Page 26 of 30 FirstFirst ... 162425262728 ... LastLast
Results 376 to 390 of 439
  1. #376
    Senior Member bovice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    658
    Rep Power
    10
    Teams start Randy Foye at PG if they want to tank for a top 3 pick

  2. #377
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    4,054
    Rep Power
    22
    I get Favors as a defensive sub late in the game, but lets not forget he was flat awful tonight. Kanter played a tiny bit better, but both their performances were drastically colored by the game within game second unit showdown which we clearly won.

  3. #378
    Senior Member Cyrone Torbin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Trapped in a Trap
    Posts
    23,900
    Rep Power
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by bovice View Post
    Teams start Randy Foye at PG if they want to tank for a top 3 pick
    Same with playing Earl Watson at PG.
    'Merican League Consensus (kind of) PWR RANKS

    12) Goose

  4. #379
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    4,054
    Rep Power
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by //r00t 4 Jazz View Post
    I also didn't mean starting and more so when Foye's shooting well and as a stop gap for just 3-5min in the mid 2nd and 4th qtrs when the opposing bench players are in and again with Hayward and Burks.

    Also when I say this it is just an idea to break up the hideousness that was the PG play of the last couple of games. I know it is not an answer and that it may not work.
    I share your pain in wanting to see adequate PG play. But no matter what their limitations are, Tinsley and Earl are vastly better options than Foye.

    If it matters, I think Foye could be a better option than both those guys in a different offensive system. Since we don't actually have a system, we desperately need anybody who can make a play handling the ball. Foye will never be that guy.

  5.  

     

  6. #380
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    5,781
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by billyshelby View Post
    We didn't lose because of defense. We played great D all game. In the 1st, the Clips played their game, we could barely run, and the lack of a half court was glaring. In the second, we played great D, but the Clips also missed a ton of shots. We shot ridiculously well despite not getting any easy looks, but mostly got loose on the break. In the 3rd, we actually looked great for the 1st 7 minutes or so.

    What did us in more than any other factor was the inability to score in the half court when the Clips went on their run. A TO with an inbounds play to break it up would have helped. And Al getting hot also helped. But a team like the Clips is going to go on runs. You have to counter by being able to trade baskets when you have to, not stopping their offense entirely.
    I agree with your statements about the half-court offense, but sorry, this doesn't give credit where credit is due.

    Quote Originally Posted by Brown Notes View Post
    There is no reliable way to deal with it except hustle which we did see in spurts, even from the starters. You cannot just put a forward on a PG and not expect said PG to not exploit the size advantage you're giving up, unless you know there is an ISO play coming. In other words, there was no sustainable substitution to guard CP.
    When I was browsing I thought Mellow wrote this.

  7. #381
    Senior Member //r00t 4 Jazz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,660
    Rep Power
    20
    Oh and I think even before the season started most people agreed that the opposing teams starters would be better on most nights then the Jazz, no matter who is starting it was the that the bench wouldn't have as much of a drop off as other teams again no matter who was coming off the bench. Because the Jazz don't have any one dominant player let alone 2 or 3 like the elite teams have they have to rely on non stop depth and hustle and trusting the offense.

    I don't think Corbin is calling for stagnated offense like has become common especially lately but it is on him at least partially if the players aren't executing or learning/understanding what he is trying to do even when Horny or other assistant coaches are being interviewed they specifically mention over and over that they aren't cutting or moving like they should on offense. I would also like to see some better assistant coaches or one single veteran assistant brought in like the Nets have PJ and Mavs for example have them. Phil Johnson would be perfect but don't see that working and Gordy would've been good except he's now in ORL with Vaughn.

  8. #382
    Senior Member NUMBERICA's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    12,486
    Rep Power
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by billyshelby View Post
    I get Favors as a defensive sub late in the game, but lets not forget he was flat awful tonight. Kanter played a tiny bit better, but both their performances were drastically colored by the game within game second unit showdown which we clearly won.
    Did you watch the game? Not everything is traditional, individual production. Saying that all of the success of the second unit was Either Watson or Tinsley, Burks, Hayward, and not the men responsible for controlling the paint and locking it down is a pretty hard sell to anyone that watched the game.
    #loseeveryremaininggame

  9. #383
    Premium Member Xsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Saint George
    Posts
    961
    Rep Power
    18
    I'm there.

    I'm at the point where I hope we pull a Lakers and start losing game after game until the front office is forced to do something about the train wreck that is our team.
    http://jazzfanz.com/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=1889&dateline=1332058703

  10. #384
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    4,054
    Rep Power
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by NUMBERICA View Post
    Did you watch the game? Not everything is traditional, individual production. Saying that all of the success of the second unit was Either Watson or Tinsley, Burks, Hayward, and not the men responsible for controlling the paint and locking it down is a pretty hard sell to anyone that watched the game.
    I said I get that Favors as a defensive sub would have made sense. I thought both Favors and Kanter played excellent D. But Favors was a nightmare on offense and Kanter wasn't much better. That run we made in the 2nd (and holding serve in the early 4th) was all about the break. But on offense, those dudes were terrible. 6 TO's in 30 combined minutes.

  11. #385
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,255
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by NUMBERICA View Post
    Did you watch the game? Not everything is traditional, individual production. Saying that all of the success of the second unit was Either Watson or Tinsley, Burks, Hayward, and not the men responsible for controlling the paint and locking it down is a pretty hard sell to anyone that watched the game.
    I can agree with this. Their defense is so consistently good that our bench usually has no trouble outscoring the other team even when Favors and Kanter are having off-nights offensively.

  12. #386
    Senior Member vegas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    677
    Rep Power
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by The Norm View Post
    Forget about the rotations for a minute and try to justify the utter lack of direction on offense this team has displayed ever since teams took away our transition game. It's unbelievably bad. I don't know what the hell Corbin is doing, and apparently he doesn't either.
    Maybe it is just a lack of intensity, but it is painful to watch when down the stretch the Jazz offense reverts to: one pass and a jump shot, or pass to Al, who puts up a contested shot or throws it out to the pg in the corner.

    There are some exceptions, but imo the repetition of those scenarios is what kills us.
    Chop it!!!

  13. #387
    Senior Member NUMBERICA's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    12,486
    Rep Power
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by billyshelby View Post
    I said I get that Favors as a defensive sub would have made sense. I thought both Favors and Kanter played excellent D. But Favors was a nightmare on offense and Kanter wasn't much better. That run we made in the 2nd (and holding serve in the early 4th) was all about the break. But on offense, those dudes were terrible. 6 TO's in 30 combined minutes.
    "Favors was awful", then "Favors and Kanter played excellent D".

    That is not awful.
    #loseeveryremaininggame

  14. #388
    Senior Member Sneakers's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,648
    Rep Power
    23
    The hard part is I'm a spurned fan that's totally excited about the 6-12 of our lineup if we ever commit. Would go from POd to euphoric
    Long Live JYD

  15. #389
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    4,054
    Rep Power
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by NUMBERICA View Post
    "Favors was awful", then "Favors and Kanter played excellent D".

    That is not awful.
    Then I amend my hyperbole. But it's hard to play post players when they're awful on offense which they were. That said, I would always sub Favors into any game for a last second defensive substitution no matter how he's playing.

  16. #390
    Senior Member The Fresh Prince's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    F#%$ You, Rep Me!
    Posts
    3,179
    Rep Power
    31
    Can we now please fire Captain Kermit?

    "Gordon Haystack gets no love."

Posting Permissions

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