What's new
By:

To the "we're better without Conley" crew

Thee jazz fan said:
Conley will turn Joe into a spot up shooter, we’ve seen him in that roll and we have seen him play with Conley. That was the result. Mitchell Joe and Conley can’t all be the primary ball handler and playmaker. You can with two, three is just too much. We never should’ve traded for him in the first place. Mitchell should’ve been named the starting pg to start the season.
Click to expand...

With Mitchell, Joe, AND Conley you can pretty much have two playmaker Ball handlers in the game at ALL times. All of the advanced stats have said that Mitchell struggles, long term, as the point. The recent playoffs seem to have backed that up a bit.

Obviously, having Bojan over Crowder helps a ton, but I'm not comfortable with tasking Mitchell to handle full time point, the scoring load, and playing good defense for long minutes. I'd rather give up some ball handling duties for more energy on defense, where we have really slipped with Donovan at the point.
 
infection said:
Locke already broke these numbers down. Joe shot the same number on threes as he has the past few years in off-the-bounce and spot up, it's just that in the second unit his spot up attempts went way down and his off-the-bounce went way up. So yes, him being a spot up shooter is good, and one reason for his resurgence because he's not playing with people who don't have offensive talent.
Click to expand...

So Joe needs to remain a starter, which is obvious considering his large sample size as both a starter and bench leader. Who goes to the bench? Bojan? I think we roll with what is working well at the moment and let Conley play himself back into shape as a reserve. As time goes on we'll figure out the lineups and maybe Conley starts again, maybe not. It's not like we need to worry about him bolting or anything.
 
str8line said:
So Joe needs to remain a starter, which is obvious considering his large sample size as both a starter and bench leader. Who goes to the bench? Bojan? I think we roll with what is working well at the moment and let Conley play himself back into shape as a reserve. As time goes on we'll figure out the lineups and maybe Conley starts again, maybe not. It's not like we need to worry about him bolting or anything.
Click to expand...
Royce goes to the bench, as indicated in the one game where Conley was back. Now that we have a guy who can drop 20 any given night in the second unit, you can put Royce in there and he's also staggered with starters a lot because he'll probably sub out early Donovan (though he should sub out Conley early). Royce gives us a (kind of) energy guy in the bench unit. Joe's talents are wasted on the bench. You could argue that Royce's talents are wasted, but he'll still see a lot of minutes guarding good players.
 
Quick question for people who follow the Stars, does Juwan Morgan have any kind of a pick and pop game?
 
The fact that this is even a question shows how horrible the trade has panned out. Whether you think he's helping or not, he's played horribly by all measures. Not only are his personal numbers horrible, but his lineups are doing poorly as well.

If we're better with him because he's simply better than Mudiay...that is not a good thing. Generally I'd agree that he hasn't sucked as much as the alternative, but he wasn't brought in to be barely above replacement level. The thought was that he could potentially push the Jazz into contention status and that is an utter failure.
 
infection said:
Is that a function of Conley or is that a function of Joe coming off the bench? Because my bet is that 80% of that variance is explained by the latter, and maybe 10-15% the former. Yes, Joe's usage will go down, but we haven't seen Joe and Mike starting together.
Click to expand...
I think it's mostly Joe. However, having Conley in the lineup would necessarily mean Joe handling the ball less and I'm not sure that's good since Joe is - quite frankly - substantially better at running point than Conley.
 
infection said:
Locke already broke these numbers down. Joe shot the same number on threes as he has the past few years in off-the-bounce and spot up, it's just that in the second unit his spot up attempts went way down and his off-the-bounce went way up. So yes, him being a spot up shooter is good, and one reason for his resurgence because he's not playing with people who don't have offensive talent.
Click to expand...
**** the god damn numbers or stats or whatever. Don’t you watch the ****ing games?!
 
Thee jazz fan said:
**** the god damn numbers or stats or whatever. Don’t you watch the ****ing games?!
Click to expand...
Yeah. Joe sucks in the second unit because nobody else can score. And nobody else can shoot. So he gets more contested looks, and he has to shoot more threes off the bounce, which he's not good at, and it drops his percentage, even though he's shooting the same percentage on catch and shoot and off the bounce as he did last year, his total percentage was way down. Joe needs to start. That's clear. His stats were worse mostly as a function of coming off the bench and playing with people who aren't nearly as talented.
 
infection said:
Yeah. Joe sucks in the second unit because nobody else can score. And nobody else can shoot. So he gets more contested looks, and he has to shoot more threes off the bounce, which he's not good at, and it drops his percentage, even though he's shooting the same percentage on catch and shoot and off the bounce as he did last year, his total percentage was way down. Joe needs to start. That's clear. His stats were worse mostly as a function of coming off the bench and playing with people who aren't nearly as talented.
Click to expand...
I like where this debate has ended up. The Start Joe crowd and the Start Royce crowd we’re both right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top