What's new
By:
Filters

Start Mitchell at the Point.

Sandman822 said:
Current starting lineup is 88.4 DRTG, lineup with Crowder in for Favs is 79.1 DRTG. Very small sample size and like Cy has mentioned numerous times it's against mostly inferior competition so it's hard to know just how much noise is in those numbers.
Click to expand...
You gotta play who you play. I'm so tired of the opponent excuse. Just another example there can always be a stat found to prove or disprove any argument. Sure it helps to play easier teams, but we have had plenty of easy opponents early in the year where we struggled.

Regardless, losing all 3 PGs would lead to issues on almost every team. The fact that we haven't missed a beat and have actually started better makes me think we would be better down the road. Given a longer sample, my bet is we would beat those better opponents just the same.


Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
LoPo said:
So without Rubio and Exum, we are 1 point worse on D than in December. Good to know. Thanks.

With Mitchell in the starting lineup, arent our defensive numbers substantially better?

And with our blowouts lately, final scores can be misleading. Like against Cleveland when we let them make it look more respectable in the 4th quarter due to Grayson, Cavanaugh, Naz lineups.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...
Because the Jazz had no blowouts in December....
 
Are we also better defensively without Dante?

This argument is just so daft and based in a willful ignorance against context and facts.
 
People say I argue just to argue, but we got dudes trying to say we are a better defensive team without two of the better defensive players in the NBA. Real galaxy brain meme stuff.
 
LoPo said:
You gotta play who you play. I'm so tired of the opponent excuse. Just another example there can always be a stat found to prove or disprove any argument. Sure it helps to play easier teams, but we have had plenty of easy opponents early in the year where we struggled.

Regardless, losing all 3 PGs would lead to issues on almost every team. The fact that we haven't missed a beat and have actually started better makes me think we would be better down the road. Given a longer sample, my bet is we would beat those better opponents just the same.


Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...
You can't ignore the current schedule and say "I'm so tired of the opponent excuse" if we're also going to say things like "the Jazz have had the hardest schedule in the league so far" prior to this stretch. It goes both ways and to just brush it off to suit your narrative isn't really being objective.

The usual starting lineup with Crowder in instead of Favors is far better statistically than either one of the starting lineup variations with Mitchell so far as well on the offensive end (114.8 ORTG for our most played lineup vs 109.8 and 102.2 ORTG for the Favors and Crowder variations of our current starting lineup respectively). If you're going to not discredit the level of competition for our defense then where is all the talk about how our usual closing lineup is far superior offensively than either one of our current Mitchell at PG starting lineups?
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
Are we also better defensively without Dante?

This argument is just so daft and based in a willful ignorance against context and facts.
Click to expand...
I said that the defense being close to the same level despite not having Exum and Rubio was impressive. If we had Exum and no Rubio, I bet our defensive stats would be amazing.

My points are simple Sandman and Cy - without all 3 PGs, we have stayed strong regardless of competition. If we lost Gobert, we would have taken a step back regardless of competition. If we would have lost Mitchell, we would have taken a step back regardless of competition.

This thread is talking about starting Donovan at PG. I think we have been awesome the last few weeks regardless of competition. If he had a whole preseason or a longer stretch preparing as a starting PG, I think we become even better as a team. Regardless of competition.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
Off Rtg. of our latest opponents:
Magic #26
Lakers #21
Bulls #30
Pistons #23
Clippers #11
Cavaliers #24
 
Everyone can say all the words... here is the facts... both of the core lineups with DM at the pg have a net rating of +30.2 and +27.5 (starters with Jae and starters with Favs). Not a huge sample size and the competition has been bad... but it has worked really frickin well to date.

It could be a fluke or hot shooting or whatever... but it's dumb to completely dismiss how successful it has been. Ricky could come back and maybe we still kill it... last year the starters with Jae was +29.2 (was during the second half surge obviously).

I want to see it against better teams and over more minutes... but we are going into an offseason where we need to make hard choices. If we are just as good with Royce next to DM as we are with Ricky then that gives us freedom to improve in other places. Ricky may not cost a ton to retain... but he certainly gets more that Royce's minimum salary.
 
Everyone knows I'm on team DMPG. But I suspect our recent successes are more about the competition. We'll find out soon enough once our PGs are back.
 
Alfalfa said:
Everyone knows I'm on team DMPG. But I suspect our recent successes are more about the competition. We'll find out soon enough once our PGs are back.
Click to expand...

I am team DMPG as well, but it is more like team DM as primary creator with the ball and lets keep our minds open to what type of players fit with him.

Our next move could be to get a guy like OP jr. or Tobias or Brogdon or... and our best option may be DM as the pg. Maybe there is a big pg that comes and DM is a two... I just thing he looks more like a pg to me and he's going to be the primary playmaker anyway. We don't get to handpick the next guy to come in... we are kind of limited to whatever comes through the door or says yes. A guy who doesn't need the ball to be successful may fit better than someone who is good with it but has limited offball value.

I think we have a better chance at finding wing talent that fits than a pg with the skills and attributes we want next to him. He has thrived in the role against some bottom feeders, but they are still nba teams so let's not completely dismiss it.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
I am team DMPG as well, but it is more like team DM as primary creator with the ball and lets keep our minds open to what type of players fit with him.

Our next move could be to get a guy like OP jr. or Tobias or Brogdon or... and our best option may be DM as the pg. Maybe there is a big pg that comes and DM is a two... I just thing he looks more like a pg to me and he's going to be the primary playmaker anyway. We don't get to handpick the next guy to come in... we are kind of limited to whatever comes through the door or says yes. A guy who doesn't need the ball to be successful may fit better than someone who is good with it but has limited offball value.

I think we have a better chance at finding wing talent that fits than a pg with the skills and attributes we want next to him. He has thrived in the role against some bottom feeders, but they are still nba teams so let's not completely dismiss it.
Click to expand...

It's too bad we can't get someone like Beal. I'd much rather have DM-Beal backcourt with Gobert-Favors than Gobert-OPJr frontcourt with Exum-DM backcourt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top