What's new
By:
Filters

Conley irrelevant...

LogGrad98 said:
Well here is where you said that.



So if you never saw bogie say that where did you get that very definitive information. You seem pretty damn positive. Where is your evidence that equation is completely correct as you claim?

I'm sure Conley, as part of the roster, was part of the equation, but far from the main reason. If you think the extra guaranteed year at more money than the other offers he was considering wasn't the main factor you're just not thinking very clearly. He mentioned that several times in other articles I read. Google it.

So no, no Conley does NOT mean no Bogdanovic. That's a myth that needs to be put to bed.
Click to expand...
My definitive information comes from that if they don't make the Conley trade I don't believe they even approach him. Combine that with the very real possibility that he doesn't sign if Conley wasn't acquired. And I fully believe that no Conley = No Bogey. But I definitely didn't say that Bogey said that, which is what you indicated.
 
Jazz4ever said:
Why is that? Do tell. Most 32 year olds fall off a cliff and never see their career averages again. His last 7 games he was averaging 9 points on 30% shooting.
Click to expand...
Because it's a much larger sample size obviously. I think we can predict some fall off in his game for sure, but it takes more than a handful of games to decide if a guy is washed or just struggling.
 
NUMBERICA said:
You mean a first-ballot hall of famer that in so many ways is and has been the exception to the rule?
Click to expand...
Yeah him, John Stockton was effective as a player until he was 40. Again a major exception to the rule. But there is a long list of guys that have been just as good at 32 as they were at 28. If you want a couple of guys that are over 32 and still playing at the same level look at Kyle Lowry, JJ Redick, Lou Williams. **** we have a 32 year old on our team that improved this year in Joe Ingles. Saying most guys fall off a cliff at 32 is just false.
 
gregbroncs said:
My definitive information comes from that if they don't make the Conley trade I don't believe they even approach him. Combine that with the very real possibility that he doesn't sign if Conley wasn't acquired. And I fully believe that no Conley = No Bogey. But I definitely didn't say that Bogey said that, which is what you indicated.
Click to expand...
So it's your opinion, as opposed to the article where Bogey said the jazz had a superior offer as well as a good roster, calling out specifically the best defensive player in the NBA. Ok then. Nothing to see here.
 
NUMBERICA said:
So what’s the plan if Mike really did just fall off? Just... **** it?
Click to expand...
“**** no” is more like it.

They will work to integrate him, no doubt. But he will come off the bench if he can’t make it work.

The advantage now is that Ingles is entrenched in the starting unit. That matters more than where/when Conley plays.
 
I don't think Conley can be even a good scorer in the NBA anymore, so I don't like the idea of him coming off the bench to lead the second unit, since playing with non-starters will only add to his tendency to try to score. At this point, both Clarkson and Mudiay are much more competent at getting off their shots and making them. Thus, I would rather start Conley and bring O'Neale off the bench. Also, I would restrict Conley's minutes to keep him fresh and (relatively) injury-free. 25 to 28 minutes a night would seem right, IMO.
 
ghsartin said:
I don't think Conley can be even a good scorer in the NBA anymore, so I don't like the idea of him coming off the bench to lead the second unit, since playing with non-starters will only add to his tendency to try to score. At this point, both Clarkson and Mudiay are much more competent at getting off their shots and making them. Thus, I would rather start Conley and bring O'Neale off the bench. Also, I would restrict Conley's minutes to keep him fresh and (relatively) injury-free. 25 to 28 minutes a night would seem right, IMO.
Click to expand...
If Conley can’t score anymore (and he’s had trouble beating bigs this year which isn’t a function of acclimating to the system), trade him. Point blank.
 
I noticed he doesnt create that much separation after a Rudy screen ,his defender is still able to stay with him which ends up in wasted seconds and a bad pass. DM and Joe, heck even newcomer JC can drop them defenders better. Don't know if it's hesitation or hairstyle. Hopefully he gets better
 
Tim McMahon at ESPN on the Hoop Collective Pod with Windy and Jackie McMullin discussed the Conley bench thing... he literally laid out the plan I had and thinks its the best idea to bring Mike off the bench... even said since he is coming back from an injury you start with it being a minutes restriction thing. Tim is pretty tied in with the Jazz especially for a national guy.

He's Mike Frickin Conley... I get it, but its best for him to come off the bench for us and it will take us to the next level.

You are all welcome.
 
ghsartin said:
I don't think Conley can be even a good scorer in the NBA anymore, so I don't like the idea of him coming off the bench to lead the second unit, since playing with non-starters will only add to his tendency to try to score. At this point, both Clarkson and Mudiay are much more competent at getting off their shots and making them. Thus, I would rather start Conley and bring O'Neale off the bench. Also, I would restrict Conley's minutes to keep him fresh and (relatively) injury-free. 25 to 28 minutes a night would seem right, IMO.[/
Click to expand...

Conley has to find other ways to be effective- period. If it’s coming off the bench he needs to do it, if it’s facilitating, playmaking, pushing the ball, whatever it is, he better figure that **** out. I don’t have any idea what that could be, because before Conley even got here the jazz needed career numbers from him to be worth his contract and to push the team into contention. The jazz have managed the scoring in other ways and through other moves. Asking a 30 million dollar player to find a way to be effective shouldn’t be too much to ask, but I don’t know where it’ll come from. I never saw him as a “special” player like so many others do. The last thing the jazz need from him at this point is taking shots from other players, if he isn’t hitting in 2 or 3 tries he better be figuring something else out. If he’s half as great a person and if he’s worth half his contract he ought to be able to figure something out. If he has to come off the bench to be effective, I’d say he better buy into that whole heartedly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Handlogten's Heros said:
Having a good player that has played pretty bad replace another good player that is playing well in a lineup that is key to a pretty great stretch of wins is the concern... not just adding him to the rotation.

Some of y’all are over simplifying the potential issue. We have multiple players in the starting lineup that are doing the things we want Conley to do... they are doing it at a much higher level than Mike was... those players also bring important things that Mike doesn’t. If Mike comes back and isn’t significantly improved over what he was earlier in the year we will be worse... we don’t get any “name brand” bonus points because it’s Mike Conley.
Click to expand...

Some are not....

And yes we do...
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
Tim McMahon at ESPN on the Hoop Collective Pod with Windy and Jackie McMullin discussed the Conley bench thing... he literally laid out the plan I had and thinks its the best idea to bring Mike off the bench... even said since he is coming back from an injury you start with it being a minutes restriction thing. Tim is pretty tied in with the Jazz especially for a national guy.

He's Mike Frickin Conley... I get it, but its best for him to come off the bench for us and it will take us to the next level.

You are all welcome.
Click to expand...
Only problem with this is then we have 3 basically PG's coming off of the bench with sub par big guys. Our defense for the second unit would be non existant.
 
gregbroncs said:
Only problem with this is then we have 3 basically PG's coming off of the bench with sub par big guys. Our defense for the second unit would be non existant.
Click to expand...
So we should put the burden of Conley’s D on the starters, AGAINST starters? Furthermore, our defense in the 2nd unit is already non-existent. Niang and Bradley offer little resistance to any driver with even a little bit of noteworthy speed.

The game continues to be which team ends up with the higher score than the other.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top