What's new

Ersan Ilyasova to sign with Jazz per Jordan Schultz

I think Royce and Ersan are close to the same. Ersan is much better than Niang and Bojan though and those are the guys his minutes would be replacing. Last year he was almost never on the court with Giannis. Year before he was on the court a little (1/3 of his minutes-ish)

It isn't that the Lopez are bad rebounders... they are a little unique in that their teams rebound well when they are on the court but they don't get the rebounds themselves. They box and wall off the rebounding area and other guys are able to collect the rebounds easier. It might just be slightly inflated... if his number dip a bit I don't think its because he's worse... just a little different.
I'd still say he's a decently stronger rebounder than Royce. Royce's best year for total rebounding percentage is his rookie year at 11.7%, whereas Ersan's lowest career TRB% was 11.4% in his rookie year. His career average is 13.6%.
 
The reason why it feels like coaches always overvalue vets it’s because fans overvalue scrubs/young players all the time. It’s easy to say that guy who you haven’t seen play is better than some vet who plays badly all the time when you’re not actually seeing them practice.

I’m not saying coaches are always right, but the majority of the time the reason why someone is planted on the bench is because they aren’t good enough. Moreover, if they are good enough, they will probably find their way on the court no matter who the coach.

I know that someone is going to toss in some Christian Wood esque outlier counter example out there...but I really think people get too caught up in these narratives.
Some truth here... but there are also player types that you can't necessarily see how effective they are until it is game type situations. Role players in particular. Joe Ingles for example was given more playing time when we were not trying to win every game possible and it really benefited his career. If he stays with the Clips does he get the run he needs?

The bigger thing is that if you don't play some of those guys you don't know what you have. So if things are equal or close to it I would prefer the higher upside option over the known quantity. Those guys also need that time to develop into the best version of the player they can be.

Coaches value predictability and they love control. Knowing what you will get is often better than a mystery box with upside. Pop used to say that Manu drove him crazy but he had to learn to live with it. Obviously he's a star talent... but there are plenty of guys that fall by the way side because there isn't playing time available for them. Fans do love the backup QB until he becomes the starter doe... I get that.

Take a guy like Desmond Bane who I loved in the draft. Had we picked him he would not have played much or at all for us. We are too deep at guard right now. He's doing quite well in Memphis in part because he has had some opportunity.

There is also a ton of value in finding out if those guys aren't good enough because you can move on comfortably. Failing requires trying.

The correct answer is somewhere in the middle between win now play the vet moves and playing only the prospects.
 
I'd still say he's a decently stronger rebounder than Royce. Royce's best year for total rebounding percentage is his rookie year at 11.7%, whereas Ersan's lowest career TRB% was 11.4% in his rookie year. His career average is 13.6%.
That's fair.
 
I coming around to the signing a little. I think he might be a better fit here than in Milwaukee and he was good there. They needed more creators with the ball and we have lots of that. Just shoot, rebound, and take a charge here and there.
 
The topic wasn't if Jerry played rookies that were destined to be stars. The topic was did he play them to develop them and give them a chance to mature on the floor. And there were plenty of complaints here on JF and in general about having a reasonably good rookie that just did not get the PT. And even with D Will he sat him often in favor of his vets instead of letting him run the team, like CP3 had free reign to do.
I pushed back against that narrative then, and I'll continue to do so now. Which rookies should Sloan have played more in order to develop? Who were these "reasonably good rookies" who didn't get playing time, of which you speak? I bet I could name more rookies that he DID play to develop, than you can name ones who had talent that he should have played more to develop.

And Deron got a TON of playing time after about the first month, ie after he knew the offensive and defensive schemes.
 
"Sloan didn't play Rookies" is a myth. Sloan didn't play guys who jackpotted around is closer to the truth. A lot of Rookies jackpot around.
 
I coming around to the signing a little. I think he might be a better fit here than in Milwaukee and he was good there. They needed more creators with the ball and we have lots of that. Just shoot, rebound, and take a charge here and there.
He's going to put LeBron on the bench after getting two quick charges in the first quarter.

#stopper
 
He's going to put LeBron on the bench after getting two quick charges in the first quarter.

#stopper
Honestly not a bad strategy. The best can score on great defenders... but no one can score if they *** on the bench.

Maybe we saw all the flopping and just said "**** it... we are all in". Now Ersan will teach our guys the Dark Arts. Bring Kevin Martin in as a consultant on how to draw shooting fouls.
 
Honestly not a bad strategy. The best can score on great defenders... but no one can score if they *** on the bench.

Maybe we saw all the flopping and just said "**** it... we are all in". Now Ersan will teach our guys the Dark Arts. Bring Kevin Martin in as a consultant on how to draw shooting fouls.
The crazy thing, if you've seen his charge highlight video, is that he doesn't even flop at all to get the calls.
 
The crazy thing, if you've seen his charge highlight video, is that he doesn't even flop at all to get the calls.
Depends on what you call a flop... taking a charge is an art. The amount of force required to knock a guy over who is trying to stay up is... a lot. Basically once they get contact they kinda go limp rather than holding their ground. There are some where he gets steamrolled doe.

He's taking contact but the contact is exaggerated... so I call that a flop. He is not faking contact where there is none so if you want to call that not flopping then fine.
 
Depends on what you call a flop... taking a charge is an art. The amount of force required to knock a guy over who is trying to stay up is... a lot. Basically once they get contact they kinda go limp rather than holding their ground. There are some where he gets steamrolled doe.

He's taking contact but the contact is exaggerated... so I call that a flop. He is not faking contact where there is none so if you want to call that not flopping then fine.
If you’re trying to stay up, though, it gets called as blocking, since you’ll have to move your feet to stay up.
 
Back
Top