What's new
By:
Filters

The Ringer: Are The Utah Jazz Ready to Contend?

I disagree.

The jazz’s Contention status is dependent on Exum. Once Exum gets healthy he’ll be able to not brick wide open corner 3s, not lose the ball while dribbling, and won’t speed 100mph into the paint and chuck the ball at the backboard. He’ll be the franchise player, not Mitchell. I saw Exum guard Harden once.
 
Mitchell has had **** for help, and I think his rookie year tells us more about the heights he can achieve, his second year tells us more about his grit (I would wager real money - if it were possible - he was playing through something Embiid would miss the first quarter or more of the season).

The numbers tell a part of the story, but they don’t lie. We’ll see what happens, but I’m not a foolish homer and I think Mitchell is going to take a leap this year and a lot of that will be because he has help.
 
idestroyedthetoilet said:
Donovan has a high volume efficiency closer to Andrew Wiggins than a superstars'. He's nearly dead last among high volume players and has a long way to go before leading a team to the promised land.
Click to expand...
Well I mean DM is a higher volume shot taker than Wiggins. DM shoots a better field goal percentage, better 3 point percentage, better efg%, better free throw percentage (by a lot), gets to the line more, averages more points, assists, and steals per game than Wiggins and barely less rebounds per game.

So he is much better than Wiggins (who has played 5 years vs DM's 2 years)

As for the statement that he is closer to Wiggins than a superstar in high volume efficiency, well that depends on the superstar. Mitchell's efficiency is quite a bit better than Russell Westbrook's for example.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
fishonjazz said:
Well I mean DM is a higher volume shot taker than Wiggins. DM shoots a better field goal percentage, better 3 point percentage, better efg%, better free throw percentage (by a lot), gets to the line more, averages more points, assists, and steals per game than Wiggins and barely less rebounds per game.

So he is much better than Wiggins (who has played 5 years vs DM's 2 years)

As for the statement that he is closer to Wiggins than a superstar in high volume efficiency, well that depends on the superstar. Mitchell's efficiency is quite a bit better than Russell Westbrook's for example.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...

Do you want him to set Westbrook up as the standard he should become? I dont.
 
idestroyedthetoilet said:
Do you want him to set Westbrook up as the standard he should become? I dont.
Click to expand...
I didn't. The word superstar is very general and vague though and has no real meaning when you just throw it out there like that.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
fishonjazz said:
I didn't. The word superstar is very general and vague though and has no real meaning when you just throw it out there like that.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...

You fished it up by cherry picking Westbrick, a well know chucker. Here's a list of All Stars last two seasons, sortable by ts%:

https://www.basketball-reference.co...&c1stat=ts_pct&c1comp=gt&c1val=40&order_by=ws

The few players with below average efficiency are Westbrick twice, Russell, a couple old timers and marginal stars like Middleton. Most names on that list are much more efficient than DM, who is over 2% less efficient than league average. Of the top 20 scorers, he was 19th in efficiency, 1 spot ahead of Westbrick and 1 behind Devin Booker. Kemba Walker, just 3 spots above DM, scores a massive .08 more PPP than Donovan.

Any way you slice it, or excuse it due to load like Numberica and others have tried, DM is simply inefficient. You may not like hearing it but that doesnt change the fact he needs to improve. Utah is 7th in ts% at 57.2. Do they win more or lose more when their leading shot taker shoots 4 percentage points lower than their average?
 
To put this another way, DM is the only player other than Carmelo Anthony in something like 50 years to take 35 shots (only 31 points) without getting an assist. Not good company.


When DM chucks, Utah loses:

"
Utah Jazz
Bad Games: Donovan Mitchell (8)
Record in Bad Games: 1-7 (.125)
Record in All Other Games: 49-25 (.662)

When Mitchell’s shot isn’t falling, he isn’t shy about forcing it. Mitchell holds the dubious honor of the most points in a bad game, when he got 32 points, took 35 shots (13-35 FG, 1-11 3PT) to get those 32 points, and the Jazz lost to the 76ers 113-107.

Mitchell is a lot like Westbrook when he’s at his worst, gunning his team clean out of games, and it’s why the Jazz were a sitting duck for the Rockets in the playoffs."

http://paceandspacehoops.com/how-much-do-high-volume-low-efficiency-shooters-hurt-nba-teams/


I know we all like DM but why in the world are people so blinded that they cannot see his inefficiency?
 
idestroyedthetoilet said:
You fished it up by cherry picking Westbrick, a well know chucker. Here's a list of All Stars last two seasons, sortable by ts%:

https://www.basketball-reference.co...&c1stat=ts_pct&c1comp=gt&c1val=40&order_by=ws

The few players with below average efficiency are Westbrick twice, Russell, a couple old timers and marginal stars like Middleton. Most names on that list are much more efficient than DM, who is over 2% less efficient than league average. Of the top 20 scorers, he was 19th in efficiency, 1 spot ahead of Westbrick and 1 behind Devin Booker. Kemba Walker, just 3 spots above DM, scores a massive .08 more PPP than Donovan.

Any way you slice it, or excuse it due to load like Numberica and others have tried, DM is simply inefficient. You may not like hearing it but that doesnt change the fact he needs to improve. Utah is 7th in ts% at 57.2. Do they win more or lose more when their leading shot taker shoots 4 percentage points lower than their average?
Click to expand...
Wonder where DM ranked on the list according to experience/age in the league.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
idestroyedthetoilet said:
To put this another way, DM is the only player other than Carmelo Anthony in something like 50 years to take 35 shots (only 31 points) without getting an assist. Not good company.


When DM chucks, Utah loses:

"
Utah Jazz
Bad Games: Donovan Mitchell (8)
Record in Bad Games: 1-7 (.125)
Record in All Other Games: 49-25 (.662)

When Mitchell’s shot isn’t falling, he isn’t shy about forcing it. Mitchell holds the dubious honor of the most points in a bad game, when he got 32 points, took 35 shots (13-35 FG, 1-11 3PT) to get those 32 points, and the Jazz lost to the 76ers 113-107.

Mitchell is a lot like Westbrook when he’s at his worst, gunning his team clean out of games, and it’s why the Jazz were a sitting duck for the Rockets in the playoffs."

http://paceandspacehoops.com/how-much-do-high-volume-low-efficiency-shooters-hurt-nba-teams/


I know we all like DM but why in the world are people so blinded that they cannot see his inefficiency?
Click to expand...
So Donovan working out with Melo wouldn’t be a good thing...?

 
Call me weird (or call me Bertha), but I've got a good feeling about Mudiay. If he's your 4th or 5th option, and you're not relying on him as your PG, he could wreak havoc with his ability to beat bigger guys off the dribble and get to the rim. He adds some athleticism and ability to score in isolation.

The Rockets were title contenders playing CP, Harden and Eric Gordon in the same lineup, with either Tucker or Ariza. The Jazz could do something a bit similar with Conley, Mitchell, Mudiay and Bogdanovic at the 4. That's a lot of spacing and offensive versatility. If Mudiay can stay in his lane, I think it could work.

The other thing that's going completely underrated here is that he was a pick from Denver.

 
Last edited:
Catchall said:
Call me weird (or call me Bertha), but I've got a good feeling about Mudiay. If he's your 4th or 5th option, and you're not relying on him as your PG, he could wreak havoc with his ability to beat bigger guys off the dribble and get to the rim. He adds some athleticism and ability to score in isolation.

The Rockets were title contenders playing CP, Harden and Eric Gordon in the same lineup, with either Tucker or Ariza. The Jazz could do something a bit similar with Conley, Mitchell, Mudiay and Bogdanovic at the 4. That's a lot of spacing and offensive versatility. If Mudiay can stay in his lane, I think it could work.

The other thing that's going completely underrated here is that he was a pick from Denver.

Click to expand...


he sure seems to have his head screwed on right
 
Douchebag K said:
His numbers from mid January thru the end of the season are awesome you clown.
Click to expand...
Playing large portions of that time with three people that can’t shoot a basketball well enough for defenses to care, and another large portion with two players that couldn’t. There wasn’t a single Jazz lineup that featured four above-average (or even average) threats from deep.
 
Oh, and check out Mudiay's jersey. Just sayin, I'm gettin a good feelin about this guy. Along with Mitchell, Conley and Bogey, Mudiay is a 4th guy who can score 30+ points on any given night.

 
Last edited:
I've been tamping down expectations on Mudiay as much as anybody, but I do think the Jazz took a good shot with him.

Everything I've read about him seems to suggest that he has his head on straight, is a willing worker and good teammate. It's easier said than done, but if the Jazz can somehow tweak his game to accentuate his strengths and minimize the inefficiencies, he could be a solid role player somewhere down the line (likely on another team, but with a bit of luck by the end of the season).

As Catchall says, he at least gives the Jazz someone else who has a chance to create his own shot when all else is failing. Doesn't hurt to have a few of those guys on the team for emergency situations, even if they don't contribute very positively on a consistent basis.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top