"Internal improvement" has been the buzzword with the FO for quite a while. The funny thing is that the way they've structured things they've ensured that internal improvement cannot happen unless there's some type of addition via subtraction. They've given no indication, directly, indirectly, or through their actions, that they are even considering addition by subtraction.
Originally Posted by sojodave
12-16-2012 07:02 PM
Originally Posted by gregbroncs
I believe if you gave Burks 30 mins a night like Foye got you'd get more production overall. You wouldn't get the 3 pt shooting, but you'd get the same or more points, more rebounds, and better defense. It's a question of what is more important to you now, and in the long term.
But that is the problem though Greg. Who knows what we really have.
Carrol is a nice energy guy, and we've needed that hustle to spark our team. Are we really going to lose our #12 pick, and go with Carrol, Foye and Williams long term?
We give these guys, and Hayward playingtime to play through the pains, grow, and develop. They get to play through mistakes, and have bad games. Burks is getting shafted.
"les grandes défaites forgent les grands hommes" - Rudy Gobert
Where exactly, has he shown that he would play any semblence of defense? This year he has been consistently beat off the dribble, and definitely doesn't fight over screens.
Originally Posted by Revolution 9
Yes, the Jazz are average (6-7-8 seed) right now. Anyone that thought anything different coming into the season is a blind fan, or a negative nellie.
That said, KoC and company have a track record of improving their assets year to year. Thus, we are not on track to remain that way. We have many assets that can be used to create something more. But they are not likely to be used today, tomorrow, or the next day.
So be ****ing patient, and quit ****ing whining about every little thing that ****ing happens you mother****ers.
That is all.
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed." - Dwight D. Eisenhower
There are many contender-level front courts in the NBA. The Lakers won the championships not because of Gasol or Bynum, but because of Kobe. And we do not have a Kobe, a Dirk or a Shaq. End of story.
Originally Posted by Catchall
We've been patient. We were patient with the same team for 3.5 years until it culminated in our HOFer coach quitting mid-season and shipping our franchise player out of town for two guys that now two years later are able to get good minutes only when injury presents itself.
Originally Posted by LunaticWolf
Sometimes you have to look a bit farther than the obvious to see what others (the Jazz management) is up to. It's not obvious to play Favors over Milsap and Kanter over Big Al. The reason is that Sap and Al have to remain attractive for the purpose of trade bait. You've all stated this at one point or another, but as the Lunatic stated above, you have to have some patients. The ideal scenario is that Al and/or Sap can be parlayed into a complementary player to DF and EK. There are two paths to arrive at that - trades or letting them expire and getting FA who replace their level of productivity at similar price tag. The trade can land you a current productive player or a bit of a dog+high draft pick. As someone noted above, some teams are starting to get nervous/antsy to make trades; the market will start to open up. Big Al and Sap and the Jazz in general must be playing well at trade deadline for any chance of 'landing a big one.' Landing a big one is a patient man's game.
Are Mo/Ma/Foye tradeable? If so then there are two reasons to give them as much time as they have. First is the tradebait, second is that they really are auditioning for a job longer term here.
The only item i can't see some reason (might not be the RIGHT reason) is that of Burks. He's shown enough last year and summer league to get some time in my opinion. So other than his countance looking like a combination of dissappointment and pride - which indicates he's in the doghouse in some form, i don't have any logic as to why he's not playing some. Maybe it is that the Jazz know what they have in him and have him locked up for another year. So maybe right now the plan is all about tradebait and tryouts. If they can parlay that work (tradebait and tryouts) into 1 more well fitting excellent player and a well fitting role player, then it is worth it.
I'm not a big fan of when the apologetic defense stands on hypotheticals.
Originally Posted by Harcher
I'm asking a question essentially to get some understanding of what reasons the jazz would have to do what they are doing? And for those of us who run businesses, we play out the hypotheticals, with as much fact as possible, and then make a business risk. Those who examine all the angles, do best. Nobody bats a 1000 on their bets, but those who can evaluate the potential outcomes of the hypotheticals do pretty good.
Originally Posted by infection
Most of the arguments in this thread are akin to "Jazz managagemetn just wants to be mediocre" "Corbin is clueless." etc. It is possible these are true. I doubt these are the case.
So what about your view is not hypothetical?
The hypothetical I'm talking about is that 'the Jazz could trade these guys for x, y or z." The Jazz have never played someone to showcase their talent for trade. This is not the style (and I don't disagree). The problem is is that we're grasping at this to explain baffling game-decisions. Last year we kept saying we were playing Bell and Howard to showcase them for a trade. This was not the case. We were playing them, apparently, because we thought they put us in the est position to win, as evidenced by Howard being reinserted to the starting lineup after being injured in the playoffs. The Jazz don't allocate playing time based off hypotheticals (trades), they allocate playing time off what they think will make us competitive and no matter how hard it is to swallow, this is honestly the low we've sunk to. We are playing Al and Paul big minutes, and sitting Favors and Kanter, not because we're showcasing for trade, but because we think we haven't hit our peak with this team and we want to see that unfold.
Originally Posted by Harcher
The best way to sum it up is that it's a lot like walking out of a gas station with a lottery ticket and someone approaches you offering $5k for the ticket and your first thought is, "but what if this is the winner?" I believe this is our fear. This team does have talent and could put together some good runs. But, like all teams, none really achieve their full potential. Thus, we would be slow to deal under the fear of, "but what of this team is it and just needs more time?" The problem we don't acknowledge is that with past teams (i.e. when we tried this for four years with Boozer and Williams) we didn't have two tickets, so to speak. We have a future sitting on the bench. These are talented guys, not CJ Miles and Kyrylo Fesenko.
got it. I guess i'm not so much "apologetic" as i am in denial that it is this...
Originally Posted by infection