What's new
By:

2025 Utah Jazz All-Time Bad Draft

GunterD said:
I think you're not. Basketball Reference has Dwill starting only 47 games that year. Says he started games 9-28 (with one game missed), but then went back to the bench for games 29-54, before starting the rest of the way. It also says McCleod started 32 and Palacio started 18 with a stretch that they apparently both started together.
Click to expand...
I remember it well. I has season tickets and grew increasingly frustrated watching McLeod and Palacio play over D-Will, when anyone with even the smallest of discernment could see that D-Will was the far superior player. Plus, he was the #3 pick, people were excited about seeing him play, and here he is being passed over in favor of two at best replacement level journeymen.Sloan's rationale was something like "I don't start rookies, they have to earn it, grumble, grumble, " old-school nonsense. (That's, at least, one side of the story.) Meanwhile, Chris Paul was starting as a rookie and getting all kinds of attention and kudos. It played with D-Will's head, creating a good deal of resentment toward Sloan.
 
I’m not old enough to know how he was for us as a player, but I envision his role as more of a player/coach, and in that role he should more than earn his keep.

My final pick is Ty Corbin
IMG_2043.jpeg

This gives me a final lineup of

Milt Palacio
Keyonte George
Ty Corbin
Trey Lyles
Jeff Withey
 
Danny Schayes (9.6 ppg)
DeShawn Stevenson (5.9 ppg)
John Crotty (3.7 ppg)
Adam Keefe (5.2 ppg)
Kyrylo FESENKO~! (2.3 ppg)

My squad may have a whopping 29.7 ppg total, but watching Crotty Keefe and Kyrylo clogging the paint will look like a Three Stooges routine gone wrong.
 
Coach Ellis said:
I’d love to see what a reverse tournament in this thing would look like - except the teams that lose advance instead of the winners.
Click to expand...
Depends on what we are voting on. If we are voting which team would win in the matchup then advancing the losing team makes sense. If we are voting which team would lose the matchup then you have to advance the winning team.
 
LogGrad98 said:
Depends on what we are voting on. If we are voting which team would win in the matchup then advancing the losing team makes sense. If we are voting which team would lose the matchup then you have to advance the winning team.
Click to expand...
Yeah. I see what you’re saying.

I think we’d probably need to vote for the winner and advance the loser. I was thinking more along the lines of a simulation though that ignores our personal biases.
 
I ran @Zombie's team and mine through Grok and this is what it thought:

First Lineup Recap (Schayes, Stevenson, Crotty, Keefe, Fesenko)​


  • Danny Schayes (F, 9.6 PPG): A serviceable big man in his era, Schayes was a decent rebounder and post player but lacked the athleticism or scoring punch to anchor a starting lineup. His 9.6 PPG suggests a role player, not a primary option.
  • DeShawn Stevenson (SG, 5.9 PPG): Known more for his defense and later 3-point shooting, Stevenson at this stage was a raw, low-scoring guard. He’d provide some perimeter tenacity but little offensive creation.
  • John Crotty (PG, 3.7 PPG): A journeyman point guard, Crotty was a backup at best, with limited scoring and playmaking. He’d struggle to run an NBA offense effectively.
  • Adam Keefe (SF, 5.2 PPG): Keefe was a hustle player, good for rebounds and defense but not a scoring threat. His role was complementary, not foundational.
  • Kyrylo Fesenko (C, 2.3 PPG): Fesenko was a project player with size but minimal impact. His low scoring and limited mobility make him a liability against starting-caliber centers.

Second Lineup Analysis (Palacio, George, Corbin, Lyles, Withey)​


  • Milt Palacio (PG, ~4.0 PPG with Jazz): A backup point guard during his Jazz stint (2000-02), Palacio averaged around 4-5 PPG across his career. He was a decent passer but lacked scoring punch or elite playmaking, similar to Crotty but slightly more athletic.
  • Keyonte George (SG, ~13.0 PPG in 2023-24): A recent Jazz draft pick, George showed promise as a rookie, averaging 13.0 PPG with 2.8 RPG and 4.4 APG in 2023-24. He’s a combo guard with scoring ability, decent shooting (33.4% from three), and some playmaking, making him the clear offensive centerpiece of this lineup.
  • Ty Corbin (SF, ~8.5 PPG with Jazz): Corbin, a Jazz stalwart in the ’80s and ’90s, was a reliable role player, averaging around 8-9 PPG during his Jazz tenure. A solid defender and rebounder for a wing, he lacked elite scoring or athleticism.
  • Trey Lyles (PF, ~6.2 PPG with Jazz): Lyles, a stretch four, averaged 6.2 PPG in his Jazz years (2015-17). He offered some floor-spacing with a 31.8% three-point shot but was inconsistent and not a strong defender or rebounder.
  • Jeff Withey (C, ~3.3 PPG with Jazz): A backup center, Withey averaged 3.3 PPG in limited minutes with the Jazz (2015-16). He was a decent shot-blocker but offensively limited and not a dominant rebounder.
  • Estimated Total PPG: ~35.0 (based on career/Jazz averages). This is higher than the first lineup’s 26.7 PPG, largely due to Keyonte George’s scoring.

Comparison​


  1. Offense:
    • First Lineup: Abysmal scoring (26.7 PPG combined). No player averages double digits, and there’s no primary scorer or playmaker. Crotty’s limited facilitation and the lack of shooters (Stevenson’s three-point shooting developed later) make this a stagnant offense.
    • Second Lineup: Significantly better, thanks to Keyonte George’s 13.0 PPG and playmaking (4.4 APG). Lyles adds some stretch-four shooting, and Corbin provides steady wing scoring. Palacio and Withey are low-output, but the lineup has more balance and a clear go-to player in George. Estimated 35.0 PPG gives them a moderate edge.
    • Edge: Second lineup, by a wide margin.
  2. Defense:
    • First Lineup: Stevenson and Keefe are solid defenders, with Stevenson capable of guarding perimeter players and Keefe offering hustle in the paint. Schayes and Fesenko, however, are slow and struggle against mobile bigs. Crotty’s defense is average at best.
    • Second Lineup: Corbin is a reliable wing defender, and Withey’s shot-blocking adds rim protection. George is young and scrappy but not elite defensively. Palacio is decent but undersized, and Lyles was a weak defender during his Jazz tenure. Overall, this group has slightly better defensive versatility due to Withey’s blocks and Corbin’s reliability.
    • Edge: Second lineup, slightly, due to Withey’s rim protection.
  3. Playmaking:
    • First Lineup: Crotty’s limited passing (career 2.1 APG) and no other real facilitators cripple this team’s ability to create shots.
    • Second Lineup: George (4.4 APG) and Palacio (career ~2.5 APG) provide better ball movement. George’s ability to create his own shot and set up teammates makes this lineup far more dynamic.
    • Edge: Second lineup, decisively.
  4. Rebounding:
    • First Lineup: Schayes and Keefe are solid rebounders for their roles, but Fesenko’s limited impact and the guards’ lack of boards weaken this area.
    • Second Lineup: Corbin contributes on the glass, but Lyles and Withey were average at best for bigs. George adds some guard rebounding. Neither lineup dominates here.
    • Edge: First lineup, slightly, due to Schayes and Keefe.
  5. Fit and Era:
    • First Lineup: Players from different eras (’80s-2000s) with an old-school, plodding style. No floor-spacing or modern versatility.
    • Second Lineup: More modern, with George and Lyles offering some perimeter shooting. Players span ’80s to 2020s, but George’s contemporary skill set (shooting, creation) aligns better with today’s NBA.
    • Edge: Second lineup for better fit in a modern or even historical context.

Hypothetical Matchup​


In a head-to-head game, the second lineup wins comfortably. Keyonte George’s scoring and playmaking would exploit Crotty’s weak defense and the first lineup’s lack of shot creation. Withey’s rim protection could neutralize Schayes and Fesenko’s limited post game, while Corbin and Lyles stretch the defense more than anyone on the first team. The first lineup’s hustle might keep it close early, but their offense would stall, likely leading to a blowout (e.g., 90-70 in a full game).


Overall Assessment​


  • First Lineup: A gritty but offensively anemic team, suited for a low-scoring, defensive battle but outclassed by most NBA lineups.
  • Second Lineup: More balanced, with George as a legitimate scoring and playmaking threat, plus better shooting and defensive versatility. Still not a playoff-caliber unit, but far more competitive.

Winner: The Palacio-George-Corbin-Lyles-Withey lineup is clearly superior, primarily due to George’s modern skill set and the team’s better offensive cohesion.
 
Hornacekamania said:
I ran @Zombie's team and mine through Grok and this is what it thought:

First Lineup Recap (Schayes, Stevenson, Crotty, Keefe, Fesenko)​


  • Danny Schayes (F, 9.6 PPG): A serviceable big man in his era, Schayes was a decent rebounder and post player but lacked the athleticism or scoring punch to anchor a starting lineup. His 9.6 PPG suggests a role player, not a primary option.
  • DeShawn Stevenson (SG, 5.9 PPG): Known more for his defense and later 3-point shooting, Stevenson at this stage was a raw, low-scoring guard. He’d provide some perimeter tenacity but little offensive creation.
  • John Crotty (PG, 3.7 PPG): A journeyman point guard, Crotty was a backup at best, with limited scoring and playmaking. He’d struggle to run an NBA offense effectively.
  • Adam Keefe (SF, 5.2 PPG): Keefe was a hustle player, good for rebounds and defense but not a scoring threat. His role was complementary, not foundational.
  • Kyrylo Fesenko (C, 2.3 PPG): Fesenko was a project player with size but minimal impact. His low scoring and limited mobility make him a liability against starting-caliber centers.

Second Lineup Analysis (Palacio, George, Corbin, Lyles, Withey)​


  • Milt Palacio (PG, ~4.0 PPG with Jazz): A backup point guard during his Jazz stint (2000-02), Palacio averaged around 4-5 PPG across his career. He was a decent passer but lacked scoring punch or elite playmaking, similar to Crotty but slightly more athletic.
  • Keyonte George (SG, ~13.0 PPG in 2023-24): A recent Jazz draft pick, George showed promise as a rookie, averaging 13.0 PPG with 2.8 RPG and 4.4 APG in 2023-24. He’s a combo guard with scoring ability, decent shooting (33.4% from three), and some playmaking, making him the clear offensive centerpiece of this lineup.
  • Ty Corbin (SF, ~8.5 PPG with Jazz): Corbin, a Jazz stalwart in the ’80s and ’90s, was a reliable role player, averaging around 8-9 PPG during his Jazz tenure. A solid defender and rebounder for a wing, he lacked elite scoring or athleticism.
  • Trey Lyles (PF, ~6.2 PPG with Jazz): Lyles, a stretch four, averaged 6.2 PPG in his Jazz years (2015-17). He offered some floor-spacing with a 31.8% three-point shot but was inconsistent and not a strong defender or rebounder.
  • Jeff Withey (C, ~3.3 PPG with Jazz): A backup center, Withey averaged 3.3 PPG in limited minutes with the Jazz (2015-16). He was a decent shot-blocker but offensively limited and not a dominant rebounder.
  • Estimated Total PPG: ~35.0 (based on career/Jazz averages). This is higher than the first lineup’s 26.7 PPG, largely due to Keyonte George’s scoring.

Comparison​


  1. Offense:
    • First Lineup: Abysmal scoring (26.7 PPG combined). No player averages double digits, and there’s no primary scorer or playmaker. Crotty’s limited facilitation and the lack of shooters (Stevenson’s three-point shooting developed later) make this a stagnant offense.
    • Second Lineup: Significantly better, thanks to Keyonte George’s 13.0 PPG and playmaking (4.4 APG). Lyles adds some stretch-four shooting, and Corbin provides steady wing scoring. Palacio and Withey are low-output, but the lineup has more balance and a clear go-to player in George. Estimated 35.0 PPG gives them a moderate edge.
    • Edge: Second lineup, by a wide margin.
  2. Defense:
    • First Lineup: Stevenson and Keefe are solid defenders, with Stevenson capable of guarding perimeter players and Keefe offering hustle in the paint. Schayes and Fesenko, however, are slow and struggle against mobile bigs. Crotty’s defense is average at best.
    • Second Lineup: Corbin is a reliable wing defender, and Withey’s shot-blocking adds rim protection. George is young and scrappy but not elite defensively. Palacio is decent but undersized, and Lyles was a weak defender during his Jazz tenure. Overall, this group has slightly better defensive versatility due to Withey’s blocks and Corbin’s reliability.
    • Edge: Second lineup, slightly, due to Withey’s rim protection.
  3. Playmaking:
    • First Lineup: Crotty’s limited passing (career 2.1 APG) and no other real facilitators cripple this team’s ability to create shots.
    • Second Lineup: George (4.4 APG) and Palacio (career ~2.5 APG) provide better ball movement. George’s ability to create his own shot and set up teammates makes this lineup far more dynamic.
    • Edge: Second lineup, decisively.
  4. Rebounding:
    • First Lineup: Schayes and Keefe are solid rebounders for their roles, but Fesenko’s limited impact and the guards’ lack of boards weaken this area.
    • Second Lineup: Corbin contributes on the glass, but Lyles and Withey were average at best for bigs. George adds some guard rebounding. Neither lineup dominates here.
    • Edge: First lineup, slightly, due to Schayes and Keefe.
  5. Fit and Era:
    • First Lineup: Players from different eras (’80s-2000s) with an old-school, plodding style. No floor-spacing or modern versatility.
    • Second Lineup: More modern, with George and Lyles offering some perimeter shooting. Players span ’80s to 2020s, but George’s contemporary skill set (shooting, creation) aligns better with today’s NBA.
    • Edge: Second lineup for better fit in a modern or even historical context.

Hypothetical Matchup​


In a head-to-head game, the second lineup wins comfortably. Keyonte George’s scoring and playmaking would exploit Crotty’s weak defense and the first lineup’s lack of shot creation. Withey’s rim protection could neutralize Schayes and Fesenko’s limited post game, while Corbin and Lyles stretch the defense more than anyone on the first team. The first lineup’s hustle might keep it close early, but their offense would stall, likely leading to a blowout (e.g., 90-70 in a full game).


Overall Assessment​


  • First Lineup: A gritty but offensively anemic team, suited for a low-scoring, defensive battle but outclassed by most NBA lineups.
  • Second Lineup: More balanced, with George as a legitimate scoring and playmaking threat, plus better shooting and defensive versatility. Still not a playoff-caliber unit, but far more competitive.

Winner: The Palacio-George-Corbin-Lyles-Withey lineup is clearly superior, primarily due to George’s modern skill set and the team’s better offensive cohesion.
Click to expand...
Can you do more. Would be interested to see how mine fairs as there is definitely 0 talent on my team.
 
Hornacekamania said:
I ran @Zombie's team and mine through Grok and this is what it thought:

First Lineup Recap (Schayes, Stevenson, Crotty, Keefe, Fesenko)​


  • Danny Schayes (F, 9.6 PPG): A serviceable big man in his era, Schayes was a decent rebounder and post player but lacked the athleticism or scoring punch to anchor a starting lineup. His 9.6 PPG suggests a role player, not a primary option.
  • DeShawn Stevenson (SG, 5.9 PPG): Known more for his defense and later 3-point shooting, Stevenson at this stage was a raw, low-scoring guard. He’d provide some perimeter tenacity but little offensive creation.
  • John Crotty (PG, 3.7 PPG): A journeyman point guard, Crotty was a backup at best, with limited scoring and playmaking. He’d struggle to run an NBA offense effectively.
  • Adam Keefe (SF, 5.2 PPG): Keefe was a hustle player, good for rebounds and defense but not a scoring threat. His role was complementary, not foundational.
  • Kyrylo Fesenko (C, 2.3 PPG): Fesenko was a project player with size but minimal impact. His low scoring and limited mobility make him a liability against starting-caliber centers.

Second Lineup Analysis (Palacio, George, Corbin, Lyles, Withey)​


  • Milt Palacio (PG, ~4.0 PPG with Jazz): A backup point guard during his Jazz stint (2000-02), Palacio averaged around 4-5 PPG across his career. He was a decent passer but lacked scoring punch or elite playmaking, similar to Crotty but slightly more athletic.
  • Keyonte George (SG, ~13.0 PPG in 2023-24): A recent Jazz draft pick, George showed promise as a rookie, averaging 13.0 PPG with 2.8 RPG and 4.4 APG in 2023-24. He’s a combo guard with scoring ability, decent shooting (33.4% from three), and some playmaking, making him the clear offensive centerpiece of this lineup.
  • Ty Corbin (SF, ~8.5 PPG with Jazz): Corbin, a Jazz stalwart in the ’80s and ’90s, was a reliable role player, averaging around 8-9 PPG during his Jazz tenure. A solid defender and rebounder for a wing, he lacked elite scoring or athleticism.
  • Trey Lyles (PF, ~6.2 PPG with Jazz): Lyles, a stretch four, averaged 6.2 PPG in his Jazz years (2015-17). He offered some floor-spacing with a 31.8% three-point shot but was inconsistent and not a strong defender or rebounder.
  • Jeff Withey (C, ~3.3 PPG with Jazz): A backup center, Withey averaged 3.3 PPG in limited minutes with the Jazz (2015-16). He was a decent shot-blocker but offensively limited and not a dominant rebounder.
  • Estimated Total PPG: ~35.0 (based on career/Jazz averages). This is higher than the first lineup’s 26.7 PPG, largely due to Keyonte George’s scoring.

Comparison​


  1. Offense:
    • First Lineup: Abysmal scoring (26.7 PPG combined). No player averages double digits, and there’s no primary scorer or playmaker. Crotty’s limited facilitation and the lack of shooters (Stevenson’s three-point shooting developed later) make this a stagnant offense.
    • Second Lineup: Significantly better, thanks to Keyonte George’s 13.0 PPG and playmaking (4.4 APG). Lyles adds some stretch-four shooting, and Corbin provides steady wing scoring. Palacio and Withey are low-output, but the lineup has more balance and a clear go-to player in George. Estimated 35.0 PPG gives them a moderate edge.
    • Edge: Second lineup, by a wide margin.
  2. Defense:
    • First Lineup: Stevenson and Keefe are solid defenders, with Stevenson capable of guarding perimeter players and Keefe offering hustle in the paint. Schayes and Fesenko, however, are slow and struggle against mobile bigs. Crotty’s defense is average at best.
    • Second Lineup: Corbin is a reliable wing defender, and Withey’s shot-blocking adds rim protection. George is young and scrappy but not elite defensively. Palacio is decent but undersized, and Lyles was a weak defender during his Jazz tenure. Overall, this group has slightly better defensive versatility due to Withey’s blocks and Corbin’s reliability.
    • Edge: Second lineup, slightly, due to Withey’s rim protection.
  3. Playmaking:
    • First Lineup: Crotty’s limited passing (career 2.1 APG) and no other real facilitators cripple this team’s ability to create shots.
    • Second Lineup: George (4.4 APG) and Palacio (career ~2.5 APG) provide better ball movement. George’s ability to create his own shot and set up teammates makes this lineup far more dynamic.
    • Edge: Second lineup, decisively.
  4. Rebounding:
    • First Lineup: Schayes and Keefe are solid rebounders for their roles, but Fesenko’s limited impact and the guards’ lack of boards weaken this area.
    • Second Lineup: Corbin contributes on the glass, but Lyles and Withey were average at best for bigs. George adds some guard rebounding. Neither lineup dominates here.
    • Edge: First lineup, slightly, due to Schayes and Keefe.
  5. Fit and Era:
    • First Lineup: Players from different eras (’80s-2000s) with an old-school, plodding style. No floor-spacing or modern versatility.
    • Second Lineup: More modern, with George and Lyles offering some perimeter shooting. Players span ’80s to 2020s, but George’s contemporary skill set (shooting, creation) aligns better with today’s NBA.
    • Edge: Second lineup for better fit in a modern or even historical context.

Hypothetical Matchup​


In a head-to-head game, the second lineup wins comfortably. Keyonte George’s scoring and playmaking would exploit Crotty’s weak defense and the first lineup’s lack of shot creation. Withey’s rim protection could neutralize Schayes and Fesenko’s limited post game, while Corbin and Lyles stretch the defense more than anyone on the first team. The first lineup’s hustle might keep it close early, but their offense would stall, likely leading to a blowout (e.g., 90-70 in a full game).


Overall Assessment​


  • First Lineup: A gritty but offensively anemic team, suited for a low-scoring, defensive battle but outclassed by most NBA lineups.
  • Second Lineup: More balanced, with George as a legitimate scoring and playmaking threat, plus better shooting and defensive versatility. Still not a playoff-caliber unit, but far more competitive.

Winner: The Palacio-George-Corbin-Lyles-Withey lineup is clearly superior, primarily due to George’s modern skill set and the team’s better offensive cohesion.
Click to expand...
This is pretty much my thoughts on this hypothetical matchup.
 
Breaking up the analysis to to character count...

1. Miggs​


Selections:


  • Round 1: Trey Burke (PG)
  • Round 2: Ronnie Price (PG/SG)
  • Round 3: Devin Brown (SG/SF)
  • Round 4: Tom Boswell (PF/C)
  • Round 5: James Hardy (SF/PF)

Starting Lineup:


  • PG: Trey Burke
  • SG: Ronnie Price
  • SF: Devin Brown
  • PF: James Hardy
  • C: Tom Boswell

Analysis:


  • Trey Burke (PG): Selected ninth overall in the 2013 NBA Draft, Burke was a high-profile pick after a stellar college career at Michigan. However, his tenure with the Jazz was underwhelming. At 6’1” and 185 lbs, his small stature limited his defensive impact, and his inefficiency (37.8% FG, 34.4% 3P over three seasons) and high turnover rate (1.8 TOV/game) made him a liability. His usage rate (21.8%) was high, but he struggled to create efficient offense, averaging 10.6 PPG and 3.6 APG in 26.0 MPG. Burke’s inability to live up to his draft billing makes him a fitting choice for a “worst” lineup.
  • Ronnie Price (SG): A journeyman guard, Price spent parts of five seasons with the Jazz (2007–11). At 6’2”, he was a tenacious defender but a woeful offensive player. His career averages with Utah (4.1 PPG, 1.5 APG, 38.9% FG, 29.0% 3P) reflect his limited scoring ability. Price’s hustle was admirable, but his lack of offensive production and poor shooting make him a drag on any lineup. Playing him at SG alongside Burke creates a backcourt with minimal scoring punch and poor spacing.
  • Devin Brown (SF): Brown played one season with the Jazz (2006–07), appearing in 49 games (14 starts). His 4.6 PPG on 38.8% FG and 21.4% 3P in 17.0 MPG were unimpressive. At 6’5”, he offered some defensive versatility but lacked the athleticism or skill to make a significant impact. His role as a bench wing who couldn’t shoot or create efficiently fits the “worst” theme, especially at SF, where the Jazz needed scoring.
  • James Hardy (PF): A second-round pick in 1978, Hardy played one season with the Jazz (1978–79), averaging 5.7 PPG and 4.9 RPG in 21.6 MPG across 68 games. At 6’8”, he was a decent rebounder but lacked the scoring or defensive prowess to stand out. His limited skill set and brief tenure make him a forgettable piece, and his lack of shooting or playmaking hurts the frontcourt.
  • Tom Boswell (C): Boswell played two seasons with the Jazz (1979–81), averaging 6.3 PPG and 3.9 RPG in 15.7 MPG. At 6’9”, he was undersized for a center and lacked the defensive presence or rebounding dominance needed for the role. His offensive game was limited to low-post scoring, with no range or passing ability. As the anchor of this lineup, he provides little rim protection or spacing.

Team Fit and Weaknesses:


  • Offense: This lineup is an offensive disaster. Burke and Price form a tiny, inefficient backcourt with no reliable outside shooting (both sub-35% from three). Brown’s poor shooting further clogs the perimeter, while Hardy and Boswell offer no floor-spacing in the frontcourt. The team would struggle to score, relying on Burke’s shaky playmaking and mid-range shots. Turnovers would be rampant due to Burke’s ball-handling and Price’s limited vision.
  • Defense: Defensively, the team is undersized and weak. Burke and Price are too small to guard most guards, and Brown lacks the lateral quickness for elite wing defense. Hardy and Boswell are undersized for their positions, offering minimal rim protection (Boswell’s 0.5 BPG) or rebounding (Hardy’s 4.9 RPG). Opponents would exploit this team inside and out.
  • Overall: Miggs’ team excels at being bad. The lack of shooting, size, and star power ensures this unit would struggle to compete. The backcourt’s inefficiency and the frontcourt’s lack of versatility make this a well-crafted “worst” lineup.

Grade: A (for being appropriately terrible)



2. Hornacekmania​


Selections:


  • Round 1: Kyrylo Fesenko (C)
  • Round 2: Adam Keefe (PF)
  • Round 3: John Crotty (PG)
  • Round 4: DeShawn Stevenson (SG)
  • Round 5: Danny Schayes (C)

Starting Lineup:


  • PG: John Crotty
  • SG: DeShawn Stevenson
  • SF: Adam Keefe
  • PF: Danny Schayes
  • C: Kyrylo Fesenko

Analysis:


  • John Crotty (PG): Crotty played parts of four seasons with the Jazz (1992–95, 1999–2000), averaging 3.7 PPG and 1.5 APG in 10.3 MPG. At 6’1”, he was a scrappy backup but lacked the skill to be a starter. His 43.2% FG and 30.6% 3P were passable, but his minimal offensive output and average defense make him a poor fit as a starting PG. His role was strictly as a low-minute reserve, which suits this lineup’s theme.
  • DeShawn Stevenson (SG): A first-round pick in 2000, Stevenson spent four seasons with the Jazz (2000–04), averaging 8.3 PPG on 42.7% FG and 29.5% 3P. At 6’5”, he had the size for a wing but struggled with efficiency and decision-making. His defense was decent, but his inability to develop into a reliable scorer or shooter (1.9 APG, 1.8 TOV/game) made him a disappointment for a lottery pick.
  • Adam Keefe (SF): Keefe spent six seasons with the Jazz (1994–2000), averaging 4.2 PPG and 3.3 RPG in 15.9 MPG. At 6’9”, he was a hustle player but lacked the athleticism or skill to play SF effectively. His 55.4% FG was decent, but he had no outside shot (0.0% 3P) and limited offensive impact. Playing him at SF in this lineup is a mismatch, as he’s too slow to guard wings.
  • Danny Schayes (PF): Schayes played parts of two seasons with the Jazz (1981–83), averaging 7.1 PPG and 5.0 RPG in 19.8 MPG. At 6’11”, he was a serviceable big but lacked the physicality or defense to excel. His 47.8% FG and minimal shot-blocking (0.6 BPG) made him a forgettable piece. At PF, he offers rebounding but little else.
  • Kyrylo Fesenko (C): A second-round pick in 2007, Fesenko played four seasons with the Jazz (2007–11), averaging 2.0 PPG and 1.8 RPG in 8.3 MPG. At 7’1” and 280 lbs, he had the size but lacked skill, mobility, and basketball IQ. His 50.8% FG was decent, but his 0.3 BPG and frequent foul trouble (2.0 PF/game) limited his impact. As the starting center, he’s a plodding, ineffective presence.

Team Fit and Weaknesses:


  • Offense: This lineup lacks any semblance of offensive cohesion. Crotty and Stevenson provide minimal scoring and poor shooting (both under 31% from three), while Keefe, Schayes, and Fesenko offer no perimeter threat. The offense would grind to a halt, relying on inefficient mid-range shots and post-ups from Schayes and Fesenko, who aren’t skilled enough to carry the load.
  • Defense: Defensively, the team is slow and uncoordinated. Crotty is too small to bother opposing guards, and Stevenson’s defense is average at best. Keefe at SF is a disaster, as he can’t keep up with quicker wings. Schayes and Fesenko are big but lack the lateral quickness or shot-blocking to protect the rim effectively. Opponents would feast on drives and pick-and-rolls.
  • Overall: Hornacekmania’s team is a masterclass in mediocrity. The combination of undersized guards, a misplaced PF at SF, and two plodding bigs ensures this unit would struggle on both ends. The lack of shooting, playmaking, and defensive versatility makes this a strong contender for the worst possible Jazz lineup.

Grade: A-



3. Ferguson​


Selections:


  • Round 1: John Amaechi (PF/C)
  • Round 2: Diante Garrett (PG)
  • Round 3: Jamie Watson (SF)
  • Round 4: Marc Iavaroni (PF)
  • Round 5: Jacque Vaughn (PG)

Starting Lineup:


  • PG: Jacque Vaughn
  • SG: Diante Garrett
  • SF: Jamie Watson
  • PF: John Amaechi
  • C: Marc Iavaroni

Analysis:


  • Jacque Vaughn (PG): Vaughn played one season with the Jazz (1997–98), averaging 3.1 PPG and 1.9 APG in 11.5 MPG. At 6’1”, he was a decent passer but lacked scoring ability (41.8% FG, 33.3% 3P) and defensive impact. His limited role as a backup and short tenure make him a fitting pick for a “worst” lineup.
  • Diante Garrett (SG): Garrett played parts of two seasons with the Jazz (2012–14), averaging 3.1 PPG and 1.4 APG in 12.3 MPG. At 6’4”, he had size for a guard but was inefficient (38.1% FG, 25.0% 3P) and offered little defensively. Playing him at SG highlights his lack of shooting and offensive creation.
  • Jamie Watson (SF): Watson played one season with the Jazz (1994–95), averaging 3.3 PPG and 1.2 RPG in 11.2 MPG. At 6’7”, he had the size for a wing but lacked the skill or athleticism to make an impact (46.9% FG, 18.2% 3P). His minimal production and brief stint make him a non-factor.
  • John Amaechi (PF): Amaechi played two seasons with the Jazz (1999–2001), averaging 2.8 PPG and 1.9 RPG in 10.9 MPG. At 6’10”, he had the size but was slow and ineffective, with a 41.2% FG and no outside shot. His lack of athleticism and defensive presence made him a benchwarmer at best.
  • Marc Iavaroni (C): Iavaroni played parts of three seasons with the Jazz (1984–86), averaging 3.0 PPG and 2.8 RPG in 12.9 MPG. At 6’8”, he was undersized for a center, offering little rim protection (0.3 BPG) or offensive skill (46.0% FG). His hustle was notable, but his impact was negligible.

Team Fit and Weaknesses:


  • Offense: This lineup is offensively barren. Vaughn and Garrett form a backcourt with no scoring threat (combined 6.2 PPG in Utah) and abysmal shooting. Watson’s 18.2% 3P at SF ensures no spacing, while Amaechi and Iavaroni lack the skill to score efficiently in the post. The team would struggle to break 80 points per game.
  • Defense: Defensively, the team is equally poor. Vaughn and Garrett are undersized and ineffective, while Watson lacks the quickness to guard wings. Amaechi and Iavaroni are too slow and small to protect the rim or rebound effectively (combined 4.7 RPG). Pick-and-roll defense would be a nightmare.
  • Overall: Ferguson’s team is a perfect storm of ineffectiveness. The lack of size, shooting, and skill across all positions ensures this lineup would be outmatched in every facet. The absence of any standout talent makes this one of the weakest teams drafted.

Grade: A



4. David Hume​


Selections:


  • Round 1: Melvin Turpin (C)
  • Round 2: Raul Lopez (PG)
  • Round 3: Erick Leckner (C)
  • Round 4: Quincy Lewis (SF)
  • Round 5: Carey Scurry (SF/PF)

Starting Lineup:


  • PG: Raul Lopez
  • SG: Quincy Lewis
  • SF: Carey Scurry
  • PF: Erick Leckner
  • C: Melvin Turpin

Analysis:


  • Raul Lopez (PG): A first-round pick in 2001, Lopez played two seasons with the Jazz (2002–04), averaging 6.5 PPG and 3.1 APG in 18.1 MPG. Injuries derailed his career, and his 44.3% FG and 29.4% 3P were underwhelming. At 6’1”, he was a liability defensively, making him a poor fit as a starting PG.
  • Quincy Lewis (SG): Lewis, a 1999 first-round pick, played three seasons with the Jazz (1999–2002), averaging 3.8 PPG and 1.3 RPG in 12.5 MPG. At 6’7”, he had size but was inefficient (41.9% FG, 33.3% 3P) and lacked playmaking or defensive impact. Playing him at SG is awkward, as he’s better suited for SF.
  • Carey Scurry (SF): Scurry played two seasons with the Jazz (1985–87), averaging 4.6 PPG and 2.4 RPG in 12.9 MPG. At 6’7”, he was athletic but wildly inefficient (44.4% FG, 20.0% 3P) and turnover-prone (1.2 TOV/game). His hustle didn’t compensate for his lack of skill.
  • Erick Leckner (PF): A 1988 first-round pick, Leckner played three seasons with the Jazz (1988–91), averaging 3.7 PPG and 2.6 RPG in 10.7 MPG. At 6’11”, he had size but was slow and ineffective (49.9% FG, 0.3 BPG). His lack of athleticism and minimal impact make him a poor PF.
  • Melvin Turpin (C): Turpin played one season with the Jazz (1989–90), averaging 4.7 PPG and 3.0 RPG in 13.9 MPG. At 6’11”, he was a decent scorer but a poor defender and rebounder for a center. His 52.6% FG was solid, but his overall impact was minimal, fitting the “bust” narrative.

Team Fit and Weaknesses:


  • Offense: The offense is clunky and limited. Lopez’s injury-prone playmaking and poor shooting don’t mesh with Lewis’s inefficiency at SG. Scurry’s athleticism adds some energy, but his poor decision-making and shooting hurt spacing. Leckner and Turpin can score in the post but offer no range or playmaking, clogging the paint.
  • Defense: Defensively, the team is a mess. Lopez is too small, Lewis and Scurry lack defensive IQ, and Leckner and Turpin are slow-footed bigs with minimal shot-blocking (combined 0.5 BPG). The team would be torched by guards and bigs alike.
  • Overall: Hume’s team is a collection of underachieving draft picks and injury-plagued players. The lack of cohesion, shooting, and defensive prowess makes this a strong “worst” lineup, though Turpin’s modest scoring prevents it from being the absolute worst.

Grade: A-



5. Elizah Huge​


Selections:


  • Round 1: Curtis Borchardt (C)
  • Round 2: Jamal Tinsley (PG)
  • Round 3: Jarron Collins (C)
  • Round 4: Thabo Sefolosha (SG/SF)
  • Round 5: Carlos Arroyo (PG)

Starting Lineup:


  • PG: Jamal Tinsley
  • SG: Carlos Arroyo
  • SF: Thabo Sefolosha
  • PF: Jarron Collins
  • C: Curtis Borchardt

Analysis:


  • Jamal Tinsley (PG): Tinsley played one season with the Jazz (2009–10), averaging 4.8 PPG and 4.3 APG in 15.8 MPG. At 6’3”, he was a solid passer but inefficient (40.4% FG, 17.9% 3P) and past his prime. His turnovers (1.7 TOV/game) and lack of scoring make him a poor lead guard.
  • Carlos Arroyo (SG): Arroyo spent three seasons with the Jazz (2002–05), averaging 8.8 PPG and 3.6 APG in 23.0 MPG. His 44.1% FG and 32.5% 3P were decent, but he was a limited scorer and defender. At 6’2”, playing him at SG alongside Tinsley creates a tiny, defensively weak backcourt.
  • Thabo Sefolosha (SF): Sefolosha played two seasons with the Jazz (2017–19), averaging 6.3 PPG and 3.9 RPG in 21.2 MPG. At 6’6”, he was a solid defender but a poor shooter (45.3% FG, 34.6% 3P). His offensive limitations, especially in Utah’s system, make him a questionable fit at SF.
  • Jarron Collins (PF): Collins spent eight seasons with the Jazz (2001–09), averaging 4.2 PPG and 3.1 RPG in 18.2 MPG. At 6’11”, he was a hustle player but lacked athleticism, scoring, or defense (0.2 BPG). Playing him at PF is a stretch, as he’s better suited for center.
  • Curtis Borchardt (C): A 2002 first-round pick, Borchardt played two seasons with the Jazz (2002–04), averaging 3.1 PPG and 3.3 RPG in 13.5 MPG. Injuries limited him to 83 games, and his 41.7% FG and 0.4 BPG were disappointing for a 7-footer. His lack of durability and impact makes him a classic bust.

Team Fit and Weaknesses:


  • Offense: The offense is stagnant. Tinsley and Arroyo are pass-first guards with poor shooting, and Sefolosha’s limited scoring doesn’t help. Collins and Borchardt offer no spacing or dynamic scoring, relying on hustle plays that rarely materialize. The team would struggle to create open looks.
  • Defense: Sefolosha is the only plus defender, but he’s not elite enough to carry the unit. Tinsley and Arroyo are undersized and exploitable, while Collins and Borchardt lack the mobility or shot-blocking to anchor the paint. This team would leak points at every position.
  • Overall: Elizah Huge’s team is a mix of injury-prone busts and limited role players. The lack of shooting, size mismatches (Collins at PF), and defensive weaknesses make this a strong “worst” candidate, though Sefolosha’s defense slightly elevates it above the worst.

Grade: A-



6. Soberas​


Selections:


  • Round 1: Jeremy Evans (SF/PF)
  • Round 2: Scott Padgett (PF)
  • Round 3: Olden Polynice (C)
  • Round 4: Gordan Giricek (SG)
  • Round 5: Duck Williams (PG)

Starting Lineup:


  • PG: Duck Williams
  • SG: Gordan Giricek
  • SF: Jeremy Evans
  • PF: Scott Padgett
  • C: Olden Polynice

Analysis:


  • Duck Williams (PG): Williams played one season with the Jazz (1982–83), averaging 6.0 PPG and 3.2 APG in 19.6 MPG. At 6’2”, he was a decent passer but inefficient (43.6% FG, 20.0% 3P) and a defensive liability. His limited impact and brief tenure make him a fitting pick.
  • Gordan Giricek (SG): Giricek played parts of three seasons with the Jazz (2002–04), averaging 8.6 PPG on 43.8% FG and 34.0% 3P in 20.9 MPG. At 6’6”, he was a decent shooter but inconsistent and offered little defensively or as a playmaker (1.4 APG). His one-dimensional game limits his fit.
  • Jeremy Evans (SF): A 2010 second-round pick, Evans spent six seasons with the Jazz (2010–15), averaging 3.5 PPG and 2.6 RPG in 11.6 MPG. At 6’9”, he was an athletic dunker but lacked skill (53.0% FG, 22.2% 3P). Playing him at SF is a disaster due to his nonexistent shooting and ball-handling.
  • Scott Padgett (PF): Padgett played two seasons with the Jazz (1999–2001), averaging 2.6 PPG and 1.9 RPG in 10.0 MPG. At 6’9”, he was a stretch big but wildly inefficient (40.5% FG, 31.3% 3P) and offered little defensively. His minimal impact fits the theme.
  • Olden Polynice (C): Polynice played parts of three seasons with the Jazz (1985–87), averaging 7.0 PPG and 5.9 RPG in 20.4 MPG. At 6’11”, he was a solid rebounder but inefficient (50.7% FG) and a poor defender (0.4 BPG). His lack of versatility hurts the lineup.

Team Fit and Weaknesses:


  • Offense: The offense is disjointed. Williams and Giricek provide some scoring but poor efficiency and no playmaking. Evans and Padgett lack the skill to stretch the floor or create, and Polynice’s post game is limited. The team would struggle with spacing and turnovers.
  • Defense: Defensively, the team is porous. Williams is too small, Giricek is average, and Evans is out of position at SF. Padgett and Polynice offer size but lack the mobility or shot-blocking to deter opponents. This unit would be exploited in every area.
  • Overall: Soberas’ team is a collection of limited role players and misfits. Evans at SF is particularly egregious, and the lack of shooting, defense, and star power makes this a strong “worst” lineup.

Grade: A
 

7. Gunter D​


Selections:


  • Round 1: Keith McLeod (PG)
  • Round 2: Jeff Foster (PF/C)
  • Round 3: Chris Morris (SF)
  • Round 4: Mark Jackson (PG)
  • Round 5: Hassan Whiteside (C)

Starting Lineup:


  • PG: Keith McLeod
  • SG: Mark Jackson
  • SF: Chris Morris
  • PF: Jeff Foster
  • C: Hassan Whiteside

Analysis:


  • Keith McLeod (PG): McLeod played two seasons with the Jazz (2004–06), averaging 5.9 PPG and 2.5 APG in 20.0 MPG. At 6’2”, he was a decent defender but inefficient (37.6% FG, 29.8% 3P) and limited as a playmaker. His lack of scoring punch fits the “worst” theme.
  • Mark Jackson (SG): Jackson played one season with the Jazz (1999–2000), averaging 4.6 PPG and 3.8 APG in 17.2 MPG. At 6’1”, he was a skilled passer but past his prime, with poor shooting (41.7% FG, 28.6% 3P). Playing him at SG alongside McLeod creates a tiny, non-shooting backcourt.
  • Chris Morris (SF): Morris played three seasons with the Jazz (1988–91), averaging 6.0 PPG and 2.9 RPG in 14.8 MPG. At 6’8”, he was athletic but inconsistent (43.8% FG, 27.3% 3P) and offered little defensively. His lack of polish makes him a fit for this lineup.
  • Jeff Foster (PF): Foster played one season with the Jazz (1999–2000), averaging 2.3 PPG and 2.1 RPG in 11.0 MPG. At 6’11”, he was a hustle player but lacked skill (45.4% FG, 0.1 BPG). His minimal impact makes him a forgettable piece.
  • Hassan Whiteside (C): Whiteside played one season with the Jazz (2021–22), averaging 8.2 PPG and 7.6 RPG in 17.9 MPG. At 7’0”, he was a solid rebounder and shot-blocker (1.6 BPG) but inefficient (65.2% FG, no 3P) and a poor fit in Utah’s system. His attitude and limited offensive game hurt his tenure.

Team Fit and Weaknesses:


  • Offense: The offense is abysmal. McLeod and Jackson are non-shooters (combined 29.2% 3P), and Morris adds little scoring. Foster and Whiteside clog the paint, with Whiteside’s rim-running as the only positive. The lack of spacing and playmaking would stall the offense.
  • Defense: Whiteside’s shot-blocking is the only defensive strength, but his poor mobility limits his impact. McLeod and Jackson are undersized, Morris is average, and Foster lacks athleticism. The team would struggle against versatile offenses.
  • Overall: Gunter D’s team is dragged down by its backcourt and lack of offensive firepower. Whiteside’s rebounding and blocks provide some value, but the overall lack of cohesion and skill makes this a solid “worst” lineup.

Grade: B+



8. Thee​


Selections:


  • Round 1: Kris Humphries (PF)
  • Round 2: Delaney Rudd (PG)
  • Round 3: Mike Brown (C)
  • Round 4: David Benoit (SF)
  • Round 5: Chris Johnson (SG)

Starting Lineup:


  • PG: Delaney Rudd
  • SG: Chris Johnson
  • SF: David Benoit
  • PF: Kris Humphries
  • C: Mike Brown

Analysis:


  • Delaney Rudd (PG): Rudd played three seasons with the Jazz (1989–92), averaging 3.4 PPG and 1.7 APG in 9.8 MPG. At 6’2”, he was a decent shooter (40.9% FG, 31.3% 3P) but offered little else. His minimal role and lack of impact make him a fitting pick.
  • Chris Johnson (SG): Johnson played one season with the Jazz (2012–13), averaging 2.0 PPG in 7.2 MPG. At 6’6”, he had size but was ineffective (44.0% FG, 33.8% 3P) and offered no playmaking or defense. His obscurity makes him ideal for this lineup.
  • David Benoit (SF): Benoit played six seasons with the Jazz (1991–96), averaging 7.3 PPG and 3.9 RPG in 19.8 MPG. At 6’8”, he was athletic but inconsistent (45.0% FG, 28.8% 3P). His decent production makes him one of the better players here, but he’s still a limited role player.
  • Kris Humphries (PF): A 2004 first-round pick, Humphries played two seasons with the Jazz (2004–06), averaging 3.7 PPG and 2.8 RPG in 11.6 MPG. At 6’9”, he was a decent rebounder but inefficient (41.0% FG) and offered little defensively. His lack of development in Utah fits the theme.
  • Mike Brown (C): Brown played three seasons with the Jazz (1988–91), averaging 4.1 PPG and 3.5 RPG in 14.8 MPG. At 6’9”, he was undersized for a center, with minimal shot-blocking (0.2 BPG) and poor efficiency (50.2% FG). His lack of impact rounds out the lineup.

Team Fit and Weaknesses:


  • Offense: The offense is limited. Rudd and Johnson provide no scoring threat, and Benoit’s inconsistent shooting doesn’t help. Humphries and Brown are inefficient in the post, with no range to stretch the floor. The team would struggle to generate points.
  • Defense: Benoit’s athleticism is the only defensive asset, but it’s not enough. Rudd and Johnson are liabilities, and Humphries and Brown lack the size or mobility to protect the rim. This team would be exposed on every possession.
  • Overall: Thee’s team is a collection of forgettable role players with no standout qualities. Benoit’s relative competence slightly elevates the lineup, but the lack of shooting, playmaking, and defense makes this a strong “worst” candidate.

Grade: A-



9. Coach Ellis​


Selections:


  • Round 1: Talen Horton-Tucker (SG)
  • Round 2: Enes Kanter (C)
  • Round 3: Sasha Pavlovic (SF)
  • Round 4: Boris Diaw (PF)
  • Round 5: Ochai Agbaji (SG/SF)

Starting Lineup:


  • PG: Talen Horton-Tucker
  • SG: Ochai Agbaji
  • SF: Sasha Pavlovic
  • PF: Boris Diaw
  • C: Enes Kanter

Analysis:


  • Talen Horton-Tucker (PG): THT played three seasons with the Jazz (2022–25), averaging 9.8 PPG and 3.0 APG in 22.1 MPG. At 6’4”, he was a decent slasher but wildly inefficient (41.6% FG, 30.0% 3P) and turnover-prone (1.7 TOV/game). Playing him at PG highlights his poor playmaking and decision-making.
  • Ochai Agbaji (SG): Agbaji played two seasons with the Jazz (2022–24), averaging 6.7 PPG and 1.9 RPG in 19.7 MPG. At 6’5”, he was a decent defender but a poor shooter (42.7% FG, 33.1% 3P). His lack of offensive impact fits the “worst” theme.
  • Sasha Pavlovic (SF): Pavlovic played two seasons with the Jazz (2003–05), averaging 5.3 PPG and 1.6 RPG in 15.2 MPG. At 6’7”, he had size but was inefficient (41.3% FG, 28.2% 3P) and offered little defensively. His minimal impact makes him a good pick.
  • Boris Diaw (PF): Diaw played one season with the Jazz (2016–17), averaging 4.6 PPG and 2.3 APG in 17.6 MPG. At 6’8”, he was a versatile passer but past his prime, with poor shooting (44.6% FG, 24.7% 3P) and no defensive presence. His lackluster stint in Utah fits the theme.
  • Enes Kanter (C): A third-overall pick in 2011, Kanter played four seasons with the Jazz (2011–15), averaging 9.0 PPG and 5.5 RPG in 20.7 MPG. At 6’11”, he was a solid scorer but a horrific defender (0.3 BPG, poor mobility). His inability to protect the rim or stretch the floor made him a bust for a top-three pick.

Team Fit and Weaknesses:


  • Offense: The offense has some scoring from Kanter, but THT’s inefficiency and Agbaji’s poor shooting kill spacing. Pavlovic and Diaw add little offensively, with no reliable outside threat. The team would rely on Kanter’s post-ups, which are easily defended.
  • Defense: Kanter’s defensive deficiencies are glaring, and THT and Agbaji are average at best. Pavlovic and Diaw lack the athleticism or effort to make an impact. This team would be shredded by any competent offense.
  • Overall: Coach Ellis’ team has a bit more scoring than others due to Kanter, but the lack of defense, shooting, and playmaking makes it a strong “worst” contender. THT at PG is particularly disastrous.

Grade: B+



10. Domino​


Selections:


  • Round 1: Cody Williams (SF)
  • Round 2: Dante Exum (PG)
  • Round 3: Ekpe Udoh (C)
  • Round 4: Trent Forrest (PG/SG)
  • Round 5: Jonas Jerebko (PF)

Starting Lineup:


  • PG: Dante Exum
  • SG: Trent Forrest
  • SF: Cody Williams
  • PF: Jonas Jerebko
  • C: Ekpe Udoh

Analysis:


  • Dante Exum (PG): A fifth-overall pick in 2014, Exum played three seasons with the Jazz (2014–17), averaging 5.7 PPG and 2.2 APG in 20.0 MPG. Injuries derailed his career, and his 42.2% FG and 29.5% 3P were disappointing. His lack of development as a playmaker or scorer makes him a bust.
  • Trent Forrest (SG): Forrest played four seasons with the Jazz (2020–24), averaging 2.8 PPG and 1.4 APG in 11.4 MPG. At 6’4”, he was a decent defender but offered no offense (44.8% FG, 18.5% 3P). Playing him at SG highlights his lack of scoring.
  • Cody Williams (SF): A 2024 first-round pick, Williams played one season with the Jazz (2024–25), averaging modest stats (exact numbers unavailable due to recent data). At 6’8”, he was a raw prospect with potential but struggled with efficiency and impact as a rookie. His inclusion is speculative but fits due to his unproven status.
  • Jonas Jerebko (PF): Jerebko played two seasons with the Jazz (2017–19), averaging 5.8 PPG and 3.3 RPG in 15.3 MPG. At 6’10”, he was a decent shooter (41.4% 3P) but offered little else (0.2 BPG, minimal playmaking). His role was limited, fitting the theme.
  • Ekpe Udoh (C): Udoh played one season with the Jazz (2017–18), averaging 2.6 PPG and 2.4 RPG in 12.9 MPG. At 6’10”, he was a solid shot-blocker (1.2 BPG) but offensively limited (50.0% FG, no 3P). His minimal impact makes him a good pick.

Team Fit and Weaknesses:


  • Offense: The offense is nonexistent. Exum and Forrest are non-shooters, and Williams’ rookie struggles add no firepower. Jerebko’s shooting is the only positive, but Udoh’s lack of scoring clogs the paint. The team would struggle to score efficiently.
  • Defense: Udoh’s shot-blocking and Forrest’s perimeter defense provide some value, but Exum and Williams are average, and Jerebko is a liability. The team lacks the cohesion to stop opponents effectively.
  • Overall: Domino’s team is a mix of busts (Exum, Williams) and limited role players. The lack of offensive firepower and inconsistent defense make this a strong “worst” lineup, though Udoh’s blocks slightly elevate it.

Grade: A-



11. Saint Cy of JFC​


Selections:


  • Round 1: Earl Watson (PG)
  • Round 2: Rudy Gay (SF)
  • Round 3: Elijah Millsap (SG/SF)
  • Round 4: Greg Ostertag (C)
  • Round 5: Isaiah Collier (PG)

Starting Lineup:


  • PG: Earl Watson
  • SG: Elijah Millsap
  • SF: Rudy Gay
  • PF: Isaiah Collier
  • C: Greg Ostertag

Analysis:


  • Earl Watson (PG): Watson played three seasons with the Jazz (2002–05), averaging 5.6 PPG and 3.5 APG in 20.8 MPG. At 6’1”, he was a solid defender but a poor shooter (42.1% FG, 28.8% 3P). His limited offensive impact fits the theme.
  • Elijah Millsap (SG): Millsap played two seasons with the Jazz (2014–16), averaging 3.8 PPG and 2.3 RPG in 15.8 MPG. At 6’6”, he was a hustle player but inefficient (38.7% FG, 28.6% 3P) and offered little offensively or defensively.
  • Rudy Gay (SF): Gay played one season with the Jazz (2021–22), averaging 8.1 PPG and 4.4 RPG in 18.9 MPG. At 6’8”, he was past his prime, with decent shooting (38.5% 3P) but minimal defensive impact. His lackluster stint in Utah makes him a fit.
  • Isaiah Collier (PF): A 2024 first-round pick, Collier played one season with the Jazz (2024–25), with modest stats (exact numbers unavailable). At 6’4”, playing him at PF is a massive mismatch, as he’s a guard with unproven NBA impact. His inclusion is speculative but disastrous.
  • Greg Ostertag (C): Ostertag played 10 seasons with the Jazz (1995–2004, 2005–06), averaging 4.6 PPG and 5.5 RPG in 20.7 MPG. At 7’2”, he was a decent shot-blocker (1.6 BPG) but offensively limited (48.8% FG, no 3P) and slow-footed.

Team Fit and Weaknesses:


  • Offense: Gay’s shooting provides some spacing, but Watson and Millsap are non-factors, and Collier at PF is unworkable. Ostertag’s post game is limited, and the team lacks playmaking. Scoring would be a struggle.
  • Defense: Ostertag’s shot-blocking and Watson’s perimeter defense are decent, but Millsap and Gay are average, and Collier at PF would be obliterated. The team’s size mismatch and lack of versatility would be exploited.
  • Overall: Saint Cy’s team is hurt by Collier’s absurd position and the lack of offensive firepower. Ostertag and Gay provide some competence, but the overall fit is poor, making this a solid “worst” lineup.

Grade: B+



12. Zombie​


Selections:


  • Round 1: Milt Palacio (PG)
  • Round 2: Jeff Withey (C)
  • Round 3: Keyonte George (PG)
  • Round 4: Trey Lyles (PF)
  • Round 5: Ty Corbin (SF)

Starting Lineup:


  • PG: Milt Palacio
  • SG: Keyonte George
  • SF: Ty Corbin
  • PF: Trey Lyles
  • C: Jeff Withey

Analysis:


  • Milt Palacio (PG): Palacio played two seasons with the Jazz (2002–04), averaging 4.3 PPG and 1.9 APG in 16.2 MPG. At 6’3”, he was a decent defender but inefficient (46.8% FG, 22.2% 3P) and offered little playmaking. His minimal impact fits the theme.
  • Keyonte George (SG): A 2023 first-round pick, George played two seasons with the Jazz (2023–25), averaging around 10 PPG (exact stats unavailable). At 6’4”, he’s a scoring guard but inefficient (low 40s FG%, mid-30s 3P%) and a poor defender. His inclusion is speculative but reflects his struggles.
  • Ty Corbin (SF): Corbin played three seasons with the Jazz (1989–91), averaging 6.1 PPG and 2.8 RPG in 16.5 MPG. At 6’6”, he was a hustle player but inefficient (44.2% FG, 0.0% 3P) and offered little defensively. His role was limited.
  • Trey Lyles (PF): A 2015 first-round pick, Lyles played two seasons with the Jazz (2015–17), averaging 6.2 PPG and 3.3 RPG in 17.2 MPG. At 6’10”, he was a decent shooter (36.2% 3P) but soft defensively and inconsistent. His underperformance fits the theme.
  • Jeff Withey (C): Withey played three seasons with the Jazz (2013–16), averaging 3.2 PPG and 2.5 RPG in 10.2 MPG. At 7’0”, he was a shot-blocker (1.0 BPG) but offensively limited (51.6% FG, no 3P) and too thin to hold his own.

Team Fit and Weaknesses:


  • Offense: George and Lyles provide some shooting, but Palacio and Corbin are non-threats, and Withey offers nothing outside the paint. The offense lacks cohesion and playmaking, relying on inefficient scoring from George.
  • Defense: Withey’s shot-blocking is a plus, but Palacio and George are weak on the perimeter, and Corbin and Lyles lack physicality. The team would struggle against versatile lineups.
  • Overall: Zombie’s team has a bit more offensive potential than others due to George and Lyles, but the lack of defense, playmaking, and overall fit makes it a strong “worst” contender.

Grade: B+
 
And I had the Grokster rank them from worst to least worst:
Below is a ranking of the 12 drafted Utah Jazz "worst" five-man teams from the message board draft, ordered from worst (most ineffective) to best (least ineffective), based on the analysis of each team’s offensive and defensive capabilities, player fit, and overall lack of impact during their time with the Jazz. The rankings prioritize teams that best embody the goal of being the least effective lineup, considering factors like poor shooting, defensive liabilities, size mismatches, and lack of cohesion. Each team is evaluated solely on the players’ performances with the Utah Jazz.



Ranking: Worst to Best​


  1. Miggs (Grade: A)
    • Lineup: PG Trey Burke, SG Ronnie Price, SF Devin Brown, PF James Hardy, C Tom Boswell
    • Why Worst: Miggs’ team is the epitome of a disastrous lineup. The backcourt of Burke and Price is tiny, inefficient (both sub-35% 3P), and turnover-prone, offering no reliable scoring or playmaking. Brown’s poor shooting (21.4% 3P) clogs the wing, while Hardy and Boswell are undersized, unskilled bigs with no range or defensive presence (combined 0.5 BPG). The complete lack of shooting, size, and star power makes this team unable to compete on either end, perfectly fulfilling the “worst” criteria.
    • Key Weakness: No spacing, no defense, no cohesion—every possession would be a struggle.
  2. Ferguson (Grade: A)
    • Lineup: PG Jacque Vaughn, SG Diante Garrett, SF Jamie Watson, PF John Amaechi, C Marc Iavaroni
    • Why Ranked Here: Ferguson’s team is a close second due to its utter lack of offensive firepower (Vaughn and Garrett combine for 6.2 PPG in Utah) and defensive vulnerabilities. The backcourt is undersized and non-threatening (Garrett’s 25.0% 3P), while Watson’s minimal impact (3.3 PPG) and Amaechi/Iavaroni’s lack of rim protection (0.5 BPG combined) make the frontcourt ineffective. This lineup would be outmatched in every facet, with no player capable of carrying any load.
    • Key Weakness: Zero offensive creators and a frontcourt too small and soft to compete.
  3. Soberas (Grade: A)
    • Lineup: PG Duck Williams, SG Gordan Giricek, SF Jeremy Evans, PF Scott Padgett, C Olden Polynice
    • Why Ranked Here: Soberas’ team is a masterclass in misfit pieces. Evans at SF is a disaster due to his nonexistent shooting (22.2% 3P) and ball-handling, while Williams and Giricek form an inefficient backcourt (combined 29.3% 3P). Padgett’s minimal impact (2.6 PPG) and Polynice’s limited skill set (0.4 BPG) ensure a weak frontcourt. The team’s lack of spacing, playmaking, and defensive cohesion makes it nearly as bad as Miggs’ and Ferguson’s.
    • Key Weakness: Evans’ positional mismatch and a complete lack of offensive versatility.
  4. Elizah Huge (Grade: A-)
    • Lineup: PG Jamal Tinsley, SG Carlos Arroyo, SF Thabo Sefolosha, PF Jarron Collins, C Curtis Borchardt
    • Why Ranked Here: This team is a collection of busts and limited role players. Tinsley and Arroyo’s tiny backcourt (both 6’2” or shorter) lacks shooting (17.9% and 32.5% 3P) and defensive prowess. Sefolosha’s defense is the only bright spot, but his offensive limitations (6.3 PPG) hurt. Collins at PF and Borchardt at C are underskilled and injury-prone (0.6 BPG combined). The team’s lack of size, shooting, and rim protection keeps it near the bottom.
    • Key Weakness: Collins at PF and a non-shooting backcourt cripple any offensive hope.
  5. Thee (Grade: A-)
    • Lineup: PG Delaney Rudd, SG Chris Johnson, SF David Benoit, PF Kris Humphries, C Mike Brown
    • Why Ranked Here: Thee’s team is a parade of obscurity, with Rudd and Johnson offering no offensive threat (combined 5.4 PPG) and poor defense. Benoit’s athleticism (7.3 PPG) is the only redeeming quality, but his inconsistency (28.8% 3P) limits his impact. Humphries and Brown are undersized and ineffective bigs (0.3 BPG combined). The team’s lack of shooting, playmaking, and defensive cohesion makes it a strong “worst” contender, though Benoit slightly elevates it.
    • Key Weakness: No offensive creators and a frontcourt lacking size or skill.
  6. David Hume (Grade: A-)
    • Lineup: PG Raul Lopez, SG Quincy Lewis, SF Carey Scurry, PF Erick Leckner, C Melvin Turpin
    • Why Ranked Here: Hume’s team combines busts (Lopez, Leckner) with limited role players. Lopez’s injury-plagued tenure (6.5 PPG, 29.4% 3P) and Lewis’s inefficiency (3.8 PPG) make the backcourt weak. Scurry’s athleticism is offset by poor decision-making (20.0% 3P), and Leckner/Turpin’s size offers modest scoring but no defense (0.5 BPG combined). The team’s lack of cohesion and defensive versatility keeps it low, but Turpin’s decent scoring (4.7 PPG) nudges it above Thee’s.
    • Key Weakness: Injury-prone guards and a slow, non-defensive frontcourt.
  7. Domino (Grade: A-)
    • Lineup: PG Dante Exum, SG Trent Forrest, SF Cody Williams, PF Jonas Jerebko, C Ekpe Udoh
    • Why Ranked Here: Domino’s team features high-profile bust Exum (5.7 PPG, 29.5% 3P) and unproven rookie Williams, paired with limited role players. Forrest’s defense is solid but his offense is nonexistent (18.5% 3P). Jerebko’s shooting (41.4% 3P) adds some spacing, and Udoh’s shot-blocking (1.2 BPG) provides a defensive anchor. The team’s offensive woes and Williams’ speculative struggles keep it low, but Udoh and Jerebko’s modest contributions lift it slightly.
    • Key Weakness: Exum’s bust status and a lack of offensive firepower.
  8. Hornacekmania (Grade: A-)
    • Lineup: PG John Crotty, SG DeShawn Stevenson, SF Adam Keefe, PF Danny Schayes, C Kyrylo Fesenko
    • Why Ranked Here: Hornacekmania’s team is a mess of slow bigs and inefficient guards. Crotty and Stevenson’s backcourt is undersized and non-shooting (30.6% and 29.5% 3P), while Keefe at SF is a positional nightmare (0.0% 3P). Schayes and Fesenko offer size but no mobility or skill (0.9 BPG combined). Stevenson’s modest scoring (8.3 PPG) gives a slight edge over lower-ranked teams, but the lack of cohesion and defense keeps it near the bottom.
    • Key Weakness: Keefe’s mismatch at SF and a plodding, non-shooting frontcourt.
  9. Coach Ellis (Grade: B+)
    • Lineup: PG Talen Horton-Tucker, SG Ochai Agbaji, SF Sasha Pavlovic, PF Boris Diaw, C Enes Kanter
    • Why Ranked Here: Coach Ellis’ team has more offensive potential than those below due to Kanter’s scoring (9.0 PPG) and Diaw’s passing (2.3 APG), but it’s still flawed. THT at PG is a disaster (30.0% 3P, 1.7 TOV/game), and Agbaji’s poor shooting (33.1% 3P) hurts spacing. Pavlovic adds little (5.3 PPG), and Kanter’s horrific defense (0.3 BPG) is a liability. The team’s slightly better scoring and versatility lift it above the worst, but it’s still ineffective.
    • Key Weakness: Kanter’s defensive issues and THT’s inefficiency at PG.
  10. Gunter D (Grade: B+)
    • Lineup: PG Keith McLeod, SG Mark Jackson, SF Chris Morris, PF Jeff Foster, C Hassan Whiteside
    • Why Ranked Here: Gunter D’s team benefits from Whiteside’s rebounding (7.6 RPG) and shot-blocking (1.6 BPG), but the backcourt of McLeod and Jackson is a non-shooting disaster (29.8% and 28.6% 3P). Morris and Foster add little offensively (6.0 and 2.3 PPG), and the team lacks playmaking. Whiteside’s defensive presence makes this team slightly less terrible than those below, but it’s still a poor fit.
    • Key Weakness: Tiny, inefficient backcourt and no offensive cohesion.
  11. Saint Cy of JFC (Grade: B+)
    • Lineup: PG Earl Watson, SG Elijah Millsap, SF Rudy Gay, PF Isaiah Collier, C Greg Ostertag
    • Why Ranked Here: Saint Cy’s team is elevated by Gay’s decent scoring (8.1 PPG, 38.5% 3P) and Ostertag’s shot-blocking (1.6 BPG). Watson’s defense is solid, but his offense (28.8% 3P) is lacking. Millsap’s minimal impact (3.8 PPG) and Collier’s absurd placement at PF (a 6’4” guard) tank the lineup’s effectiveness. The team’s slight offensive and defensive contributions make it less bad than others, but it’s still a mess.
    • Key Weakness: Collier’s positional mismatch and lack of offensive firepower.
  12. Zombie (Grade: B+)
    • Lineup: PG Milt Palacio, SG Keyonte George, SF Ty Corbin, PF Trey Lyles, C Jeff Withey
    • Why Ranked Here: Zombie’s team is the “best” of the worst due to George’s potential scoring (around 10 PPG) and Lyles’ shooting (36.2% 3P), which provide more offense than other teams. Withey’s shot-blocking (1.0 BPG) adds some defensive value. However, Palacio’s inefficiency (22.2% 3P) and Corbin’s limited impact (6.1 PPG) drag the team down, and the overall fit is poor. This team is still terrible but has the most redeemable qualities.
    • Key Weakness: Inefficient guards and lack of cohesive playmaking.


Summary​


  • Top Tier (Worst): Miggs, Ferguson, and Soberas crafted the most ineffective lineups, excelling in their lack of shooting, defense, and cohesion. Miggs’ team takes the crown for its complete absence of any redeeming qualities.
  • Middle Tier: Elizah Huge, Thee, David Hume, Domino, and Hornacekmania produced lineups with slight bright spots (e.g., Jerebko’s shooting, Benoit’s athleticism) but still embody the “worst” spirit with major flaws in fit and performance.
  • Bottom Tier (Least Bad): Coach Ellis, Gunter D, Saint Cy, and Zombie have players with some competence (Kanter, Whiteside, Gay, George), but positional mismatches, inefficiencies, and defensive issues ensure they remain poor teams.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top