It may not be a huge problem, but it potentially is in certain matchups, and those are likely to occur in the playoffsIf a 6’2 PG is your shortest player it’s not a problem at all.
It may not be a huge problem, but it potentially is in certain matchups, and those are likely to occur in the playoffsIf a 6’2 PG is your shortest player it’s not a problem at all.
If a 6’2 PG is your shortest player it’s not a problem at all.
Healthy Conley? I don't know. But we have only had healthy Conley for less than 20 games this year. Sexton is a better defender than hobbled Conley. Not sure you could say the same about Donovan Mitchell though.I think all of us would agree Sexton is a better defender than Conley right?
Recently Mike has been pretty spry... so both sides of the court he has looked great. He had some great sequences/stretches in the game yesterday. I'd say Mike is the better defender but he struggles more when he isn't 100% or has a bigger guard to deal with. Collin has had his good stretches but I'd say he's worse on defense.I think all of us would agree Sexton is a better defender than Conley right?
Sexton is way better than the Don we got last year. Actually giving an eff matters quite a bit.Healthy Conley? I don't know. But we have only had healthy Conley for less than 20 games this year. Sexton is a better defender than hobbled Conley. Not sure you could say the same about Donovan Mitchell though.
Hell no lmaoI think all of us would agree Sexton is a better defender than Conley right?
The biggest things we'd miss would be the steady presence of Mike on and off the court. Even when he was out he was still helping the guys playing the position. We have talent to cover up the spot but will miss the playmaking and decision making a lot. Sexton just won't ever be the cerebral guy that makes 90% of the correct decisions. He has amazing speed and power and that will open things up at times that Mike is struggling.
I just find it kinda silly to say we wouldn't skip a beat... we may not fall off a cliff but I'd bet if Mike was out the rest of the year we'd lose at least 4-5 games we would have won.
I’m a big Sexton fan, but the advanced numbers would say he is a little worse at D than Mike. However, those numbers could be skewed if the Jazz normally hid Mike on their defensive scheme.I think all of us would agree Sexton is a better defender than Conley right?
I don't think Kennard is healthy right now... but yeah I understand. I think we will pretty obviously be worse even if they are all healthy.Well yeah… in this scenario we are getting actual players back for him.
Disagree on Mike. I think we'd slide pretty hard. We are like 4-6 I believe with Sexton as a starter... one of the wins was the miracle GS game. I think NAW was on fire during that stretch so we may not have felt the full brunt of the injury. With the way Mike is currently playing his loss will be felt. Dev time for those guys is important so I'd agree there... and if we didn't fall off we will have learned something.
I don't think NAW is quite as good of a shooter as his percentages have been thus far but agree we should lock him up and it would be good to kick the tires a bit more. He could be a solid long term value play.
I understand how folks math all that stuff out... I get it... I love on/off court data... I really do. I think it misses when projecting wins for an individual player.I would be more inclined to believe that if we played fantastic with Mike on the court, but we're not. There's always an element of randomness to this, especially given small sample sizes, so maybe we are actually significantly better with Mike and the numbers don't bear that out. But that can go both ways. Personally, I'm not convinced and while Conley still has his merits, he also has a lot of flaws at his age and Sexton/others also have stuff they bring to the table. If there's a drop off, I don't think it's because we're worse with Conley is so much better than Sexton...it's because he's so much better than THT who gets extended minutes. I do believe the difference there is real because THT is so crappy, so maybe the win difference would be real....but it could be mitigated by putting in a replacement level player or playing Sexton more minutes.
There are 32 games left in the season. If the cost of losing Mike is 4-5 wins, that would mean that would mean he changes the Jazz overall net rating by like +5. This is some bad back of the napkin math, but only star (superstars?) have that kind of impact. Gun to my head, I think we're worse, but not by much. But even if we are, does it matter? I don't really think so. I can guarantee that when draft time comes people around here are going to be wishing they were drafting just 1-2 shots higher. Development wise I think it's nice to have Mike around....I think it's also nice to give the younger guys more opportunity. I would prefer to have the increased opportunity for others and I would prefer to be 1-2 spots in the draft too.
I understand how folks math all that stuff out... I get it... I love on/off court data... I really do. I think it misses when projecting wins for an individual player.
Its pretty simple in my mind... are there 2-3 games I think Mike plays really well and the margin may be thin so without him we lose? Yes. Do I think there will be a game or two where THT/NAW/Sexton have eff ups that cost us a game or two? Yes. Do I also consider the effect trading Mike would have on depth and the potential for that to cost us a game or two if the other guys get hurt? Yes.
Mike is one of the best playmakers in the league. Literally he is top 7 in assists per minute. That is a void we will be hard pressed to fill and without that guy I can quickly see a push and pull between guys as they go "my turn your turn".
Can't really just Math the absence of Mike in my mind. We play a **** ton of close games so a few shifts in those games and they are losses.
Even KO has "won" us multiple games... like if we had traded Bogey for no players coming back I think there are easily 4-5 games we lose... either he got hot or hit game winners etc.Yeah, the big thing with Mike is also depth. When you have third string playing second string minutes for long stretches we suffer. It is good that Kessler is playing Olynyk's starting minutes. It would be better if Olynyk was back playing Gay's minutes.
If the margin of error for winning is THT, we are boned. No two ways about that. He has had ample chances too. We'll see what he brings next year.
I understand how folks math all that stuff out... I get it... I love on/off court data... I really do. I think it misses when projecting wins for an individual player.
Its pretty simple in my mind... are there 2-3 games I think Mike plays really well and the margin may be thin so without him we lose? Yes. Do I think there will be a game or two where THT/NAW/Sexton have eff ups that cost us a game or two? Yes. Do I also consider the effect trading Mike would have on depth and the potential for that to cost us a game or two if the other guys get hurt? Yes.
Mike is one of the best playmakers in the league. Literally he is top 7 in assists per minute. That is a void we will be hard pressed to fill and without that guy I can quickly see a push and pull between guys as they go "my turn your turn".
Can't really just Math the absence of Mike in my mind. We play a **** ton of close games so a few shifts in those games and they are losses.