freakazoid
Well-Known Member
Oh, no, please do. I'd love to hear how another coach could turn poop into gold. Fairy tales always make me sleepy, and I could use a nap.
Jazz were -16 with Favors
- Thread starter franklin
- Start date
Oh, no, please do. I'd love to hear how another coach could turn poop into gold. Fairy tales always make me sleepy, and I could use a nap.
MVP
Well-Known Member
We have a saying - you can't squeeze cottage cheese from ****. So you are absolutely right. Give this team to Phil Jackson and what is going to happen? We would win 5-7 game more? would that make you all happier winning 30 games instead of 23-25? Remember it would give us lesser draft pick! So let Tyron lose more games, it will get his *** fired next year and we will have better chance of future superstar in the draft.
DutchJazzer
Banned
+/- stat is as usefull as farts per game stat(actual real life farts/game)
I can take a bed of stat sheets on that fishing trip.
Oh please do. I'd love to hear nothing more than your counter argument. It shouldn't take you much effort at all too, since it's so air tight and all.
freakazoid
Well-Known Member
Farts per game is actually a really useful stat. Jeremy Evans leads this category. It's how he gets his mad hops.
OTOH, Bell hasn't farted in years, but for some reason, still manages to stink the most.
That's exactly why I'm not gonna bother.
InGameStrategy
Well-Known Member
Before you call out individual posters on a narrowly focused argument like yours, you might want to make sure you can back up the gist of it.
Other JazzFanz have done a good job in putting your argument in its place already.
But maybe, just maybe, you (and more importantly, the coaching staff) might consider analyzing Favors' court time. The key message here for Corbin is that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting the same results. The 2nd quarter should've taught Corbin that Favors-Kanter isn't particularly effective (although it did work vs. weaker Philly big men). Not sure if Millsap was injured, but Kanter shouldn't have played alongside Favors again in the third quarter if they could afford it when Jefferson got in foul trouble. And more importantly, the perimeter defense was killing the Jazz--and did so for most of the game.
1st quarter, 5:28 to 0:00: (Harris/Watson)-(Bell/Howard)-(Hayward/Miles)-(Jefferson/Kanter)-Favors. In other words, every other position turned over, and the team managed to go from 13-6 deficit to 23-18 deficit, thus possibly calling into question the value of a "tight" rotation with minimized substitutions. Net +/-: +2.
2nd quarter, 12:00 to 6:22: Watson-CJ-Howard-(Kanter/Jefferson)-Favors. Ginobili made three treys and another FG; Bonner chipped in another trey. Some JazzFanz (including myself) have expressed skepticism about playing DF and EK together. But the big problem here was playing Howard and CJ together; Miles is a lazy defender, and I don't buy Howard's D yet, despite his reputation. Corbin is partially to blame for this (for not enforcing the 3-point defense and for playing two youngins simultaneously). Yet low or no Spurs points were scored inside. Jazz go from 23-18 to 42-28. Net +/-: -9.
3rd quarter, 6:39 to 0:00: (Harris/Watson)-(Bell/Howard)-(Miles/Hayward)-(Jefferson/Kanter)-Favors. Jefferson scores nothing and picks up two fouls before going out at 4:48. Kanter scores 1 FT; Favors scores nothing. If Millsap was avaialble, I would've preferred him alongside Favors instead of Kanter (based on the 2nd quarter experience); hopefully an astute coach would pick up on that. Utah goes from 63-48 to 83-60 (-1 with Jefferson-Favors; -7 with Kanter-Favors). Net +/-: -8.
4th quarter, 12:00 to 9:52: Watson-Howard-Hayward-Jefferson-Favors. Anderson scores a trey; Blair scores a layup and draws the foul from Hayward. Favors took no shots. UJ goes from a 83-60 deficit to 88-62. Net +/-: -3 (-4 with the and-1).
4th quarter, 3:00 to 0:00: Tinsley-(Hayward/Burks)-(Howard/Evans)-Favors-Kanter. Kanter had 1 FG and 2 FTs; Favors had 2 FTs. Splitter had a reverse layup and a jump shot (thanks to a Favors defensive goaltend). Utah went from 97-79 deficit to 104-89. Net +/-: +3.
Yeah. Coach, you have exactly one quarter to figure out whether Favors-Kanter works on that given night. Go.
Last edited:
Edit: Actually, the Jazz were -15 per 48 minutes, which equals to -0.3 pts per minute. So Favors with 23 minutes played should have been -7 to be on average. He was below average, but the more important question is whether he was outplayed by the players he played against.
Last edited:
InGameStrategy
Well-Known Member
Right. And the analysis above suggests that Favors did fair to middling vs. his matchups, and that the poor perimeter defense was likely a larger contributor to Favors' subpar +/- than Favors' own performance; the decision to play Favors and Kanter together--thus reducing the scoring against a highly veteran Spurs team--was probably another factor.
So Corbin deserves some of the blame for Favors' poor +/-. He continues to refuse to play Burks for any minimal length of time, so he doesn't really know what Burks can do. He continues to start Bell, even though Bell's contribution is not readily evident at best and a damaging negative at worst. ("Team leaders" can still be effective as backups, Ty.) And he continues to tolerate poor defense--especially Saturday's anemic 3-point defense--from a wide range of players; see the highlights on NBA.com for multiple examples (Hayward, Jefferson, etc.).
These are things that are not necessarily dependent on coaches' or players' experience; it doesn't take a HoF coach (not that our previous HoFer recognized it) that Bell sucks or Jefferson is lazy or that Burks has more value than 2 to 3 garbage minutes per game right now, not to mention Burks' likely huge upside, easily leapfrogging the ability of an aging SG whose greatest claim to fame is clotheslining Kobe. For starters. Literally.
cctrackstar
Well-Known Member
Locke doesn't like +/- either, that's why he uses so many other types of stats, to the point of creating his own. (locke offensive rating)
Is anyone truly suprised that a sophmore player who hardly played during his first year is struggling? Also, maybe, just maybe it had something to do with the fact that he was guarding/driving into Tim Duncan, a sure thing hall of fame player.
just because
Well-Known Member
I think teams shoot well against the jazz because of the double teaming. Jefferson is so weak at defending the post that anytime his guy gets the ball it's an automatic double team which leaves shooters open. Favors on the other hand can handle the job by himself most of the time which allows defenders to stay home on the shooters. I think Millsap is leans towards the favors side as well although not as strong as Favors.