Dennis Lindsey feels he owes Richard Jefferson a lot
- Thread starter franklin
- Start date
Your argument is splitting hairs. I don't care that only 31 players average 35+ minutes. If they only get 32 minutes because of foul problems I really don't care. My point and my meaning is that I want our young guys to play as much as possible. They are young and can handle more than 30 minutes a game. I would like them to get them as much time together as possible. If that is 30 minutes great. If that is 35 minutes even better. And as for the subs I would like to see Gobert and Clark or even Harris get the remaining minutes. I don't care if Jefferson or Williams even play at all. Jefferson has proved not loyal and Williams is also likely gone if he doesn't take a substantial pay cut.
As for why get involved in the discussion is again splitting hairs. I didn't mean I wont back and forth with you so much as nothing you have said, or will say, can convince me that the Jazz are better off playing Jefferson or Williams as much as Corbin has been. This year should only be about developing our young talent. If the young talent is good enough to win great. Then next year we should be good despite getting to pick somewhere between 8-14 in the upcoming draft. If we lose (and we will lose more games playing young guys lots more) then we get a higher pick and maybe even a game changer type player. Playing the young guys major minutes is a win/win scenario.
This is an interesting thread. The content in this tread is why I joined this site. Good arguments on both sides. Being backed up with stats and examples.
My take on the RJ/Marv VS. Burks/Kanter minutes is more down the middle than most I guess. I like RJ in the starting lineup. He spaces the floor as our best 3 points shooter (42%). He doesn't need the ball to make things happen and is a great 4th to 5th option to Burke, Gordon, and Favs. He brings leadership when the team is looking a little lost and has taken over at times when the offense isn't clicking. Where I do have a problem is that He is getting more minutes than those contributions deserve now. Back in Nov Jeffersons minutes were justified because of injuries and the fact that we had to play Burks at PG. Plus with Burks struggles with being moved between PG and SG made Jeffersons minutes even more important to this team. Now that we have a healthy team and Jefferson should be getting no more than 20-24 minutes a game.
Marvin and Kanter is a little different. Kanter up until the last couple of weeks was playing bad. Marvin in the starting line up made us better. The stats, the win/losses, and just watching the games show you this. Up until now I haven't had a problem with Marvin starting and playing in the rotation that Corbin has been using because it was working. Now that Kanter is starting to play better this issue needs to be brought up again. Last night was the perfect example, The Lakers started two 7 footers. There are times that Corbin needs to realize that defensively we can not compete with 2 players like that in the post playing Marvin at the 4. The Memphis game was another example of this. Favs had to guard Randolph, that left Marv on Koufos. Koufos had a great game because of it.
Kanter need to start and play major minutes against team like that.
My take on the RJ/Marv VS. Burks/Kanter minutes is more down the middle than most I guess. I like RJ in the starting lineup. He spaces the floor as our best 3 points shooter (42%). He doesn't need the ball to make things happen and is a great 4th to 5th option to Burke, Gordon, and Favs. He brings leadership when the team is looking a little lost and has taken over at times when the offense isn't clicking. Where I do have a problem is that He is getting more minutes than those contributions deserve now. Back in Nov Jeffersons minutes were justified because of injuries and the fact that we had to play Burks at PG. Plus with Burks struggles with being moved between PG and SG made Jeffersons minutes even more important to this team. Now that we have a healthy team and Jefferson should be getting no more than 20-24 minutes a game.
Marvin and Kanter is a little different. Kanter up until the last couple of weeks was playing bad. Marvin in the starting line up made us better. The stats, the win/losses, and just watching the games show you this. Up until now I haven't had a problem with Marvin starting and playing in the rotation that Corbin has been using because it was working. Now that Kanter is starting to play better this issue needs to be brought up again. Last night was the perfect example, The Lakers started two 7 footers. There are times that Corbin needs to realize that defensively we can not compete with 2 players like that in the post playing Marvin at the 4. The Memphis game was another example of this. Favs had to guard Randolph, that left Marv on Koufos. Koufos had a great game because of it.
Kanter need to start and play major minutes against team like that.
On Corbin
While I disagree with a lot of posters on this board when it comes to how bad Corbin is as a coach there is one thing that I think is a major problem. (And its not his overplaying of Vets).
Corbin has improved over the last couple of years in a lot of areas. He has made adjustment to the offense by changing it based on the players he has. Outside of Raja he has always seemed to have a locker room were people know what to expect and are kept together. The team Always plays hard. Even when they are getting killed they always seem to fight. The Jazz are one of the few bad teams that play hard every night. He is getting better at calling time outs and riding lineups that are working instead of just subing when the clock says to.
That being said the problem that I am seeing is huge. I don't think Corbin has the ability to think like a defensive minded coach. Offensively I have seen that adjustments. Defensively the Jazz always seem to give up shots that you scratch your head and think "how did that guy get so open?" The point I made with Kanter vs Marv in the last post I made I think is the main problem. Corbin just doesn't think defense. He starts Mavin against Pau with the thought that Pau well have to chase Marvin out to the 3 point line and that gives the Jazz an advantage, Yet is willing to give up a ton on defense by making Marv or RJeff guard Pau on the defensive end. Forcing your defense to double team and giving a great passing big in Gasol free rain to pick you apart with his passing. Marv had a clunker of a game on the offensive end. Gasol had 23 points and 17 rebounds. Yet it took until the end of the game for Corbin to make the switch.
The point of all this is that in order to be a great team you have to defend. The Bobcats have a top 5 defense with Al Jefferson in the middle and an undersized PG. The Jazz have never been in the top 15 defensively with Corbin as the coach. There is no way you can convince me that the Bobcats starters have better individual defenders than the Jazz. Corbin is an offensive minded coach that doesn't have the horses to make his system thrive.
Hopeful Lindsey was serious in what he said that we needed to find a defensive identity.
While I disagree with a lot of posters on this board when it comes to how bad Corbin is as a coach there is one thing that I think is a major problem. (And its not his overplaying of Vets).
Corbin has improved over the last couple of years in a lot of areas. He has made adjustment to the offense by changing it based on the players he has. Outside of Raja he has always seemed to have a locker room were people know what to expect and are kept together. The team Always plays hard. Even when they are getting killed they always seem to fight. The Jazz are one of the few bad teams that play hard every night. He is getting better at calling time outs and riding lineups that are working instead of just subing when the clock says to.
That being said the problem that I am seeing is huge. I don't think Corbin has the ability to think like a defensive minded coach. Offensively I have seen that adjustments. Defensively the Jazz always seem to give up shots that you scratch your head and think "how did that guy get so open?" The point I made with Kanter vs Marv in the last post I made I think is the main problem. Corbin just doesn't think defense. He starts Mavin against Pau with the thought that Pau well have to chase Marvin out to the 3 point line and that gives the Jazz an advantage, Yet is willing to give up a ton on defense by making Marv or RJeff guard Pau on the defensive end. Forcing your defense to double team and giving a great passing big in Gasol free rain to pick you apart with his passing. Marv had a clunker of a game on the offensive end. Gasol had 23 points and 17 rebounds. Yet it took until the end of the game for Corbin to make the switch.
The point of all this is that in order to be a great team you have to defend. The Bobcats have a top 5 defense with Al Jefferson in the middle and an undersized PG. The Jazz have never been in the top 15 defensively with Corbin as the coach. There is no way you can convince me that the Bobcats starters have better individual defenders than the Jazz. Corbin is an offensive minded coach that doesn't have the horses to make his system thrive.
Hopeful Lindsey was serious in what he said that we needed to find a defensive identity.
JimLes
Well-Known Member
Why do so many people ignore facts? You can't play Kanter and Favors together at the moment, as they do not know how. And I mean really don't know how. Not the kind of "don't-know-how" where you can just let them figure it out in-game. The kind of "don't-know-how" where you need lots of work in practice first, and maybe even then it won't work because maybe it's not that they don't know how, maybe it's just they can't. So, who is going to play next to Favors? Gobert? The problem is already that Kanter plays too close to the basket and is taking away space from Favors. You think Gobert would fix that? Who but Marvin can play the stretch 4?
Then there's the issue that apparently people would love to just get rid of Marvin and Jefferson permanently. Who will hit the three? We have only two players shooting over 40% from beyond the arc. Oh yeah, we don't need threes because we're not trying to win. Fine, but are we not at least trying to develop young players? Aren't we eventually going to need to shoot the three? When we're on the championship cruise everyone believes is inevitable with Parker or Bilbo Wiggins? Shouldn't our bigs practice how to hit three point shooters now? Instead of making it up as we go along next season?
Furthermore, not one player we are hoping to draft is an above-average three point shooter. Even if everything goes according to the plan, and the Jazz keep the current core of young players and draft a future franchise player in June, we won't have any three point shooters. Are we just going to try to win without them? Or will we have to sign some three point shooters to fill the rest of the rosters. Players like, oh...I don't know, Marvin Williams or Richard Jefferson? Do people actually thing the Jazz team next year will just consist of Burke, Burks, Gobert, Kanter, Favors, Hayward, and Wiggins? Isn't it idiotic to get rid of Marvin or Jefferson, only to have to sign the exact same kind of players next year?
People are acting like this is the Franchise mode on NBA 2K where you get 6-7 really good players, play them all 35 minutes a game, ignore match-ups or balance, and just steamroll your way through games.
Who said that? I don't think playing the young guys 35 minutes means they are going to steam roll through anything. I think they are going to lose games and some games will be ugly. Its still the way to go.
That funny because I hate people that respond to a post with thousands of question marks and then get snarky when that poster responds back trying to answer the questions that were asked. If you didn't want a response why ask questions to my post? I don't think my opinion is important I was trying to respond to the questions you were asking. Sorry for taking you seriously.
I'll admit I'm somewhat perplexed by your argument. I would venture to guess that most people would e supportive of this in the "year of discovery," wouldn't you assume? We have no idea if Kanter can hit the three (not that I'm saying he can, would or should), but it makes it a challenge if we just straight up say he can't when he's attempted a grand total of 2 for his career (one of which he connected on), neither of which were this year. So, I agree with you, but I'm uncertain as this seems comment seems different from your overall sentiments.
I would imagine Jabari would be considered above average.
Williams and Jefferson are both currently having great years from beyond the arc. To say that they are our only three point shooters wouldn't give a full context. Though Hayward is currently having a bad year from 3 (31%), his career average is still 38%. It's also tough to not consider Burke a three point shooter. I realize you're probably talking about the immediate here-and-now, but Jefferson and Williams being three point shooters is more of a relatively new thing (less so in Jefferson's case). Jefferson's career 3P% is 37.4, but his first five years in the league he shot above 34% once and shot 25% or less twice. Williams' career average is 33.6%. He's currently averaging 38.9% and that would be a career high if he maintains/exceeds that. With regard to his first five years in the league, his averages are 25%, 24%, 10%, 36% and 30%, respectively. The point I'm making is that we're concluding that we don't have three point shooters already (which is contrary to evidence), yet referencing Williams and Jefferson as shooters, when none of the other guys have even been in the league five years. This is also before we know who we will draft and who we will pick up with a significant amount of cap space. Worrying about next year's role players (especially when Jeffersom and Williams are free agents) is bordering on irrelevant.
See above. Also, let next offseason handle next year. No sense in worrying about it now as there are far more relevant problems that are actually happening now. It makes me feel like Walmart is offering buy-one-get-two-free on turkeys and we're too busy to make it because we're driving to Magna to save $0.06/gallon on gasoline.
JimLes
Well-Known Member
Have you ever had to write an essay? High school maybe? 3 arguments in support of your claim. That's what I did. I had three arguments. That's how you argue a point. Not dozens of points, most of which overlap. Pick your three strongest arguments. And learn how to use the quote function on the forum.
JimLes
Well-Known Member
I think you took this as me saying our bigs should be shooting threes. I was trying to say that our bigs ought to practice passing out of double teams and hitting open teammates. I don't want either of them to turn into one of those bigs like Big Al where once the ball goes in, it never comes back out. Having spot up or off the ball shooters like Marvin and Jefferson helps, because they can actually hit them. It's positive reinforcement. Sure, for the sole purpose of teaching Kanter to pass out, you could have Gobert spot up in the corner, but the reward factor goes down significantly unless the guy you hit can make the shot.
It's just the overall issue I have with some of the suggestions in this thread. Sure, let's experiment, but within reason. We want to build on this season, not treat it as an interlude. I know it's unclear what the Jazz will look like next year, as the player coming in through the draft will undoubtedly be a high profile one who will necessitate things be adjusted around him, but I think the front office has a decent idea of where they want to go. Why not start going there now? If we know what the Jazz playbook will look like next year, why not run those plays now to get everyone used to it? If we know we're going to surround the core with specialist role players, why do people have such a problem with them playing with specialized role players now? If the FO has decided that certain players will be coming off the bench next season(and remember, this HAS to happen as our young core will likely be 6 players), why not have them used to that role now? If we suspect that Kanter and Favors can't play together, let's get the used to those roles, instead of stubbornly playing them together "to see what happens" as some posters are suggesting?
I mean, player development should have a goal, right? And a structure? It's not just throw your best players on the floor at once and play them 35 minutes.
Got me there. I was in high school when the first apple computers came out. You know the ones with 5 and 1/4 inch floppy disk. I really don't know how to use the quote function in a forum. What I do know is that you quoted my response, made numerous false straw man arguments and when I responded you got snarky. I responded in kind.
JimLes
Well-Known Member
https://grammar.about.com/od/rs/g/rhetquesterm.htm
And I made three points.
1. Kanter and Derrick don't play well together. Marvin and Derrick do. You can throw all your PhDs around all you want, but unless it's in basketball, you're wrong and I'm right. You know how I know? The Jazz coaching staff agrees with me.
2. Since any future contending Jazz team will have some role players whose job is to shoot the three, we might as well get our young guys get used to it now. Burke and Hayward don't count, as they can't simultaneously be distributors and stop up shooters.
3. Since we're going to need a player like Marvin next year, why not...oh, I don't know...keep Marvin?
So, instead of responding point by point to every sentence, as well as rhetorical question, why not just respond to those three points, in freaking paragraph form, with your own three points?
I responded to what you now call rhetorical questions, because they were built on what I believed were false assertions. The format sucks because I truly do not know how to use the multiple quote system.
Oldtimer, your argument is essentially Trey Burke = fairy dust that will magically make Kanter-Favors work together because you say it will.
If you want to convince anyone then why not tell us what plays specifically will work and why, instead of relying on that fantasy n magic claim?
If you want to convince anyone then why not tell us what plays specifically will work and why, instead of relying on that fantasy n magic claim?
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
When I was in high school, we were loading TRS-80s with a cassette tape. I managed to figure it out.
{QUOTE]their text{/QUOTE]
your text
{QUOTE]their text{/QUOTE]
your text
Replace the { with [
You're allowed to dislike the form. I prefer the form when there are different supporting points in a paragraph, which are wrong in different ways, and the wrongness needs to be corrected by different methods. However, I'd be the first to acknowledge I probably overuse it myself. I'm trying to improve.
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
Just wanted to say that we have 3 draft picks next year so while our lotto pick may not be a great shooter (embiid, randle, wiggins) we have no idea who the jazz will draft with the other two..
Maybe the jazz are lookin to address the 3 ball with a couple of thier picks
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
I think hayward burke favors and burks have probably been playing basketball all thier lives so I think they have probably played with great shooters before (randy foye) so I'm worried about them "getting used to playing with shooters."
I hope to get a better shooter than marvin next year