What's new
By:
Filters

Rethinking our roster in light of Finals small ball

Gameface said:
We have the makings of a "tall" team that I think has the skill to compete next year. Why in the hell would we move away from the strength this (Jazz) team has? Strengths built largely through the draft including a few surprise home runs (Gobert --biggest surprise-- and Hayward).

Not only that, but if you listen to what the players are saying it's that they think there's something special happening with this team. They believe in themselves, they believe in their teammates and they are bought-in on what coach Snyder is selling. Don't make any sudden movements! This is what we've all been waiting for.
Click to expand...
Good post.
#letthecakebake
 
Qman said:
It was stunning to see a roster of Golden State Warriors all 6'7"-6'8" controlling the game against Cleveland. Everyone was athletic and had all around skill. Then I thought back a little more and realized Miami did the same thing with a extra athletic, skilled big in Bosh. So I started to think about which of our players fit the mold. Any maybe drafting a backup big will have a lot less value. Now I am not saying we need to abandon Gobert or the option of going big. I am saying athletic 6'7" guys with all-around skills may be more valuable than the common wisdom indicates.

Another example was the Kobe, Odom, Gasol Lakers. Offensively they had 5 guys who could shoot, handle and pass. They could also crush people on the boards at the same time.

Now Miami had Lebron and Bosh that helped to make everyone work. Golden State has Draymond Green as a unique defense force and Igoudala's incredible athletic ability doesn't hurt. IMO Favors has that kind of super athletic ability. Who is our second guy with the athletic ability to overcome size? Maybe Oubre or Stanley Johnson could become that. Or maybe Booker mix of big man skills and incredible athletic ability is just we need in the long term. If he can continue to improve his 3 point shooting I want him here for upcoming title runs.


A lineup of Exum, Burks, Hood, Hayward and Favors could approximate what Miami did on their title teams. This also make Ingles more important to retain. Maybe Elijah too. Now I believe we need another Center for emergencies. But using the 12th pick on one might be a mistake.

As a downer it makes Burke and Cotton look like more and more of weaknesses. Now if we trade Burke and 12 to move up and draft Winslow or Johnson we could just sign Marquis Teague to be our 3rd point with size.
Click to expand...
I agree with most everyone in this thread. Reworking our team to fit some small ball definition would be a big mistake. But with that said, I'm curious how your small ball ideas make Cotton look like more of a weakness? Exactly what are you expecting from your third point guard?
 
You don't need to play small ball, you need to be able to defend small ball. Favors and Gobert are athletic enough to make a difference. Its also a reason I want Johnson. Teams want to play small ball? Great! We'll still stop you, then kill you down low on offense!
 
The Jazz have the athletes (and the attitude) to defend small ball. Rudy vs. Draymond Green? Are you kidding me? That's a matchup that I'd love to see.
 
To create a small ball team would be foolish. Small ball is an option when the other team has inferior big men and you want to score (judging that your team doesn't have offensively-gifted bigs). When you're playing a team with solid bigs (AKA most teams that battle for a championship) you need to be able to defend them.
 
Small ball Warriors lineup

5 - Green
4 - Iguadola
3 - Barnes
2 - Thompson
1 - Curry

Jazz regular lineup

5 - Gobert
4 - Favors
3 - Hayward
2 - Hood/Burks
1 - Exum

Question #1.) Can the Jazz defend against this lineup? I think they are athletic to, but the key two matchup a would be Favors/Iguadola and Exum/Curry. Rudy can handle Green and I think that some combination of Burks/Hood/Hayward could slow down Barnes and Thompson. Iguadola is more athletic than Favors and a better shooter, but I think Favors could handle him. Exum would have to use his length and help defense to slow Curry down. When Steph struggles, so does the whole team.

Question #2.) Can the Jazz then use their size to exploit the Warriors on offense. I don't think Green/Iggy can match up with what Gobert and Favors bring to the low post. Especially if Rudy improves his strength and shooting. They'd kill GSW on the boards, which should lead to more 2nd chance opportunities. My guess is that the Warriors would "go big" to match up with what the Jazz do.
 
I think too much is being made of the small ball that we're seeing in the Finals. What I see is two coaches playing chess with their lineups and rotations. There's still plenty of room in the League for height and length, assuming they are paired with some measure of hustle and at least a hint of athleticism.
 
Ellis269 said:
Small ball Warriors lineup

5 - Green
4 - Iguadola
3 - Barnes
2 - Thompson
1 - Curry

Jazz regular lineup

5 - Gobert
4 - Favors
3 - Hayward
2 - Hood/Burks
1 - Exum

Question #1.) Can the Jazz defend against this lineup? I think they are athletic to, but the key two matchup a would be Favors/Iguadola and Exum/Curry. Rudy can handle Green and I think that some combination of Burks/Hood/Hayward could slow down Barnes and Thompson. Iguadola is more athletic than Favors and a better shooter, but I think Favors could handle him. Exum would have to use his length and help defense to slow Curry down. When Steph struggles, so does the whole team.

Question #2.) Can the Jazz then use their size to exploit the Warriors on offense. I don't think Green/Iggy can match up with what Gobert and Favors bring to the low post. Especially if Rudy improves his strength and shooting. They'd kill GSW on the boards, which should lead to more 2nd chance opportunities. My guess is that the Warriors would "go big" to match up with what the Jazz do.
Click to expand...

This is the essence. Who adjusts to whom? If your brand is better than their brand, you win.

But the OP did say to not change out the gobert plan, but to consider where the emphasis goes on the next player acquired. Do you favor more robustness in a current strength: athletic bigs or do you increase your ability to take on the trending smal ball? Unfortunately, at the 12th pick , I simply go to best player available to maximize trade options when the time for fine tuning occurs. Jazz will start moving piecies a year from now once the competitive landscape is understood at a playoff-caliber level.
 
To play like Golden State, it helps to have a Steph Curry on your team. Last time I checked, there aren't too many of those out there.

And the same, there aren't Rudy Gobert's growing on trees. That's our strength. We are going with that.
 
Cappy_Smurf said:
If Cleveland hadn't given away the 1st game, GS could easily be down 3-1. Kind of strange to base this off 1 game and ignore the fact that they've kind of been exposed in the playoffs more they've dominated. For the most part, I view small ball as something you try when your bigs are getting outplayed, but definitely not something to intentionally build a team on. Even with the sharpshooters they have, they Could still end up losing to LeBron and anybody else. They really aren't dominating to the point you think about copying what they have.
Click to expand...

This.

The key to wins in the current finals series has been controlling tempo and/or being able to adapt to what the opponent is throwing at you. In this case small-ball has been the antidote to cleveland slowing down the pace. But it isn't the end-all be-all secret finals formula. It is merely the adaptation that GS used that seems to work. At least for one game.
 
Magic Spray said:
It's not about size. It's about skill. That's why Gobert is so devastating. He has the measurables of Shawn Bradley without being a massive stiff.

I'd rather play Gobert against a small lineup than say, oh I don't know let's just pull out a random 6'8" player from utah's past, let's say Scott Padgett. Even though Padgett is a better matchup against the Warriors small balls, he sucked like Cherokee parks. Play Gobert and favors against a small ball lineup, see how ineffective a whole bunch of midgets are against those two. When you have the high ground you maintain it. Jazz are going to make the league play them on their terms. And it's going to be breathtaking.
Click to expand...

Bingo. the point isn't that Gobert is 7+++ feet, it's that he has lateral speed, he can turn and compensate, he has gotten so much better at knowing when and where to jump, etc... a small lineup against Gobert means giving up the paint completely on offense, now you might still win if you are a fantastic shooting team.

Let's not get carried away witht he whole small ball thing.
 
Ellis269 said:
Small ball Warriors lineup

5 - Green
4 - Iguadola
3 - Barnes
2 - Thompson
1 - Curry

Jazz regular lineup

5 - Gobert
4 - Favors
3 - Hayward
2 - Hood/Burks
1 - Exum

Question #1.) Can the Jazz defend against this lineup? I think they are athletic to, but the key two matchup a would be Favors/Iguadola and Exum/Curry. Rudy can handle Green and I think that some combination of Burks/Hood/Hayward could slow down Barnes and Thompson. Iguadola is more athletic than Favors and a better shooter, but I think Favors could handle him. Exum would have to use his length and help defense to slow Curry down. When Steph struggles, so does the whole team.

Question #2.) Can the Jazz then use their size to exploit the Warriors on offense. I don't think Green/Iggy can match up with what Gobert and Favors bring to the low post. Especially if Rudy improves his strength and shooting. They'd kill GSW on the boards, which should lead to more 2nd chance opportunities. My guess is that the Warriors would "go big" to match up with what the Jazz do.
Click to expand...

Here is how we defend this lineup:

1) Slow it down. Play the half court sets. Protect the ball and reduce options for fast breaks.
2) Defend the perimeter. Let Gobert/Favors shore up the rim, and take away the 3. Let them challenge the bigs inside instead of the 3 ball. In the end this will force them into a lot of long 2's or mid-range contested shots, the absolute worst shots in the game.
3) Attack their attackers. Force their big guns to play some D themselves. Post up Favors on Iggy. Iggy cannot stand against that and will expend a ton of energy trying to slow down Favors. Do the same with Exum against Curry. Hell with that lineup I would clear out and let Exum back down Curry nearly every possession until they start doubling and tripling. Also, use alternate ball handlers. Let Burks or Hayward bring the ball down to set up the offense. Dudes that primarily focus on offense can be thrown off their game when they are forced to play defense.

The bigger danger really for us would be how to break their zone, as they would undoubtedly run zone at us until we prove we can break it. We need some long ball folks for that, so hopefully Exum steadies his shot and Hayward as well. Hood/Burks should be fine for that but if they are really the only options that doesn't bode well.

And I think you are right, that GS would end up going big to try to offset what we are doing. With those lineups I could see Gobert averaging nearly 20 boards be game (if we are talking about a seasons series or a playoff series). Favors wouldn't be far behind. As good as those guys are on the boards (and Hayward is no slouch either we know) GS would suffer badly on rebounding and would have to bring Bogut or someone back in to help on the glass.
 
https://espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/20...nals-stephen-curry-officially-race-finals-mvp

"......The Cavaliers went small, likely because Timofey Mozgov looked out of sorts defending Golden State's drag screens and in generally keeping up with the Warriors. He also was flummoxed by double-teams, something he rarely sees. Curry set about attacking the cracks in Cleveland's downsized, offense-oriented looks. "They made an adjustment," Curry said. "Didn't play Mozgov pretty much at all in the whole game. So they tried to match our lineup."

The Cavs couldn't do it. While the move gave Cleveland a little life offensively, it ultimately was overmatched playing Golden State's style. The scene was a bit surprising in a Finals that, for the first few games, had been slow and grinding. Now it's suddenly a look into where the league is headed, how spacing and speed claim priority over size in many situations. "It's just not a series for bigs right now," Kerr said.

That's another reason the game served as a reminder of just how revolutionary Curry is. The smallest guy on the floor can dictate so much of what happens, mostly with his outside shot. He might not be better than LeBron James today, and might not be tomorrow. His rise still represents a changing of the guard in basketball. Small can prevail over large, unlike in the NBA of yore. The future is here. It's smaller and quicker than the past."
 
Stifle Tower said:
SA seemed to do just fine with a 6'11" PF. You also failed to recognize Bynum started alongside Gasol for all but 5 games of their two championships in 2009 and 2010. Maybe a little too hasty in thinking Gobert and Favors can't be a championship tandem and it's time to go small.
Click to expand...

We may need to revamp, and re-release the Jazzfanz.com official jump to conclusions mat for the 2015 off season.
 
The Cavs are dumb. They can't play the same game as the Warriors. Golden State operates at a much higher level when playing small ball. The counter to that is to go bigger, slow things down and manhandle their smaller lineups. Force them to abandon the paint and shoot longer, contested shots. Should have kept Wiggins. He'd be their best non-Lebron offensive and defensive player by now.
 
People may say this concern is dumb and we will be fine being big, but I bet there is a lot of discussion of this issue at Jazz HQ. Personally, I tend to agree with the idea of sticking with your best talent and working around that which is Gobert now for us, Curry for GS. Could be an interesting series in a few years, real big vs real small. Cavs are really neither right now.
 
bigs will have to be more like anthony davis. 6ft 9 - 6ft 10 guy with long arms - who can run up and down and can defend at least 3 position. not necessarily a stretch 4, but a versatile defender who can pick & roll and get to the rim.
 
The NBa is a copy cat league. Expect the number of small lineups and 3pt chucking to grow exponentially next season.

The NBA is a flexible league. Historically they have been good at changing the rules to enhance the skills of the biggest stars.

The nba is smart. They realize that if all 30 teams are looking for players with the same skill set, that it creates a shortage of that skill set, and a surplus of other less desirable skills. They will make adjustments to correct for these to capture the surplus. If that means changing the rules to increase the contributions of bigs, then the league will find a way to do it.

Eliminating corner threes, live balls on the rim, new hack a shaq rules would all increase the importance of NBA bigs.
 
Does anyone think that Gobert would punish Draymond Green or Lebron James if they were playing the 5? Because I sure don't. And if they're dragging Gobert and Favors away from the rim, this team goes from THE BEST DEFENSIVE TEAM OF ALL TIME to well below average.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top