What's new
By:

Are the Jazz feeling the loss of Mobi-Wan?

vegas

vegas

Well-Known Member
2v93v9s.jpg

I've been a bit surprised that the Jazz haven't had a huge drop-off without him. Perhaps the following explains why.

.278% EFG in last 2 min of games w/in 5 pts. He is 4/18. For comparison, Al has an efg% of .577 and is 7/13.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/plus/shot_finder.cgi?request=1&player_id=&match=single&year_id=2013&is_playoffs=N&team_id=UTA&opp_id=&game_num_min=0&game_num_max=99&game_month=&game_location=&game_result=&shot_pts=&is_make=&shot_type=&shot_distance_min=&shot_distance_max=&q4=Y&q5=Y&time_remain_minutes=2&time_remain_seconds=0&time_remain_comp=le&margin_min=-5&margin_max=5&c1stat=&c1comp=ge&c1val=&c2stat=&c2comp=ge&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=ge&c3val=&order_by=fg

Our record without him is 6-4. We also won a game where he only played 8 mins.
https://espn.go.com/nba/player/gamelog/_/id/2178/mo-williams

It has also been discussed that his +/- is not top -- Per 100 possesions:
Code: 
                                           Poss Poss  Poss Net  Net   Net  Net   Net   Net    Net   Net  Net   Net   Net 
Rk            Player  Tm  Season  G     MP   Tm  Opp  Pace   FG  FGA   FG%   3P   3PA   3P%   eFG%    FT  FTA   FT%   PTS
1         Alec Burks UTA 2012-13 18  205.7  400  408  94.3 +6.5 +4.2 +.052 -3.8  -8.8 -.037  +.029  +1.7 +4.6 -.049 +10.8
2     Jamaal Tinsley UTA 2012-13 26  527.4  978  983  89.2 +1.7 -5.0 +.045 +0.6  +0.6 +.021  +.051  +4.1 +5.7 -.010  +8.2
3       Jeremy Evans UTA 2012-13 14   95.2  189  188  95.1 +3.5 -2.1 +.050 -4.8 -16.5 +.081  +.023  +5.7 +9.9 -.056  +7.9
4    DeMarre Carroll UTA 2012-13 27  460.9  869  868  90.5 +1.8 +3.2 +.004 -0.6  +0.1 -.035 -0.001  +4.1 +4.6 +.031  +7.1
5        Enes Kanter UTA 2012-13 33  508.3  976  969  91.8 +2.0 +0.2 +.022 -1.2  -3.7 +.007  +.015  +3.0 +4.6 -.012  +5.8
6     Gordon Hayward UTA 2012-13 33  876.3 1695 1682  92.5 +0.2 +1.2 -.004 -1.0  -0.7 -.041 -0.010  +1.8 +1.6 +.022  +1.2
7    Marvin Williams UTA 2012-13 29  748.2 1406 1415  90.5 -1.0 -1.1 -.006 -0.1  +0.7 -.018 -0.006  +2.2 +2.1 +.024   0.0
8     Derrick Favors UTA 2012-13 28  613.4 1153 1145  89.9 -1.6 +2.6 -.030 -1.5  -1.2 -.059 -0.040  +3.2 +3.2 +.027  -1.5
9       Paul Millsap UTA 2012-13 33  990.9 1880 1882  91.1 -0.9 -0.1 -.010 +0.3  +0.8 +.002 -0.008  -0.3 -0.8 +.012  -1.8
10      Al Jefferson UTA 2012-13 32 1045.2 1985 1988  91.2 -1.2 +0.6 -.017 -0.1  +0.9 -.023 -0.018  -1.1 -2.4 +.031  -3.7
11       Mo Williams UTA 2012-13 24  753.6 1448 1445  92.1 -1.0 +2.7 -.024 +0.5  +2.3 -.021 -0.023  -3.1 -4.3 +.014  -4.6
12       Earl Watson UTA 2012-13 18  301.4  586  578  92.7 -2.6 +6.6 -.064 -4.4  -8.5 -.079 -0.092  +4.7 +4.4 +.052  -4.9
13        Randy Foye UTA 2012-13 33  859.5 1637 1629  91.2 -3.4 -0.9 -.034 +0.9  +1.4 +.018 -0.028  -2.7 -4.0 +.015  -8.6
14      Kevin Murphy UTA 2012-13  3    9.1   18   20 100.4 -6.7 +3.3 -.100 -5.0  -8.9 -.250 -0.131 -33.9 -6.1 -.714 -52.2
https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/plus/plus_minus_finder.cgi?request=1&player_id=&match=single&output=per_poss&year_min=2013&year_max=2013&age_min=0&age_max=99&is_playoffs=N&team_id=UTA&opp_id=&game_num_min=0&game_num_max=99&game_month=&game_location=&game_result=&c1stat=&c1comp=ge&c1val=&c2stat=&c2comp=ge&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=ge&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=ge&c4val=&order_by=diff_pts#stats::none

Because +/- is a bit controversial, let me add some perspective, same stats for the 2000-2001 team.
Code: 
                                             Poss Poss Poss Net   Net   Net  Net  Net   Net    Net  Net   Net   Net   Net 
Rk              Player  Tm  Season  G     MP   Tm  Opp Pace   FG   FGA   FG%   3P  3PA   3P%   eFG%   FT   FTA   FT%   PTS
1        John Stockton UTA 2000-01 82 2394.7 4544 4536 91.0 +6.3  +3.4 +.057 -0.7 -4.4 +.065  +.052 +0.2  +0.9 -.016 +12.2
2     Donyell Marshall UTA 2000-01 81 2328.5 4404 4405 90.8 +4.6  +1.9 +.045 -1.4 -6.2 +.060  +.036 -0.4  -0.5 -.001  +7.5
3         Quincy Lewis UTA 2000-01 35  399.9  749  745 89.7 +5.7  +3.6 +.051 -2.6 -7.0 -.009  +.034 -2.0  -3.9 +.026  +6.8
4          Karl Malone UTA 2000-01 81 2891.0 5473 5455 90.7 +3.5  +2.4 +.029 -1.1 -4.6 +.042  +.021 +0.7  +1.6 -.018  +6.6
5        Bryon Russell UTA 2000-01 78 2474.6 4616 4602 89.4 +3.8  +3.2 +.028 -0.7 -3.2 +.037  +.022 -1.1  -0.6 -.017  +5.8
6        Danny Manning UTA 2000-01 82 1300.6 2426 2410 89.2 +6.0  +4.3 +.050 -1.6 -4.6 -.003  +.039 -5.6  -7.3 -.002  +4.7
7          John Starks UTA 2000-01 75 2126.4 4005 4008 90.4 +3.1  +3.1 +.020 -0.6 -3.2 +.042  +.016 -1.6  -1.4 -.018  +4.1
8       Olden Polynice UTA 2000-01 81 1618.8 3026 3017 89.6 +3.1  +1.7 +.026 -1.4 -5.0 +.049  +.017 -0.9  -0.8 -.011  +3.9
9        Greg Ostertag UTA 2000-01 81 1489.3 2721 2729 87.8 +3.1  +1.7 +.028 -1.5 -5.3 +.024  +.018 -2.7  -2.3 -.030  +1.9
10         John Crotty UTA 2000-01 31  264.5  491  492 89.2 +5.6 +10.5 +.013  0.0 -1.2 +.045  +.009 -9.9 -13.2 -.004  +1.2
11        David Benoit UTA 2000-01 49  443.5  851  857 92.4 +4.0  +1.0 +.044 -1.4 -7.6 +.116  +.035 -7.5  -8.7 -.023  -0.9
12   DeShawn Stevenson UTA 2000-01 40  295.9  574  564 92.3 +1.5   0.0 +.018 -2.2 -5.7 -.033  +.005 -1.9  -2.7 +.006  -1.0
13       Scott Padgett UTA 2000-01 27  126.1  246  240 92.5 +2.9  +8.8 -.011 +1.1 +3.0 +.004 -0.007 -8.6 -11.4 -.010  -1.7
14       Jacque Vaughn UTA 2000-01 82 1626.2 2984 2980 88.0 +0.5  +1.7 -.003 -2.0 -5.3  .000 -0.015 -4.0  -4.3 -.025  -5.0
https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/plus/plus_minus_finder.cgi?request=1&player_id=&match=single&output=per_poss&year_min=2001&year_max=2001&age_min=0&age_max=99&is_playoffs=N&team_id=UTA&opp_id=&game_num_min=0&game_num_max=99&game_month=&game_location=&game_result=&c1stat=&c1comp=ge&c1val=&c2stat=&c2comp=ge&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=ge&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=ge&c4val=&order_by=diff_pts

Before I researched a bit, it seemed to me that it was kind of a wash. After doing a bit of research I'm leaning towards that he may actually be a burden. He is the biggest black hole on the team in crunch time while shooting a horrible percentage and the team scores dramatically better with any other point on the floor except Earl the Pearl. I think it's hard to say that the wins/losses says we are better due to the sample size, but I think it's safe to say we aren't worse.

A couple of side notes, Tinsley was -3.0 last year, and.....just for HH, DHarris was +3.4. In 2010-11 Fess was top of the list lol. There's some fodder for the skeptics.
 

Attachments

  • 2v93v9s.jpg
    2v93v9s.jpg
    52.1 KB · Views: 5
Mo can help this team... just not as starting pg.

And, yeah, Watson is cooked.
 
We have to get rid of EARL WATSON this guy is earning millions, without scoring any points, he´s the worst BB player, i have ever seen.
 
Burks is fast as lighting gong forward, but his ball protection is a bit suspect. I'm sure that he can improve that however. i was extatic to see him trying to follow the offence instead of shooting it every time. Hopefully he gets more time there because with Hayward and Foye on the team that's the only way he sees the floor with any consistency.
 
I like Mo & hope he's back soon. But those stats are pretty interesting. Burks did pretty well last night from what I saw, but caught little of him running point. Not sure how much time he spent at #1. ? Would like to see how he does with more minutes there. I did catch Lowe taking in coach's ear last night after Burks made a play. If my lip reading skills were on he said the words "Burks more playing time." Not sure what else. Anyone else notice that?
 
Cyrone Torbin said:
Yes, but it's more of the negative of having Earl Watson play.
Click to expand...

This.
You see, contrary to what most physics theorists believe, Watson has formed a mini anti-black hole around the 3 point line where he stands.
See, a black hole pulls everything towards it whereas an anti-black hole pushes everything away from it. It's really interesting. We should bring in Stephen Hawking into one of the Jazz games to see if we can make use of this phenomenon.
 
According to this +/- stat, we should be starting Burks, Tinsley, Carrol, Evans and Kanter, and have them play the majority of mins...
 
Mo is a chucker. He takes too many shots. Tinsley and earl suck in a lot of ways but they get more people involved with their style. We are better when we play team ball. Its too bad Mo doesnt realize this. He is a really good shooter. He just needs to take less shots.

Weird

Mo=Good shooter=If he shoots less=we better

I think reality is on drugs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top