picked Barnes (who would have been the No. 2 pick in 2011)
- They got Thompson & Jenkins some experience.

All those things had nothing to do with how many W's they get this year. They are assets they can use going forward. They made the most of the cards that were dealt to them.

We didn't.

[Cyrone Torbin]

From tonight at least it seems pretty clear that the GSW model seemed to have worked pretty well:

- gamble a year and tank (which only really works in a year with a loaded draft class)
- give young players (Thompson, Jenkins) plenty of experience against good players (at the cost of W's)
- get a decent player from draft (Barnes)

This is in complete contrast to the Jazz's model which is:

- tanking? What's that?
- play vets big minutes to give us a chance to win the game
- play young players limited minutes VS subs
- compete for the playoffs no matter what (even in a loaded draft year, even at the expense of giving young guys experience)
- main aim seems to be assembling a team which sells tickets no matter what

The results?

- Our young guys look lost against decent competition or when called upon to play big minutes
- Our young guys don't seem to have any 'go to move' due to the limited minutes they received last year
- We could have picked up a decent player in the draft
- With that pick, we may be could have traded for Harden together with another player if we wanted to

I don't know.. those are my thoughts.. what do you guys think?

I don't really feel like arguing with anyone, just wanted a friendly discussion on this.

Why do people act like Klay Thompson is some great young player? He shoots a ton, doesn't get to the foul line, and doesn't shoot a good FG%. He is good from deep, but that is really all he has on Hayward (and he isn't the TO machine that Hayward can be).

[Cyrone Torbin]

Besides Steph Curry, none of their young players they drafted are really contributing that much.

Honestly, I'm still dumb-founded they are doing this good. I honestly think it will eventually come to a screeching halt and they will drop out of the playoffs.

[bjunior]

Why do people act like Klay Thompson is some great young player? He shoots a ton, doesn't get to the foul line, and doesn't shoot a good FG%. He is good from deep, but that is really all he has on Hayward (and he isn't the TO machine that Hayward can be).

Burks is better or can be better all around. So if Burks played instead of Bell and Foye all this time, we could have more chances the last game.

[NUMBERICA]

Besides Steph Curry, none of their young players they drafted are really contributing that much.

Honestly, I'm still dumb-founded they are doing this good. I honestly think it will eventually come to a screeching halt and they will drop out of the playoffs.

Harrison Barnes has been pretty damn good. Klay Thompson is better than Hayward. And they've been winning all of these games without one of the best centers in the NBA (at least defensively, but you could argue one of the best in the league since the position sucks currently).

[NUMBERICA]

And Warrior Girls all day. Or all night.