Jazz 3 main objectives


Harcher

Well-Known Member
One of the difficulties of reading a fan site is that as soon as one of the players (i.e. Kanter or Burkes lately) are not performing folks ask questions like "we should be tradin' him" and while that conclusion might be true there is a lot time and work that needs to be done. Additionally, the thread about the bench situation also, had me pondering that we should discuss the big picture a bit so as to put these “insta changes” into perspective.
So what are the Jazz main objectives this year.
.
1...Win 35 games
.....1a - must be competitive in most (say 35 of 47 losses, to give a mantra of '35 and 35')
2...Develop the system, develop the culture
3...Develop players
.
I picked 35 games as sufficient improvement to enable player/organization/fans satisfaction of 'progress'. Then, when that goal is in progress, it is a wise idea to make coaching decisions that are not 100% toward winning a particular game, but instead made to cement an idea or concept into the team or to give them a chance execute what they SHOULD.
.
This means there will be a lot of play calls, rotations, subbing in the "hot hand" actions that will be experimented with in situations where “just give it to Hayward” would be better AT THAT INSTANT. (the NY Nix have been in the ‘just give it to Carmello’ for the past N years and it is a bad idea in the long run.)
.
So things like examining the bench play call this into question…. Optimize for winning or optimize for the three objectives above? Getting TB3 to reach his potential? How? Or just bench him for sucky shooting in favor of Exum? Or 'plan that player x gets an average of n mins/game in spite of some in-season set backs. etc.
.
I think success should be measured on the three objectives above (almost as equal measures actually) About 3 years from now the weighting will be on winning games. And at that point moving players in and out to fill gaps and who fit the system.
.
What do you think?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ema


Bodhi

Well-Known Member
I agree with all of this, actually. I have complete trust in QS and his methodology. I genuinely think a lot of what he is doing is what you're advocating. When I watch his body language at the very end of close games I don't see him tense and ultimately worried sick about that particular game, but in reveling in the opportunity and using it as the ultimate teaching tool.

It's been a god send to be in so many close games with a young team and a young coach growing together. I'm 100% convinced these situation will pay dividends in the future. Our core is intact for the most part and now it's time to start feeling each other out and gaining genuine continuity.

Ty was a disaster in so many aspects but he was a complete failure when it came to this kind of stuff.
 

Harcher

Well-Known Member
I agree with all of this, actually. I have complete trust in QS and his methodology. I genuinely think a lot of what he is doing is what you're advocating. When I watch his body language at the very end of close games I don't see him tense and ultimately worried sick about that particular game, but in reveling in the opportunity and using it as the ultimate teaching tool.

It's been a god send to be in so many close games with a young team and a young coach growing together. I'm 100% convinced these situation will pay dividends in the future. Our core is intact for the most part and now it's time to start feeling each other out and gaining genuine continuity.

Ty was a disaster in so many aspects but he was a complete failure when it came to this kind of stuff.

Concur. The bolded part had me wondering if Ty CANT or WOULDNT. While the "play veterans or youngster" debate is behind us regardless, I think it was the symbolic debate of what the overall plan was or should have been. And looking back it was possible that DL and Ty were not on the same page... on purpose of DL so he could just move along with coaching change.
 

ema

Well-Known Member
Contributor
One of the difficulties of reading a fan site is that as soon as one of the players (i.e. Kanter or Burkes lately) are not performing folks ask questions like "we should be tradin' him" and while that conclusion might be true there is a lot time and work that needs to be done. Additionally, the thread about the bench situation also, had me pondering that we should discuss the big picture a bit so as to put these “insta changes” into perspective.
So what are the Jazz main objectives this year.
.
1...Win 35 games
.....1a - must be competitive in most (say 35 of 47 losses, to give a mantra of '35 and 35')
2...Develop the system, develop the culture
3...Develop players
.
I picked 35 games as sufficient improvement to enable player/organization/fans satisfaction of 'progress'. Then, when that goal is in progress, it is a wise idea to make coaching decisions that are not 100% toward winning a particular game, but instead made to cement an idea or concept into the team or to give them a chance execute what they SHOULD.
.
This means there will be a lot of play calls, rotations, subbing in the "hot hand" actions that will be experimented with in situations where “just give it to Hayward” would be better AT THAT INSTANT. (the NY Nix have been in the ‘just give it to Carmello’ for the past N years and it is a bad idea in the long run.)
.
So things like examining the bench play call this into question…. Optimize for winning or optimize for the three objectives above? Getting TB3 to reach his potential? How? Or just bench him for sucky shooting in favor of Exum? Or 'plan that player x gets an average of n mins/game in spite of some in-season set backs. etc.
.
I think success should be measured on the three objectives above (almost as equal measures actually) About 3 years from now the weighting will be on winning games. And at that point moving players in and out to fill gaps and who fit the system.
.
What do you think?
Nice post. I think similarly for the most part.

I believe there is/must be a balance between being patient with certain players to win them and giving the chances to the other players who might fill in and step up. In current case, the time is certainly not the time that we have to give and do everything we can just for the sake of winning games. That time will come as well for sure and it won't be that far away in my opinion but for now, I think we should give the optimum chances to Burke or any other struggling players to pick things up and find their games, as long as it's not to the extent of displeasing or intercepting the other players, of course.
 

Top