Game Thread Feb 09, 2026 05:30PM MT: Utah Jazz @ Miami Heat

[framer]

Right, and we’ve got more talent than those other teams, so which way is that balance shaking out going to favor?


Yes… this is what I and many have been saying… that we have guys that will be too good, but then are told things about how the FO wants to keep the pick and so therefore we will. What I and many others are doing is trying to bridge the gap between your two ideas, which you’re acknowledging here about being too good… and that should connect to the idea of how it affects the pick other than this magic idea that it’s set in stone that we’ll keep it but also set in stone that we’re going to be more competitive. Those ides are at odds with each other.


I’ve been posting here without disappearing for over 25 years. A lot of people post based on a disposition or a template, whether it be positive or negative. My posting history is nothing of the sort. There have been times where I’ve appeared irrationally positive, which many can attest of like when Rudy was out in Donovan’s rookie year and everyone was wanting to tank and I said it was stupid because we weren’t really bad. And may times since then I’ve been talking people off ledges. Not because I was inherently positive, but because the reality was clearly there to be observed for anyone willing to do so. Likewise, there are times where I’ve been negative, but it’s a reaction to an honest inventory of where we’re at and not a default disposition.

But if one were to ask themselves if they’re always on the same side of any issue it may help indicate that maybe it’s not the dynamics of then situation dictating that but rather one’s default disposition.

I wasn't necessarily referring to you in particular. Sorry about that!

 

[NUMBERICA]

There's a thread titled "Jaren Jackson Jr. traded to the Jazz", it took me less than a minute to grab just a few samples:

View attachment 20137

View attachment 20138

View attachment 20139

View attachment 20140
View attachment 20143

View attachment 20142

I for sure hated the trade, at least at first blush. I can see why they did it. Jury is still out.

I gave the deadline a B-. If we lose the pick it is an F-.

 

[MTS]

And may times since then I’ve been talking people off ledges. Not because I was inherently positive, but because the reality was clearly there to be observed for anyone willing to do so.

Similar to what I tried to do with you when I posted the lottery odds, our current position, and all that would have to happen for us to drop below even an 85.7% chance of keeping our pick.

 

[infection]

Similar to what I tried to do with you when I posted the lottery odds, our current position, and all that would have to happen for us to drop below even an 85.7% chance of keeping our pick.

The odds of staying in that position are very far from certain. We certainly could, but that is quite far from a near certainty. A 4-game winning streak can happen, and it can take much, much less than that.

 

[Thee Jazz Fan]

I’m mostly not upset by this win. The heats roster is really bad, Spo must be a really good coach for them to have that many wins. But at the same time it just dawned on me that our worst shooter hit an improbable 40 ft frozen rope to beat the first half buzzer

 

[Thee Jazz Fan]

The odds of staying in that position are very far from certain. We certainly could, but that is quite far from a near certainty. A 4-game winning streak can happen, and it can take much, much less than that.

I’m not too worried yet. As long as we pull starters in the fourth every game we’ll be fine. That heat roster sans Bam is almost every other teams bench. They have no lead dawg scorers

 

[NUMBERICA]

I’m mostly not upset by this win. The heats roster is really bad, Spo must be a really good coach for them to have that many wins. But at the same time it just dawned on me that our worst shooter hit an improbable 40 ft frozen rope to beat the first half buzzer

In a vacuum I am not that upset by the “win” either. In the broader context that the Jazz probably can’t triumph in head-to-head tank battles any longer, they really just cannot be winning games like this, point blank, mathematically, if they want to assure they keep the pick. They will win 10+ games which would probably put them 8th.

For all the heat the Jazz are getting for tanking, they are going pretty soft playing two all-stars at all and 0 G-Leaguers.

 

[infection]

I’m not too worried yet. As long as we pull starters in the fourth every game we’ll be fine. That heat roster sans Bam is almost every other teams bench. They have no lead dawg scorers

That’s fine theoretically. Don’t be surprised when there’s some pressure or action that forces our hand, whether directly or through back channels, where that isn’t a viable option for nearly 28 games.

 

[MTS]

The odds of staying in that position are very far from certain. We certainly could, but that is quite far from a near certainty. A 4-game winning streak can happen, and it can take much, much less than that.

Let's quantify that "could", can we?

We have two things that can foul up our positioning:

1. The Pels, with no incentive to tank, do not win more than the Jazz in psycho tank mode, AND at least two of the Grizzlies/Bucks/Mavericks win less than the Jazz. The combined odds of both these things happening are, in my opinion, extremely low.
2. The Pels, with no incentive to tank, DO win more than the Jazz in psycho tank mode, BUT all three of the Grizzlies/Bucks/Mavericks win less than the Jazz. This is, in my opinion, a bit more likely than the first scenario, but also extremely low.

If either scenario hits, our odds of keeping the pick drop below 85.7% to around 60.7%. In other words, it would take an extremely low odds just to even be in a position to have a 39.3% chance of losing the pick.

Personally, I think the odds of either scenario 1 or 2 happening are 10% at most, probably lower.

Odds of keeping the pick become 1 - (10% x 39.3%) = 96.07%

But let's say you disagree, and say the odds of either scenario 1 or 2 happening are double what I put, at 20%. 1 - (20% x 39.3%) = 92.14%

Want to increase it even further to 30%? 1 - (30% x 39.3%) = 88.21%

I get that this is a real simplified exercise and not precise, but hopefully the overall point has been conveyed: We're in the ~90%ish range of probability in keeping our pick.

I wouldn't describe those odds as "could happen", as you have. I'd describe them more as "extremely strong".

Is it hyperbolic to say we're keeping the pick for sure? Obviously, nobody can guarantee anything under 100% odds. Are the posts we see every single time the Jazz win about how catastrophic the win was also an unwarranted overreaction?

Yep, big time.

 

[fishonjazz]

Meh, I sure as hell want the young guys sent out there to lose to do everything they can to win. The problem we are going to face is that our young guys and trade leftovers are going to be better than some of the "stars" of the teams we are going to face, especially Eastern teams.

And those young guys are just getting better the longer we play them.

Washington is sending their young guys out there to try to win as well. What they aren't doing is sending tre young and anthony davis doe.

 

[fishonjazz]

There's a thread titled "Jaren Jackson Jr. traded to the Jazz", it took me less than a minute to grab just a few samples:

View attachment 20137

View attachment 20138

View attachment 20139

View attachment 20140
View attachment 20143

View attachment 20142

I see one single post saying they hate it. From Shad. In the context of him saying we are going to lose Kessler. So if we keep kessler then zero people who hate it?
Tremendous Downside hates everything so he doesn't count.

 

[infection]

Let's quantify that "could", can we?

We have two things that can foul up our positioning:

1. The Pels, with no incentive to tank, do not win more than the Jazz in psycho tank mode, AND at least two of the Grizzlies/Bucks/Mavericks win less than the Jazz. The combined odds of both these things happening are, in my opinion, extremely low.
2. The Pels, with no incentive to tank, DO win more than the Jazz in psycho tank mode, BUT all three of the Grizzlies/Bucks/Mavericks win less than the Jazz. This is, in my opinion, a bit more likely than the first scenario, but also extremely low.

If either scenario hits, our odds of keeping the pick drop below 85.7% to around 60.7%. In other words, it would take an extremely low odds just to even be in a position to have a 39.3% chance of losing the pick.

Personally, I think the odds of either scenario 1 or 2 happening are 10% at most, probably lower.

Odds of keeping the pick become 1 - (10% x 39.3%) = 96.07%

But let's say you disagree, and say the odds of either scenario 1 or 2 happening are double what I put, at 20%. 1 - (20% x 39.3%) = 92.14%

Want to increase it even further to 30%? 1 - (30% x 39.3%) = 88.21%

I get that this is a real simplified exercise and not precise, but hopefully the overall point has been conveyed: We're in the ~90%ish range of probability in keeping our pick.

I wouldn't describe those odds as "could happen", as you have. I'd describe them more as "extremely strong".

Is it hyperbolic to say we're keeping the pick for sure? Obviously, nobody can guarantee anything under 100% odds. Are the posts we see every single time the Jazz win about how catastrophic the win was also an unwarranted overreaction?

Yep, big time.

I’d estimate the odds of keeping the pick are around 70%. That’s a really good number if you have those odds cumulatively in many equations, but if you’re only getting one roll of the dice then 30% is not an insignificant number.

In the event we do lose the pick, I believe we’ll see a lot of, “yep, that’s how it goes some times. Nothing is certain and even if we tanked harder we could’ve still lost the pick, just nothing you can do it’s all a crapshoot” type posts.