Jazz history, Status Quo and Social Media

[jimmy eat jazz]

Okay, it is more likely to help. Would you agree with that? Generally speaking, playing more minutes gives you a better chance to improve? I think it does.

Also, the youngs are handled differently than the vets. Vets can play ugly and get their minutes. The youngs screw up and they head to the bench. THAT is not good.

Case in point, vets routinely fall behind yet continue to play their allotted minutes. Youngs fall behind or lose lead and Corbin pulls the plug sending the vets back in. (Admittedly sometimes it does help stabilize things.)

 

[Lion's Roar]

I grew up in a soccer country which relates to this in two different ways.

First of all soccer leagues around the world are open leagues that means that you can't tank. If you lose you go to the minors you don't get rewarded for it. Because of this I don't stomach tanking all that well. You play to win and at the end of the day you figure out where you're at.

Second soccer leagues around the world don't use high schools or colleges as recruitment fields. Players are developed from 9 or 10 years old playing for the major clubs. They have youth leagues, initiate leagues, juvenile leagues, junior leagues and so forth but all this leagues are disputed by the same clubs that are in the majors with exceptions of course. That means that players can be 15 years old and be brought up to play for the pro teams (very unusual). I can tell you that only the absolute best talent gets called up and stays the course. Since soccer is a limited substitution sport a coach has to choose wisely who to play cause if he messes up he can only sub 3 out of 11 players. This means that most youth players get put in and out of the lineup quite frequently. That probably makes me accept a little bit more the idea of slowly developing talent. But there's a base to this. I want you guys to realize that there are actually sports where this is embraced and it seems to work quite well. And the idea is not a reach to apply to the NBA. Ask me to be honest and I will say I would want the C4 to play more. But I try to keep an open mind directed at the fact that the FO knows them better than I do. And they might be doing the right thing. We have to wait and see.

 

[Stoked]

Just because something was done in the past is not adequate defense for always doing the same thing.

The problem is Big Al and his no effort defense and Ty and his inability to make changes that are necessary to build for the future.

Now also you mention is the 7th seed and being 4 games over .500 not being good? Well no it is not when your team is capable of much more. If that is the limit of your capability then yea it is great. The Jazz have the talent and ability to be fighting for the 4th seed but they are not.

 

[Lion's Roar]

Thanks to all of those that welcomed me back. You're too kind.

And BTW I never really left. I just stopped posting.

 

[GVC]

We'll just have to agree to disagree that playing an extra 5-10 minutes per game would give the coaches, front office, and other people who see these players every day a much higher understanding of who they will be getting.

I'm not sure what difference 5-10 minutes per game would make, but there is some tradeoff. And, if 5-10 isn't enough, and you're sure that the current players aren't longterm pieces, that's more motivation to move those pieces sooner to not only give the youngs more time but also greater responsibility (leadership, crunch time, etc.). Granted, the potential money saved by not letting other teams get a look at your players might be more to your advantage before their first extension, regardless (since your coaching staff/FO has much more interaction with these players than opposing teams).

Anytime you sign a low-20s guy to 6 years, you are taking a chance, no matter how many minutes they play. Would you say the Jazz got what they expected/hoped from Deron Williams, for example?

After year 3, they had a pretty good idea that extending him for the max wouldn't backfire, so yeah. What Derrick will turn into in the next handful of years, with more time and a more prominent role, can't possibly be as clear as it was with Deron.

 

[franklin]

Welcome to Club Apologist, LR. Want a fly swatter? You'll need one.

[3] The Jazz offense had less movement in the early 90's (before Hornacek arrived) not only because the talent level around Stockton&Malone was poorer, but because the rules favored iso-ball. Illegal defenses encouraged 1-on-1 play and allowed Malone to be singled up on the block. If you fronted him it was a layup. Now teams can play in front of and behind Al and unless you can execute the high-low (Sap&Al can't) you have 4th-quarters like we saw against Chicago Friday night. And once the Jazz replaced JeffMalone w/Hornacek - the ball movement was on another level. Malone became one of the best low-post passers in the game as well. We didn't stand and watch, we cut down the lane, the guards would split, we kept moving which made double-teams alot harder and less effective.

This is why the current Jazz offense is so stagnant. That and young players needing time to learn and mesh. It sure as hell isn't some shortcoming of Ty Corbin. Hell, Ty would implement the triange & ball handling by committee with this pg-less group ifthe young guys were capable learners and competent players. Not only does Ty know Jerry ball, he knows every type of NBA offense inside and out, just like most head coaches in the league and veteran players alike.

Those of us who've read a playbook have seen CoTy try to implement just about every NBA play imaginable without much success worth writing home about. Prop to you on calling out the JeffySap high-low working, although I'd personally love to see more of it countering JeffyBall.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

I grew up in a soccer country which relates to this in two different ways.

First of all soccer leagues around the world are open leagues that means that you can't tank. If you lose you go to the minors you don't get rewarded for it. Because of this I don't stomach tanking all that well. You play to win and at the end of the day you figure out where you're at.

Second soccer leagues around the world don't use high schools or colleges as recruitment fields. Players are developed from 9 or 10 years old playing for the major clubs. They have youth leagues, initiate leagues, juvenile leagues, junior leagues and so forth but all this leagues are disputed by the same clubs that are in the majors with exceptions of course. That means that players can be 15 years old and be brought up to play for the pro teams (very unusual). I can tell you that only the absolute best talent gets called up and stays the course. Since soccer is a limited substitution sport a coach has to choose wisely who to play cause if he messes up he can only sub 3 out of 11 players. This means that most youth players get put in and out of the lineup quite frequently. That probably makes me accept a little bit more the idea of slowly developing talent. But there's a base to this. I want you guys to realize that there are actually sports where this is embraced and it seems to work quite well. And the idea is not a reach to apply to the NBA. Ask me to be honest and I will say I would want the C4 to play more. But I try to keep an open mind directed at the fact that the FO knows them better than I do. And they might be doing the right thing. We have to wait and see.

The one thing from soccer I would LOVE to see implemented in basketball is the 'advantage' rule; that is, in soccer, if a player gets fouled, the ref will often wait to blow the whistle to see how the play develops. If the offense doesn't lose advantage, or even gains advantage (or alternately the defense doesn't gain advantage), then the ref may choose not to blow the whistle. Adopting this rule would hopefully reduce the large number of ticky tack fouls in basketball that don't affect the outcome of the play. How it would be implemented practically in basketball, I'm not sure, but I like the concept.

 

[Lion's Roar]

The one thing from soccer I would LOVE to see implemented in basketball is the 'advantage' rule; that is, in soccer, if a player gets fouled, the ref will often wait to blow the whistle to see how the play develops. If the offense doesn't lose advantage, or even gains advantage (or alternately the defense doesn't gain advantage), then the ref may choose not to blow the whistle. Adopting this rule would hopefully reduce the large number of ticky tack fouls in basketball that don't affect the outcome of the play. How it would be implemented practically in basketball, I'm not sure, but I like the concept.

You should tweet this to #hoopidea . An ever better "advantage" rule is the rugby one.

 

[George]

Welcome to Club Apologist, LR. Want a fly swatter? You'll need one.




This is why the current Jazz offense is so stagnant. That and young players needing time to learn and mesh. It sure as hell isn't some shortcoming of Ty Corbin. Hell, Ty would implement the triange & ball handling by committee with this pg-less group ifthe young guys were capable learners and competent players. Not only does Ty know Jerry ball, he knows every type of NBA offense inside and out, just like most head coaches in the league and veteran players alike.

Those of us who've read a playbook have seen CoTy try to implement just about every NBA play imaginable without much success worth writing home about. Prop to you on calling out the JeffySap high-low working, although I'd personally love to see more of it countering JeffyBall.

Holy ****, this. I just ****ing love when I see posts along the lines of "I could pick a better coaching staff and FO from several posters here on Jazzfanz".



Get ****ing real.

-George

 

[One Brow]

Okay, it is more likely to help. Would you agree with that? Generally speaking, playing more minutes gives you a better chance to improve? I think it does.

Also, the youngs are handled differently than the vets. Vets can play ugly and get their minutes. The youngs screw up and they head to the bench. THAT is not good.

I agree that, in many circumstances, more minutes will mean improved development. I agree this is likely true for Favors and Kanter at this time.

I have not seen enough games to pass judgement on your second paragraph. I know I was disappointed in the Bulls game when, after having a very good 3rd quarter, Jefferson was not rested at the beginning of the fourth. So, my inclination based on that, and a handful of other, observations would be that Corbin has bought into the "hot hand" theory, and uses it instead of a good rotation. That could certainly account for keeping veterans in.

 

[GVC]

So, my inclination based on that, and a handful of other, observations would be that Corbin has bought into the "hot hand" theory, and uses it instead of a good rotation. That could certainly account for keeping veterans in.

He'll keep the veterans in whenever he has the opportunity/excuse to do so. We all see that. Corbin has also shown a willingness on occasion to go with Gordo, Favors and, more recently (largely due to injuries), Burks down the stretch. What Corbin has not done to this point is cut Al's minutes in favor of Kanter. With that said, and without the data to corroborate, Kanter does seem to play better in the first half than the second, and Al seems to play better in the second half than the first.

 

[One Brow]

I'm not sure what difference 5-10 minutes per game would make, but there is some tradeoff. ... Granted, the potential money saved by not letting other teams get a look at your players might be more to your advantage before their first extension, ...

After year 3, they had a pretty good idea that extending him for the max wouldn't backfire, so yeah.

I agree there is a tradeoff, but I don't think there is much real secrecy involved. That was not my point.

They knew Williams' talent was there, but I don't think they expected they would be trading him. Going back further, Kirilenko playing almost 2900 minutes in his third year didn't really give the Jazz a great idea of his ceiling.

Playing someone more or fewer minutes will not necessarily be more revealing, if at the end of the process they are still early 20s.

 

[GVC]

Playing someone more or fewer minutes will not necessarily be more revealing, if at the end of the process they are still early 20s.

And? All else equal, more information is going to be at least as good as less information. At some point the expected payoff of that information is going to exceed that of the payoff of making the players earn the time/learn from the sideline. Yes, fans have a tendency to overrate their young players, and are especially impatient with their lack of playing time when subjected to watching a perpetual rehash of a treadmill team, but from where I sit, Kanter and Favors are playing at a level that demands more time and responsibility (I don't have an issue with Burks' and Gordo's PT or role. I actually think Gordo's best role is as leader of the second team, instead of parked in the corner a la Marvin).

It's not time to freak out though; this summer will reveal a lot. For now, however, watching 5 starters, at least 4 of whom are not under contract for next season, play sleep/lazy dump-it-in-and-stand-around ball is not going to entertain me in the least. It won't lead to any meaningful playoff experience for the youngs either.

 

[vegas]

Great thread. Both sides posting valid arguments with supporting information, instead of name calling and opinion. Lots of posts deserve rep here.

Just for comparison:

player	oct	nov	dec	jan	feb		y1	y2	y3
Kanter	14.3	14.2	16.5	12.2	13.6		13.2	14.3	
Favors	18	23.1	20.9	21.1	23.8		19.7	20.2	22
Burks	2.3	9.8	13.2	16.1	25.3		15.9	15.4	
Hayward	23.8	28.6	24.8	26.4	inj		16	30.5	26.6
Millsap							18	20.8	30.1
CJ							8.8	10.1	11.5
Brewer							12.1	27.5	32.2
J Evans							9.4	7.5	5.5
Dwill							28.8	36.9	37.3
AK							26.2	27.7	37.1

This is all over the board, so I would like to hear thoughts. It is very clear that management really liked Dwill. Brewer seems to have earned his minutes, CJ also earned them after his best season in his 3rd yr and jumped to 22 mpg in yr #4. Millsap was a guy who worked his way up as well.

If I had to pick a theme it would be that historically guys haven't got mins until at least 21 yrs old. It appears that Favors is the exception here to an extent. If minutes say what the franchise believes about the C4, Hayward is a keeper (a bit more than a rotation player), and the other 3 look promising with Favors being the furthest along (yet not progressing much).

I would like to see a slow deliberate transition to the C4 being the new face of the franchise. At this point, Hayward is the only one that has seen a significant uptick in mins, the other 3 are barely increasing.

 

[George]

Great thread. Both sides posting valid arguments with supporting information, instead of name calling and opinion. Lots of posts deserve rep here.

Just for comparison:

player	oct	nov	dec	jan	feb		y1	y2	y3
Kanter	14.3	14.2	16.5	12.2	13.6		13.2	14.3	
Favors	18	23.1	20.9	21.1	23.8		19.7	20.2	22
Burks	2.3	9.8	13.2	16.1	25.3		15.9	15.4	
Hayward	23.8	28.6	24.8	26.4	inj		16	30.5	26.6
Millsap							18	20.8	30.1
CJ							8.8	10.1	11.5
Brewer							12.1	27.5	32.2
J Evans							9.4	7.5	5.5
Dwill							28.8	36.9	37.3

This is all over the board, so I would like to hear thoughts. It is very clear that management really liked Dwill. Brewer seems to have earned his minutes, CJ also earned them after his best season in his 3rd yr and jumped to 22 mpg in yr #4. Millsap was a guy who worked his way up as well.

If I had to pick a theme it would be that historically guys haven't got mins until at least 21 yrs old. It appears that Favors is the exception here to an extent. If minutes say what the franchise believes about the C4, Hayward is a keeper (a bit more than a rotation player), and the other 3 look promising with Favors being the furthest along (yet not progressing much).

I would like to see a slow deliberate transition to the C4 being the new face of the franchise. At this point, Hayward is the only one that has seen a significant uptick in mins, the other 3 are barely increasing.

Keep in mind, Millsap lost playing time in his 4th year. His 3rd year minutes were mainly due to boozer playing only 37 games that season.

Think of all the playing time Favors would get if Millsap only played 37 games this season

 

[babe]

I just got a grey rep and I don't know what that is. I also just figured out I got a red rep and some name calling quite a long time ago.

grey rep means someone repped you but they don't count because they're newbs, and presumably know nothing. . . . lol

 

[vslice02]

If I had to pick a theme it would be that historically guys haven't got mins until at least 21 yrs old. It appears that Favors is the exception here to an extent.

Andrei Kirilenko played 2000+ minutes and started the last half of his rookie season as a 20-year old. DeShawn Stevenson was given ample opportunites to win the starting SG spot as a 20 & 21 year-old but wasn't effective. Same with CJ Miles as a 19-year old in 2006-07.

If I had to pick a theme - it would be that prior to the past couple seasons - historically the Jazz play young players when they are ready to help the team win. I like the chart & numbers, but sometimes mpg isn't always indicative of opportunities to play.

 

[fishonjazz]

Great thread. Both sides posting valid arguments with supporting information, instead of name calling and opinion. Lots of posts deserve rep here.

Just for comparison:

player	oct	nov	dec	jan	feb		y1	y2	y3
Kanter	14.3	14.2	16.5	12.2	13.6		13.2	14.3	
Favors	18	23.1	20.9	21.1	23.8		19.7	20.2	22
Burks	2.3	9.8	13.2	16.1	25.3		15.9	15.4	
Hayward	23.8	28.6	24.8	26.4	inj		16	30.5	26.6
Millsap							18	20.8	30.1
CJ							8.8	10.1	11.5
Brewer							12.1	27.5	32.2
J Evans							9.4	7.5	5.5
Dwill							28.8	36.9	37.3

This is all over the board, so I would like to hear thoughts. It is very clear that management really liked Dwill. Brewer seems to have earned his minutes, CJ also earned them after his best season in his 3rd yr and jumped to 22 mpg in yr #4. Millsap was a guy who worked his way up as well.

If I had to pick a theme it would be that historically guys haven't got mins until at least 21 yrs old. It appears that Favors is the exception here to an extent. If minutes say what the franchise believes about the C4, Hayward is a keeper (a bit more than a rotation player), and the other 3 look promising with Favors being the furthest along (yet not progressing much).

I would like to see a slow deliberate transition to the C4 being the new face of the franchise. At this point, Hayward is the only one that has seen a significant uptick in mins, the other 3 are barely increasing.

yes your first sentence was correct (about the lack of name calling) then franklin showed up and started calling people "apoligists" and saying "you're gonna need a flyswatter".... then george shows up and starts with the cursing and criticizing of other peoples opinions.

 

[vegas]

Andrei Kirilenko played 2000+ minutes and started the last half of his rookie season as a 20-year old. DeShawn Stevenson was given ample opportunites to win the starting SG spot as a 20 & 21 year-old but wasn't effective. Same with CJ Miles as a 19-year old in 2006-07.

If I had to pick a theme - it would be that prior to the past couple seasons - historically the Jazz play young players when they are ready to help the team win. I like the chart & numbers, but sometimes mpg isn't always indicative of opportunities to play.

Thanks for the additional insight. I added AK to the list above. I can't believe I didn't put him up in the first place! Deshawn and CJ you have to go into the individual game logs and you can see some groups of games where they get mins. DeShawn even cracks 30 min a few times.

I also agree that data needs context and interpretation. However, there is nothing worse than somebody with blinders on posting baseless opinion.

yes your first sentence was correct (about the lack of name calling) then franklin showed up and started calling people "apoligists" and saying "you're gonna need a flyswatter".... then george shows up and starts with the cursing and criticizing of other peoples opinions.

What can I say. It took a bit to put that post together, plus multitasking...

 

[One Brow]

And? All else equal, more information is going to be at least as good as less information. At some point the expected payoff of that information is going to exceed that of the payoff of making the players earn the time/learn from the sideline.

I agreed with the rest of your post, for the most part. I'm just skeptical of this part. NBA history, including Jazz history, is replete with teams misestimating the abilities of players even after they played significant minutes, if they were still young at the time of their first extension. So, I don't see this as being a good motivation for getting them more playing time. I think they have earned more playing time, but for other reasons.