Easy to distinguish the two. Last year we tanked like crazy and other years we have only tanked after DL/ASB. Its like super apparent vased on record alone.
Or so I thought.
Hardy isn’t the guy for this job. It isn’t working
- Thread starter Roy_McAvoy
- Start date
Or so I thought.
jom2003
Well-Known Member
I already said it twice and I will say it again. Hardy was the reason Brice wasn't playing well this season. All of our young players have taken a step back this season except for George, which validates OP's point. Brice last season had way better numbers than Svi and was absolutely on fire the first two games to start the season. But he wasn't given the trust and leeway to do what he does best and got benched by Hardy whenever he made a mistake, rather than letting the kid play through it. If a young plager was benched immediately after a mistake, how could you expect him to learn from it and correct it? And how motivated will you be to learn from your mistakes when you saw the coach basically giving a free pass to Svi who got to stay in and play after making mistakes again and again?
And you kinda explain the bias yourself (sort of). My theory is that Svi received the preferential treatment because he is Ukrainian. There is a reason no one talks about AK here any more despite being a fan favorites for many years. Even Dwill and Booz got to have their moments since they retire.
Last edited:
jom2003
Well-Known Member
So how many Ws you think Hardy will get us this year by playing Svi and his so-called “system”? 20? 25?
Play harder......for te tank
Quin Snyder being praised for NAW is kind of ridiculous when Hardy is the coach that began NAW's rise and gave everyone the blueprint on how to develop him.
AK was literally just on the Jazz broadcast...
The idea that Will Hardy is weighing world politics in his rotation is crazy talk.
Last edited:
And Filipowski is better this season.
Anyone who expected Flip to play at the level he did to end the season must have just started watching the NBA last year. Everyone dominates end of season because NBA teams do not care about the end of season games. Flip is at a higher level now than he was this time last year.
And did y'all not see what Walker was doing this season before the injury?
Anyone who expected Flip to play at the level he did to end the season must have just started watching the NBA last year. Everyone dominates end of season because NBA teams do not care about the end of season games. Flip is at a higher level now than he was this time last year.
And did y'all not see what Walker was doing this season before the injury?
Svi is a solid rotation player who has two more years left on a minimum contract. The reality is that he likely has a longer and more productive future for the competing version of the Utah Jazz than Brice does. I know some people can't wrap their heads around that because drafted rookie contract players HAVE to be the future, but blindly following that logic will lead to negative outcomes.
Players can improve in their late 20s after having relatively low impact careers and become something, it's not unheard of
jom2003
Well-Known Member
Oh okay, so maybe Hardy is just a bad coach then. Ty Corbin 2.0. No reason to think logic when it comes to bad coaching. Like we will never know why Nico traded Luca. Let's just call it bad GMing.
jom2003
Well-Known Member
So show me where Svi has improved as a player. I'm all ears. I think you heard me when I said this isn't even his best season. He had better numbers on the 22 win OKC and 27 win Charlotte, then got immediately released the following season. The reality is his future isn't with a competing version of the Jazz. That future may not even come any time soon. Even if it comes prior to the expiration of his contract, rest assured he will not have anything to do with it. And quite possibly, neither will Hardy.
Ok bud. I get you are on your negative posting BS so I'll just let you talk to yourself.
Zombie
Well-Known Member
Hilariously stupid theory
I didn't like the Hardy hire, but he acquired a dumper fire.
The lack of defensive rotations is what drives me crazy. Teams have been feasting from 3 with wide open warm up shots. Talent is a factor, but this is far beyond that.
I'd also like to see a lot more off ball movement and paint cuts. What they run is so predictable.
The lack of defensive rotations is what drives me crazy. Teams have been feasting from 3 with wide open warm up shots. Talent is a factor, but this is far beyond that.
I'd also like to see a lot more off ball movement and paint cuts. What they run is so predictable.
More off ball? The Jazz run one of the most complex off-ball offenses in the NBA. Y'all just make stuff up to complain about sometimes
jom2003
Well-Known Member
You have to justify the stupid decision with stupid theory sometimes. Just like those folks trying to justify the Luka trade.
Schrödinger's Gerbil
Well-Known Member
It looks like jom2003 has positioned himself on a precarious branch. I feel some sympathy for some of his arguments, but in playing the Ukrainian card, I fear he's sawed off his branch.
What I don't get is the apparent predominant unqualified support for Hardy. With due respect, what's the evidence he's such a great coach, as so many people here and in the media keep saying? That the Jazz in recent years hovered around .500 before the FO intervened to trade away competent players? Ok, so he can coach a team stocked with established NBA players to a .500 record, give or take. This may be evidence that he's a good/great coach, but from where I sit, it's pretty underwhelming. I'm willing to concede that he may be a good coach, but the absolute certainty that so many people express about his being one is undeserved.
I also see that he's now resorting to yelling at his players as one of his coaching tools, not as a sign of a tough coach brilliantly motivating his players, but as a worrisome sign that his other teaching/motivational methods (presumably those that made him the great coach others claimed him to be) aren't working. So, he's resorting to what coaches seem to do best, and which fits the public's archetype of the tough, successful, motivational coach: Yelling at and berating his players. It's true, coaches do this all the time. But are we really that confident it works?
NBA players are professionals and, for the most part, adults. Whereas they may have been willing to submit to yelling and verbal humiliation during their high school and college years, when the balance of power is decidedly against them, they're unlikely to be so willing to put up with it at this level. Eventually, I'd argue that they're more likely to tune it out than to use it as a motivation to achieve grander deeds.
Thus, I'm more inclined to be worried than encouraged by this turn of events and to interpret it as Hardy's response to the growing pressure created by the team's continuing dismal performance, particularly defensively, notwithstanding a few solid games thrown into the mix.
A question I keep asking myself is at what point will Hardy be held accountable, whether for wins and losses or on-court performance? So far, it appears that he's sailed on a sea of goodwill. Eventually, this goodwill will evaporate, and he'll have to prove it. How long will the FO give him to turn things around? We want to think that the FO will be fair, given that they handed him this dunghill of a roster with a clear imperative to lose, but humans are often neither fair nor reasonable. To me, it's pretty inconceivable that he's not worried about this. He's human, after all.
My perspective is perhaps shaped by a major frustration with sports culture: the near-reflexive belief that a good coach must yell at, berate, or publicly humiliate their players to be successful. This mindset is so entrenched that it’s treated as a prerequisite for authority rather than a stylistic choice. As a result, generations of coaches have felt compelled to perform this behavior simply because it’s the only model they’ve seen rewarded. And because quieter, more constructive coaching styles rarely get the same cultural attention, they’re often overlooked—even though they are likely more common than we imagine, in many cases, far more effective.
What I don't get is the apparent predominant unqualified support for Hardy. With due respect, what's the evidence he's such a great coach, as so many people here and in the media keep saying? That the Jazz in recent years hovered around .500 before the FO intervened to trade away competent players? Ok, so he can coach a team stocked with established NBA players to a .500 record, give or take. This may be evidence that he's a good/great coach, but from where I sit, it's pretty underwhelming. I'm willing to concede that he may be a good coach, but the absolute certainty that so many people express about his being one is undeserved.
I also see that he's now resorting to yelling at his players as one of his coaching tools, not as a sign of a tough coach brilliantly motivating his players, but as a worrisome sign that his other teaching/motivational methods (presumably those that made him the great coach others claimed him to be) aren't working. So, he's resorting to what coaches seem to do best, and which fits the public's archetype of the tough, successful, motivational coach: Yelling at and berating his players. It's true, coaches do this all the time. But are we really that confident it works?
NBA players are professionals and, for the most part, adults. Whereas they may have been willing to submit to yelling and verbal humiliation during their high school and college years, when the balance of power is decidedly against them, they're unlikely to be so willing to put up with it at this level. Eventually, I'd argue that they're more likely to tune it out than to use it as a motivation to achieve grander deeds.
Thus, I'm more inclined to be worried than encouraged by this turn of events and to interpret it as Hardy's response to the growing pressure created by the team's continuing dismal performance, particularly defensively, notwithstanding a few solid games thrown into the mix.
A question I keep asking myself is at what point will Hardy be held accountable, whether for wins and losses or on-court performance? So far, it appears that he's sailed on a sea of goodwill. Eventually, this goodwill will evaporate, and he'll have to prove it. How long will the FO give him to turn things around? We want to think that the FO will be fair, given that they handed him this dunghill of a roster with a clear imperative to lose, but humans are often neither fair nor reasonable. To me, it's pretty inconceivable that he's not worried about this. He's human, after all.
My perspective is perhaps shaped by a major frustration with sports culture: the near-reflexive belief that a good coach must yell at, berate, or publicly humiliate their players to be successful. This mindset is so entrenched that it’s treated as a prerequisite for authority rather than a stylistic choice. As a result, generations of coaches have felt compelled to perform this behavior simply because it’s the only model they’ve seen rewarded. And because quieter, more constructive coaching styles rarely get the same cultural attention, they’re often overlooked—even though they are likely more common than we imagine, in many cases, far more effective.
In 2022-23 was a team that started Lauri, Mike Conley, Jordan Clarkson, Jarred Vanderbilt and Kelly Olynyk really supposed to be a team that goes 10-3?
Or in 2023-23 a team that started Kris Dunn, Collin Sexton, John Collins, Lauri and Sinone Fontecchio? (That was the most common starting lineup during our 12-2 January run)
This year we are again trending to exceed expected win totals while starting Key, Ace, Svi, Lauri and Nurkic.
Its not about .500, but about exceeding expectations whenever his hands arent tied.
My guess is media appreciates him because his peers and other NBA professionals appreciate him, since most people in the media steal their takes from them or each other.
Actually looking at that starting lineup turnover between 2022-23 and 2023-24 its actually pretty impressive we had such runs on both years.
But to emphasize the point further. Counting out our guy Lauri, the amount of starts this season for those that Hardy had as main starters in those two years are as follows:
2022-23 roster 7 total (Conley 5, Vando 2, KO 0, Clarkson 0)
2023-24 roster 38 total, but 33 of them are coming from Dunn (18) and Collins (15) in one of the worst teams this season. Sexton has 5 and Tech has 0.
The Clips comp is also rather interesting if they werent such a dumpster fire, since Dunn and Collins arent looking like winning starters rn despite Ty Lue being pretty highly regarded HC.
But to emphasize the point further. Counting out our guy Lauri, the amount of starts this season for those that Hardy had as main starters in those two years are as follows:
2022-23 roster 7 total (Conley 5, Vando 2, KO 0, Clarkson 0)
2023-24 roster 38 total, but 33 of them are coming from Dunn (18) and Collins (15) in one of the worst teams this season. Sexton has 5 and Tech has 0.
The Clips comp is also rather interesting if they werent such a dumpster fire, since Dunn and Collins arent looking like winning starters rn despite Ty Lue being pretty highly regarded HC.
Schrödinger's Gerbil
Well-Known Member
Yeah, this is very reasonable, and you may be on to something. I don't deny, indeed I fervently hope, that he's all that, as people seem to believe. Plus, he deserves a great deal of benefit of the doubt, given that he's been asked to coach a team that's actively trying to lose, and structured to do just that. It's a very fine needle he's trying to thread.
Even then, I still don't see that he's done anything of note to deserve the uncritical praise he continues to receive. It's OK and perfectly reasonable to be skeptical and question whether his performance justifies the unremitting effusive praise.
For example, it's easy to attribute our dumpster fire of a defense to a "lack of effort" among players, but if this continues, when does Hardy and/or his defensive schemes come under reasonable, deserved scrutiny? I'm skeptical, moreover, of the "lack of effort" explanation, which, as I've mentioned before, strikes me as an all-too-handy catchall excuse/explanation, particularly when it's repeated over and over and over, after each miserable performance. But, then, its accuracy is often less the issue than its effectiveness as a distraction that allows coaches to cover their arses when things go sideways. And, frankly, if lack of effort is indeed so persistent, it doesn't reflect well on the coach's motivational prowess.
In any case, I blame the ownership and FO for the train wreck the Jazz have become, not the coach. But the case of Hardy as the long-term or even medium-term answer at coach is still an open one, and the jury is justified in requiring more evidence that he his.
I dont think Hardy is absolved for our defensive issues and he has to be considered a part of the problem there. But FO selling any and all decent wing/PoA defenders we have had over these years has been more detrimental imo. In the 2023-24 January run we started Tech and Dunn and were quite good defensively for about 20 games before the trades took away 2 key glue guys including Tech who was critical for the starting unit defensively.
He also has other qualities I dont necessarily like and his player development resume is a mixed bag... but offensively there should be very little doubt about his competence.