Preseason Game #2 - Portland @ Utah, 12-21-11, 7pm MST
- Thread starter YB85
- Start date
I'd advise against this. Wheels is only tolerable when the Blazers are down by like 30 and he's whining at the refs. Any other time, listening to nothing at all is preferable as long as you've got live video to look at.
Come on guys, keep it real!
_______________________________________________________________________________________
The Jazz will play better!
________________________________________________________________________________________
Defense wins!
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Keith McLeod will play!!!
__________________________________________________________________________________________
19-13!!!!!!!
__________________________________________________________________________________________
![free-cute-smileys-289[1].gif](https://www.smileyshut.com/free-cute-smileys-289[1].gif)
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Mcleod is a beast. Must play this game. Go Mcleod. Need Coach back.
memo is money
Active Member
I just cannot understand the fans who are already in calamity howler mode. We have +10 pages for a freakin' scrimmage, including player-by-player analysis 
It will take at least a couple of months for this team to play solid, consistently efficient, I think. I will be fair to coach Corbin, who is in the toughest position during this period.
Coaching staff and management have very litte time to
- accomplish a degree of cohesion both on offense and defense
- decide on who to start, who to pair together considering the harmony in potential 5-man units
- divide the 96 mins of PT between 5 bigmen
- insert new defensive and offensive strategies (1-2 week of training camp + just 2 preseason games) and get the rookies and newcomers to execute them by not thinking too much on play, instead instinctively, which is nearly impossible to attain in such a shortened training period
- decide on whether to make a line up that is changeless throughout the season ,barring injuries; or to make radical changes in the rotations pursuant to opponents' rotation etc...
Players also have had a short time understanding how to effectively use each other's skillset, especially bigmen's. From my viewpoint, that was the thing that hurt the Jazz most against Blazers. Too many turnovers on offense, and thinking too much on defensive rotations, as well as miserable effort from veterans to start the ballgame were other factors. Most of these agents, IMO, should be expected. The Jazz have a new head coach, many new faces and old ones with little experience of Jazz basketball. The only thing I was unhappy with was the lack of effort, mainly by veterans. Way to set example for youngsters.
However, I'm not buying the idea that the Jazz should start all / most of the youngsters since the club is in a period of change. You play the games to win, not to give any chance to rookies for them to develop, hoping that in X years you will have hell of a squad. When it comes to the dilemma of playing vets over young ones / providing PT for player development; I think a coach should seek for a balance, which is very difficult to ensure in such a shortened period of time. Giving 25-30 mins to a rookie does not guarantee a bright future for your club and the player. Minnesota has had lineups including many lottery and early first round picks, and if they become a 50 win team in two years, does it make them a successful organization, will it be considered a pleasure for their fans to enjoy the much-anticipated +.500 season? I do not give a s*** if Minny wins WCF or Finals in 4-5 years with their numerous lottery picks.
My opinion is that; transition of roles in team dynamics from veterans to youngsters should occur smoothly and in an extended period, rather than quickly, even when you select a player like KD or Rose from draft. Regardless of who starts the game on Wednesday, coach will be interested in the bigger picture, the cohesion in the units on the floor, communication in team defense, offensive execution. The search for lineup preferences may continue till the mid-January, so I find the discussions as to who will/should start indiscreet. We have seen the team play 2 times, one being a much-disputed scrimmage. I, personally, am more interested in the overall effort and execution, fluent on-the-court play as a group.
It will take at least a couple of months for this team to play solid, consistently efficient, I think. I will be fair to coach Corbin, who is in the toughest position during this period. Coaching staff and management have very litte time to
- accomplish a degree of cohesion both on offense and defense
- decide on who to start, who to pair together considering the harmony in potential 5-man units
- divide the 96 mins of PT between 5 bigmen
- insert new defensive and offensive strategies (1-2 week of training camp + just 2 preseason games) and get the rookies and newcomers to execute them by not thinking too much on play, instead instinctively, which is nearly impossible to attain in such a shortened training period
- decide on whether to make a line up that is changeless throughout the season ,barring injuries; or to make radical changes in the rotations pursuant to opponents' rotation etc...
Players also have had a short time understanding how to effectively use each other's skillset, especially bigmen's. From my viewpoint, that was the thing that hurt the Jazz most against Blazers. Too many turnovers on offense, and thinking too much on defensive rotations, as well as miserable effort from veterans to start the ballgame were other factors. Most of these agents, IMO, should be expected. The Jazz have a new head coach, many new faces and old ones with little experience of Jazz basketball. The only thing I was unhappy with was the lack of effort, mainly by veterans. Way to set example for youngsters.
However, I'm not buying the idea that the Jazz should start all / most of the youngsters since the club is in a period of change. You play the games to win, not to give any chance to rookies for them to develop, hoping that in X years you will have hell of a squad. When it comes to the dilemma of playing vets over young ones / providing PT for player development; I think a coach should seek for a balance, which is very difficult to ensure in such a shortened period of time. Giving 25-30 mins to a rookie does not guarantee a bright future for your club and the player. Minnesota has had lineups including many lottery and early first round picks, and if they become a 50 win team in two years, does it make them a successful organization, will it be considered a pleasure for their fans to enjoy the much-anticipated +.500 season? I do not give a s*** if Minny wins WCF or Finals in 4-5 years with their numerous lottery picks.
My opinion is that; transition of roles in team dynamics from veterans to youngsters should occur smoothly and in an extended period, rather than quickly, even when you select a player like KD or Rose from draft. Regardless of who starts the game on Wednesday, coach will be interested in the bigger picture, the cohesion in the units on the floor, communication in team defense, offensive execution. The search for lineup preferences may continue till the mid-January, so I find the discussions as to who will/should start indiscreet. We have seen the team play 2 times, one being a much-disputed scrimmage. I, personally, am more interested in the overall effort and execution, fluent on-the-court play as a group.
Gyp Rosetti
Banned
MIM, you're being too kind. At least a couple months? By that time the season will be lost and young guys may have become disenchanted with the direction of the Jazz organization. This isn't rocket science here. We don't need John Nash to figure out a) who's busting their *** on both ends of the court b) who's producing on both ends of the court c) who's limiting "unforced errors" and d) how to mix and match the guys best. Seriously, we're only talking about five players here. It's a lock that Harris is starting so Corbin really only needs to figure out the other four guys to start. Is that so tough? Whoever's left is pretty much off the bench. Again, not rocket science. But if Corbin ignores such logic and chooses instead to go with the vets because that's the safe route, he'll see the losses piling up quickly and find a fanbase who wants his head. Regardless, starting Okur and Jefferson will be one of the dumbest moves in the history of the league and if he does that, he might as well sign his name on his career suicide papers.
billyshelby
Well-Known Member
I disagree. Right now, I don't think Favors and Al are very complimentary. You can make arguments for Favors and Sap. Favors and Okur could also work. But for better or worse, Al and Sap is still our best option. And honestly, I think those 2 can play a lot better together than they have. But Al and Okur could be great offensively. Defensively, they might be compensated for if our rotations didn't look so horrific. Start Okur against Wallace (instead of Batum) and I think we'll see an improvement off the bat.
Are Al and Sap really our best option? Favors is better are everything than Jefferson except in post iso's. So we don't throw the ball to him for post iso all the time.
Basically we give up so much defensively and on the boards by going with Jefferson over Favors. Now if we are being sneaking and trying to hold up Jefferson's trade value I can see why to play him.
billyshelby
Well-Known Member
Favors is not better than Al by a long margin at this point. I loved the game he had last night. But he still doesn't have a post game. Starting Favors with somebody who isn't a threat in the post will lead to disaster (unless he miraculously develops a P&R game that he doesn't currently have). He's much better suited to keep developing a post game against second unit players.
freakazoid
Well-Known Member
Memo is in no way a starter, but I really hope no one is suggesting not starting Al. Regardless of whether we keep him or trade him, he's starting. I tend to believe Utah will look to trade him by the deadline if we're not in the playoff hunt. Obviously our best case scenario would be for him to put up big numbers, if that's going to be the case.