DutchJazzer
Banned
but his defeatist loser attitude affected the whole team
Biggest Reason We Lost?
- Thread starter Saint Cy of JFC
- Start date
but his defeatist loser attitude affected the whole team
Coloradojazzfan
Active Member
Big Al gave up all of Parker's and Duncan's points combined.
Boozer's brother from another mother ****** son of a *****..... **** SALT!
Boozer's brother from another mother ****** son of a *****..... **** SALT!
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
Our offense lost us this series. You can all point to the fact that Al is an absolute defensive sieve (and he totally is), but that doesn't explain averaging 86 ppg in a series. Our offense, particularly our permitter shooting, was simply terrible. AS a result, the Spurs would clog the paint, and our paint-game was completely demolished. How Jefferson scored 26 tonight, I will never understand. Hayward averaging 45% from 3 would have changed this entire series, if he was attempting ~5 threes per game.
xellos88330
New Member
From a Spurs fans perspective, the Jazz would just run out of steam. It wasn't due to lack of effort from the Jazz players, but they could not sustain the high level of play they needed for the amount of stretches the Spurs force opponents to play at in order to beat them. The plethora of depth the Spurs enjoy is exactly the reason why the Jazz struggled. The Spurs offense doesn't fall apart when just 1 player is sent to the bench. It doesn't fall apart when all 5 players are switched. The Spurs always have pressure on the opponents defense no matter who is on the court, and most of all, they aren't scared to make mistakes.
I honestly think it was a deer in the headlights effect. For the most part, the Jazz played scared. Not scared of the Spurs, but scared of themselves. They were to scared to make any sort of mistakes and it caused them to be way too indecisive offensively and wasting precious seconds off of the shot clock. It forced Harris to do something, and all he could do at that point is throw it into the bigs and rely on their size to make lemonade. Size has been known to give the Spurs trouble... last season. This season, it is a different Spurs. It was not the answer. If I were a Jazz fan, I wouldn't be too upset though. The Jazz CLEARLY have a bright future ahead, and who knows what will happen should the team be able to practice and develop their players in a regularly scheduled season. I give Corbin a pass. It can't be easy to be a rookie coach in a shortened season and get matched up against an experienced and loaded Spurs team in the playoffs. I mean, how many of you really expected the Jazz to make the playoffs. I for one didn't.
I honestly think it was a deer in the headlights effect. For the most part, the Jazz played scared. Not scared of the Spurs, but scared of themselves. They were to scared to make any sort of mistakes and it caused them to be way too indecisive offensively and wasting precious seconds off of the shot clock. It forced Harris to do something, and all he could do at that point is throw it into the bigs and rely on their size to make lemonade. Size has been known to give the Spurs trouble... last season. This season, it is a different Spurs. It was not the answer. If I were a Jazz fan, I wouldn't be too upset though. The Jazz CLEARLY have a bright future ahead, and who knows what will happen should the team be able to practice and develop their players in a regularly scheduled season. I give Corbin a pass. It can't be easy to be a rookie coach in a shortened season and get matched up against an experienced and loaded Spurs team in the playoffs. I mean, how many of you really expected the Jazz to make the playoffs. I for one didn't.
Al's holding the ball in the post and lack of ability to pass out of it after the double team came hurt our outside shooting because many of the shots we got on the perimeter were tough, contested shots. Also, it results in the rest of the team standing and watching Al instead of making cuts. Nevertheless, we did miss many of the open shots we did get -- especially Hayward.
But I think the biggest reason we lost was playing Howard because he hurt the chemistry we had going into the playoffs. Just about everyone here was worried about this before the playoffs started and sure enough it proved to be a disaster. Al's playing in awe of Duncan and inability to stop penetration has to be second. Limited time for Favors in the first two game, third. And since two of those three are on Corbin, you have put him next in line.
But I think the biggest reason we lost was playing Howard because he hurt the chemistry we had going into the playoffs. Just about everyone here was worried about this before the playoffs started and sure enough it proved to be a disaster. Al's playing in awe of Duncan and inability to stop penetration has to be second. Limited time for Favors in the first two game, third. And since two of those three are on Corbin, you have put him next in line.
gregbroncs
Well-Known Member
We lost because they are a better team with a better coach.
We got destroyed because our coach is a basket case.
We got destroyed because our coach is a basket case.
Fixed.
Gyp Rosetti
Banned
I've seen a lot of answers all of which could be understood as true but for me, it's team defense.
Was Al individually awful? Yes, but so was Harris in slipping through screens and keeping Parker from penetrating. So were our bigs at making Parker pay when he did penetrate. So were others and not just Al at rotating both down low for help and out to the wings. I mean, how many open threes did the Spurs have? About four or five per game.
Team defense is the answer for me. Had we done all the little things right, take better angles, rotate quicker, and so forth, we'd have still lost, sure, but we'd have limited so many of the easy baskets the Spurs got. We'd have turned some of that good defense into easier (transition) offense (where we too struggled), much like we saw in the 4th quarter last night. If we played better team defense, we'd have had less 14-20 point deficits, and more 8-12 point ones that felt like they were manageable.
Team defense.
Was Al individually awful? Yes, but so was Harris in slipping through screens and keeping Parker from penetrating. So were our bigs at making Parker pay when he did penetrate. So were others and not just Al at rotating both down low for help and out to the wings. I mean, how many open threes did the Spurs have? About four or five per game.
Team defense is the answer for me. Had we done all the little things right, take better angles, rotate quicker, and so forth, we'd have still lost, sure, but we'd have limited so many of the easy baskets the Spurs got. We'd have turned some of that good defense into easier (transition) offense (where we too struggled), much like we saw in the 4th quarter last night. If we played better team defense, we'd have had less 14-20 point deficits, and more 8-12 point ones that felt like they were manageable.
Team defense.
squareinthecircle
Well-Known Member
That Spurs team is a well oiled machine. They were winning championships when they were first thrown together, and now have the benefit of knowing each others games intimately. Pop has that Spurs team so ready for any situation- I bet they run multiple plays for late game situations that they can run like clockwork with their eyes closed. And Pop pounds this stuff into their receptive heads. Just some of the reasons we lost.
