Interesting Locke tweets & recap re:last night

[NAOS]

I don't need to. Its pretty clear already.

And in response to your reputation comment:

It doesn't matter. I don't care about E-Peen Rep.

That's what I thought. I mean, who needs to make sense? You're totally right to remain occluded in stupidity.

 

[billyshelby]

People have to start questioning Locke's assertions a little more. He doesn't see things accurately, and rarely reports what he sees with context.

1. Paul was "held" to 1-6 by Hayward. Actually, 1-5. 3 were jumpers from 20 feet and out. Meanwhile, down the stretch, when Paul was driving, he drew two fouls (4 FT's) and made a jumper. Hayward was our best option to guard Paul, but not even good on the whole, and he got exposed when Paul took the game over.

2. Favors/Griffin: Easily the biggest misstatement bordering on a lie. In the 1st, he went 1-2 on Millsap, the other 4 points with Favors in. When he came back in in the 2nd, Griffin drew 2 personals on Favors (4 FT's), and later picked up a personal from Tinsley w/ Sap in. In the 3rd, Griffin scored 4 points on the Al/Sap tandem before Favors came in. He scored 2 points on Favors before getting a breather in the early 4th. In the 4th he was mostly out against Favors. But he scored 2 with Favors in, 3 with Al/Sap.

I'm not arguing that Favors isn't our best defensive option, but he hardly 'shut down' Griffin. The guy was 7-10 and 8-9 from the line. More than half those points came when Favors/Kanter were on the floor.

 

[//r00t 4 Jazz]

That's one thing I forgot to bring up but was commenting on during the game, some how Blake and DeAndre bad FT shooters were hitting well above their normal FT%.

Jazz' FT defense is horrible a little levity in a depressing time

 

[Former Member]

This Bench vs Starter bull **** is so stupid to argue over. We know the ****ing starters aren't good enough to win a championship. The bench has some great potential, but that all it is right now. Let them sink or swim. If they sink, at least their will be another solid draft pick. Jerry West always claimed to be in the middle was the worst spot, and that's exactly where the veteran led team is. Smack dab in the worst position in basketball.

I feel exactly the same way. Our starters are good for another 4-5 games in the playoffs if we're lucky. The kids bring us the best chance at one day winning a championship. They might fail, but one of them might become a cornerstone of a championship squad. I am indifferent with the mediocrity of our current starting squad.

 

[Revolution 9]

They can blame the officials all they want but it wasn't a foul on Foye and Jefferson fouled CP3 for no reason.

The way they were calling the game that was a foul at the end. Body contact.

Big Al's was a foul of the ticky tack variety, and should have been let go.
Some of the fouls called on both ends before that were laughable, and that is what led to the upset reactions.

 

[Gyp Rosetti]

People have to start questioning Locke's assertions a little more. He doesn't see things accurately, and rarely reports what he sees with context.

I'm curious. How can we do this? Is Locke a shill to the Jazz? Can we all openly question his dumbass about not questioning Corbin's dumbass in interviews and such?

 

[billyshelby]

I'm curious. How can we do this? Is Locke a shill to the Jazz? Can we all openly question his dumbass about not questioning Corbin's dumbass in interviews and such?

I was more specifically referring to his tweets and "noggin" takeaways he always posts. Like saying Hayward defended Paul well only one of Paul's missed shots (the block at the top of the 4th) had anything to do with Hayward's D. Meanwhile, Paul got Hayward on 2 fouls down the stretch and doinked him on that step back move before the Al foul to take the lead. Or saying Favors was giving Griffin the business when that's really not what happened.

As to your question, yes, you can question Locke's objectivity highly. Anybody who has watched this team's offense over the last 10 games (and all season, really) would have to question Ty's coaching skill at some point. I mean, he's part of the puzzle, too. Not only has Locke NEVER questioned Ty, but he posts all this distracting stuff about what lineups might work which presupposes that the system is fine, it's the players not executing it.

Personally, I think Locke likes Ty and, as a matter of principle, doesn't want to call out the coach. But I also strongly believe he knows where his bread is buttered and consequently is following marching orders not ever putting Ty under the microscope.