Was Fes' Play Last Night An Aberration?

[jazzmanian devil]

I projected that Fes would be out of the league by now, as it stands it seems that he is going to hang around the league for a little longer. I'm not sure if that is so because we really saw some light in him or simply because our financial situation didn't allow us to sign anything better. I think it was rather the latter one, but when Fes went out to test the market and learned the hard way that there was no to little demand for his lazy arse, he seems to realize that he is in a tight spot and he started to put some more effort into his game as the last couple of games prove.

I think if he continues to work this way he has a good shot to contribute this year and then get some long term contract extension after this season. He is still a kid and there will certainly be some jackpotting going around, but he better start to grow up though, because there is some serious competition now in Elson who is certainly no koufos and Memo Okur is also not dead just yet.

 

[InGameStrategy]

I projected that Fes would be out of the league by now, as it stands it seems that he is going to hang around the league for a little longer. I'm not sure if that is so because we really saw some light in him or simply because our financial situation didn't allow us to sign anything better. I think it was rather the latter one, but when Fes went out to test the market and learned the hard way that there was no to little demand for his lazy arse, he seems to realize that he is in a tight spot and he started to put some more effort into his game as the last couple of games prove.

I think if he continues to work this way he has a good shot to contribute this year and then get some long term contract extension after this season. He is still a kid and there will certainly be some jackpotting going around, but he better start to grow up though, because there is some serious competition now in Elson who is certainly no koufos and Memo Okur is also not dead just yet.

Kudos for actually acknowledging that you had missed the mark on Fesenko already. What is amusing is that you seem to be following it up with underrating him again. To the Jazz's benefit, he fell slightly short of getting a multiyear deal elsewhere this summer, which would suggest that he is already on the verge of staying the league for a while (although the rumored lockout might derail that dream)--or that his agent was overly ambitious of his value. I predict the former.

A scout or GM or fantasy forecaster or even coach is of not much value from a talent evaluation standpoint if they cannot effectively predict the upside or downside of a player until it has almost already happened. In Fes's case, he made a contribution in the very limited playing time during the past three years, less than his potential primarily because of experience and, to a lesser degree, because of discipline and conditioning. Anyone who doesn't just look at Fes's individual stats would see that he's more than below-the-borderline NBA player. Heck, just looking at him--poor prior conditioning and all--suggest that he has a better build than Osterblob or the MarshMemo Man. And he's 10ish years younger than San Francisco.

But I guess haters are gonna hate (or pessimistic prognosticators gonna prognosticate).

 

[One Brow]

To the Jazz's benefit, he fell slightly short of getting a multiyear deal elsewhere this summer, which would suggest that he is already on the verge of staying the league for a while (although the rumored lockout might derail that dream)--or that his agent was overly ambitious of his value.

So, that Fesenko failed to get a contract means that 1) he's going to be in the leagur for a long time, and 2) his agent (Dan Fegan, of all people) is incompetant at estimating his value. It has nothing to do with Fesenko's inferior development of his skills and attributes in prior seasons. Circular logic, indeed.

 

[InGameStrategy]

So, that Fesenko failed to get a contract means that 1) he's going to be in the leagur for a long time, and 2) his agent (Dan Fegan, of all people) is incompetant at estimating his value. It has nothing to do with Fesenko's inferior development of his skills and attributes in prior seasons. Circular logic, indeed.

I didn't say that. More closely the opposite. Fegan probably could've gotten Fes a multiyear deal at the minimum, but he knew that that's a lowball.
https://www.hoopsnotes.com/teams/utah/jazz-offer-to-fesenko-has-been-pulled/

Talk is cheap, but there was what seemed to be fairly strong interest by Houston in Fesenko.
https://www.hoopsnotes.com/teams/houston/rockets-still-in-picture-for-kyrylo-fesenko/

I don't know the details of negotiations of the Fes camp with any of the teams; I'd invite anyone to provide information. It's very possible that Houston decided not to offer a deal because they could be matched, and that might put them out of contention for Dampier or others while they waited for Utah's decision. Evidently some dude at the Houston Chronicle agrees (or more appropriately, I agree with him).
https://www.slcdunk.com/2010/9/15/1691992/alarm-loud-noises-all-your-fesenko

Your offhanded remark about Dan Fegan is unwarranted. By not accepting a bargain-basement, multi-year deal, and betting that Fes that could get a deal next year that more than compensates for taking the QO (or a near-minimum multi-year deal) this year, Fegan assesses Fes's value at a level that more closely approaches Fes's value and upside than the uninformed, penny-ante deals being bandied about by other teams (and being further constrained as the beginning of the season started). I think that there was talk about Fes getting a mulit-year QO deal from the Jazz, but Fegan most likely balked. Assuming that the lockout doesn't happen (and he stays healthy (which there's no reason that he wouldn't and he gets reasonable playing time (e.g., at least 500 minutes or so over the course of the season) expect Fes to get a deal that makes him more than the $4 million over two years that he was flirted with this year.

As for Fes's "inferior development of his skills", Utah benefitted moneywise in the short term--this year only--by keeping his minutes low in previous years. Unfortunately, though, they won't have the protection of the RFA provision next year, and they will have to negotiate with him on an even plane with everyone else (except for his familiarity with the system). I wouldn't be surprised if Fegan tries to talk him out of a deal with Utah next year, given that they weren't willing to offer him a respectable multi-year deal this year. But in Utah's case, finances had a lot to do with it--as well as an underestimation of his value (i.e., considereing him not much more than a minimum-salary guy), stemmed in part by not seeing him much on the floor (and his goofiness, too, which should be a low criterion in terms of deciding who plays).

 

[Gyp Rosetti]

IGS, are you going to reply to my retort or not?

I'm assuming no since you haven't already and you'll just chalk it up to, "It's not worth my time, you're so dumb Serpico."

That's cool though.

The funny thing is, I'd probably love you in person. I know I have my own huge crushes. YB's daughter being #1 on that list at this current moment.

 

[One Brow]

I didn't say that.

It was somewhat tongue-in-cheek. The point being that, regardless of the evidence of the past three years, your position seems to be fixed that Fesenko is something more than an inferior back-up center. maybe he will turn it around this year, but who was going to offer a sizable mult-year deal based on that maybe?

As for Fes's "inferior development of his skills", Utah benefitted moneywise in the short term--this year only--by keeping his minutes low in previous years.

As I made clear above, I fully reject your notion that skills are developed in-game. They are developed on the practice floor. Fesenko has no one to blame for inferior skill development but himself.

 

[InGameStrategy]

As I made clear above, I fully reject your notion that skills are developed in-game. They are developed on the practice floor. Fesenko has no one to blame for inferior skill development but himself.

Oh, OK. I'm beginning to understand the disconnect here. If the player truly sucks, in-game experience isn't enough, but no player--from LeBron to Kevin Lyde--is immune from the need for in-game experience. I'm baffled that such a fundamental concept is controversial in your mind. Repeatedly it was reported in games that the likes of CJ and KK were great shooters in practice (i.e., getting their skills "developed on the practice floor") but stunk it up in games. Eventually the shooting slumps became more infrequent. Matthews was a dismal shooter at the beginning of his rookie season and started to get it together at the end. Same goes for Deron Williams regarding his ability to distribut the ball from the beginning of his rookie season to the end--and beyond (except that within-season progress is probably a more robust measure because it doesn't allow for much free training time outside practice--and less practice overall). Recently, Shaquille (a notorious anti-practice player) was reported to have been making free throws in practice, but it is unlikely that it translates to games until he gets the experience with whatever technique he is using.
https://greenstreet.weei.com/sports...fix-shaquille-oneals-free-throws-dont-bother/

If that doesn't suggest to you that on-court experience isn't crucial and possibly a primary factor for player development, I don't know how to help you. The correlation between ability in practice and ability in games is not always there; see CJ and KK (and KK2 (Kosta Koufos), for that mattter). When players are traveling and playing (or attending) games every third day, team practice isn't all that significant sometimes anyway. And I'm sorry, but refining footwork in an empty gym of against some middle-age assistant coaches isn't the same as doing it under the coliseum lights with 20,000 screaming fans and 5 sweaty men distracting you. The best measure is under the spotlights, just like movie stars and musicians and politicians and athletes from other sports do. And it takes some time under the spotlight to get it right, no matter how hard or well they have practice.

By the way, Allen Iverson just called to remind you that he had a long career of multiple All-Star appearances in the NBA even though he could care less about practice. There is no doubt that Fes could've worked harder to this point, and would've been further along than he is, but he was already the best option at backup center more often than he was played, without the development, from wherever it came.

Addendum: Jazz pregame show comments on how Al is trying not to overthink things when he's on the court. Looks like "practice" isn't sufficient for this 6-year veteran, either, much less Fesenko--whose career minutes are less than what Big Al got in his very first year in the league. Now AJ has had more than 10 times as many minutes as Fes had. Silly Al. You're supposed to pick that up in practice. BTW, Fes and Jefferson are both at 5.7 RPG in preseason--and Fes in fewer minutes per game (and, in fairness, against more backups). KF has gotta get the TOs down, but part of those came from passing the ball, which is a promising--um--development.

 

[One Brow]

Oh, OK. I'm beginning to understand the disconnect here. If the player truly sucks, in-game experience isn't enough, but no player--from LeBron to Kevin Lyde--is immune from the need for in-game experience. I'm baffled that such a fundamental concept is controversial in your mind.

Actually, I spelled out a few things specifically related to experience. Here's a reminder:

While there are some things you learn on the court (vision, timing, poise), you develop your skills (shooting, passing, lateral movement) on the pratice floor and raw attributes (strength, endurance, speed) in the gym.

You seem to think that if a player does not "truly suck", on-court is the primary place to improve. However, on-court experience is meaningless if you don'thave the skills to use, and the skills are meaningless if you don't havethe raw attributes to use them correctly.

Repeatedly it was reported in games that the likes of CJ and KK were great shooters in practice (i.e., getting their skills "developed on the practice floor") but stunk it up in games. Eventually the shooting slumps became more infrequent.

My point exactly.

If that doesn't suggest to you that on-court experience isn't crucial and possibly a primary factor for player development, I don't know how to help you.

I think it is crucial, at the proper time in a player's development cycle. Fesenko is finally in the shape he needs to be in. He needs to develop his skills (and they have shown a small improvement, as well). Playing time follows that.

By the way, Allen Iverson just called to remind you that he had a long career of multiple All-Star appearances in the NBA even though he could care less about practice.

Iverson was a gym rat when he was young. An older Iverson may have felt he didn't need to practice like the younger players.

Addendum: Jazz pregame show comments on how Al is trying not to overthink things when he's on the court. Looks like "practice" isn't sufficient for this 6-year veteran, either,

You have confused player development with learningan offensive system, or are arguing disingenuously. Jefferson is already a very skilled player.

KF has gotta get the TOs down, but part of those came from passing the ball, which is a promising--um--development.

I agree, he is showing some promise right now.

 

[InGameStrategy]

Actually, I spelled out a few things specifically related to experience. Here's a reminder: You seem to think that if a player does not "truly suck", on-court is the primary place to improve. However, on-court experience is meaningless if you don'thave the skills to use, and the skills are meaningless if you don't havethe raw attributes to use them correctly.

Um, what's the difference between "raw attributes" to mean "talent". Fes had enough "talent" and skills to play more last year; as mentioned before, he had a better body than Ostertag or Okur even before the weight loss, and he wasn't terrible agilitywise. He was pulling down rebounds and logging some blocked shots and scoring some very easy baskets. The biggest thing he needed was to play during games where he could get a better feel of the offense and how to handle opposing bigs, etc. Practice attempts to simulate that, but it falls short, and as I have so eloquently stated previously, even the best players are not immune from needing on-court time to refine those skills. I dispute the notion that Fes was such a goof off in practice to preclude him from playing more in games, because when he was on the court, he was playing like most inexperienced big men--making some mistakes yet doing some good things, too. Repeatedly it was documented that he limited the opponents' inside scoring better than the alternatives, and that should've been enough IMHO to get him more PT, because that was arguably the Jazz's #1 problem.

The past four preseason games plus the playoffs are confirming that he already had the talent (probably not all-star level, but a solid backup center at minimum), and they are also supporting the notion that playing time was a necessary condition for improving. He is also showing that he had the skills, except possibly free-throw shooting, which he probably has practiced outside games. But even in that case, it's very difficult to get into a rhythm FT-wise if you're only playing 3 or 4 minutes at a time, so that supports the notion that playing time is essential for improvement, also.

Conditioning was not a limiting factor last year either--not for the limited amount of minutes that he was receiving. If he had been pushing 15 or 20 MPG, maybe. He was good fro 10-15 MPG, which is the minimum amount that most players need to develop. As for "confusing player delevelopment"; I'm not. Being able to play on a given team within a given system is part of "player development". Fes's biggest problem was that he lacked experience, and part of that experience was figuring out during games where to be on the court at all times. Jefferson moving to the Jazz and going through this transition only validants how essential that on-court time is; if a 6-year veteran needs to do the same thing, then a younger player who has received only spot minutes definitely needs it. You can call it "learning an offensive system" or "player development" or whatever you want, but Fes hasn't receive that time until now, and the Jazz probably lost some wins because they lacked a backup center (or really, a center at all) who could do more than hold the fort. The bottleneck was experience because Fes was a decent enough rebounder and shotblocker and a close-to-the-basket scorer to play more than he did.

 

[One Brow]

Um, what's the difference between "raw attributes" to mean "talent".

I see "talent" as a natural affinity for an activity or type of knowledge, and could be a factor in the speed of acquiring any of the advantages discussed. A person with a talent for strength fnds it easy to put on muscle, a person with a talent for shooting develops agood form easily and quickly starts hitting a high percentage, a perso with a talent for court vision starting making the right pass quickly.

Fes had enough "talent" and skills to play more last year; as mentioned before, he had a better body than Ostertag or Okur even before the weight loss, and he wasn't terrible agilitywise.

I'm not sure how his body was better than Ostertag's for an NBA center. They were of comparable size, and Ostertag probably had even longer arms. Fesenko is certainly larger than Okur.

He was pulling down rebounds and logging some blocked shots and scoring some very easy baskets. The biggest thing he needed was to play during games where he could get a better feel of the offense and how to handle opposing bigs, etc.

I accept that this is your opinion. I saw him as needed to improve his endurance, mobility, shooting, and footwork. You can't improve those in-game to the same degree you can improve them in a structured environment.

... they are also supporting the notion that playing time was a necessary condition for improving.

Confirmation bias. You interpret everything you see in this regard under the initial assumption that the most important development factor is playing time, rather than allow for the evidence to dictate the importance of playing time. To demonstrate my point, please answer this: what sort of observation would be needed to demonstrate that players can improve even without receiving playing time? I fully expect the answer, if there is one at all, to be essentially unfulfillable.

 

[Hopper]

Confirmation bias. You interpret everything you see in this regard under the initial assumption that the most important development factor is playing time, rather than allow for the evidence to dictate the importance of playing time.

Yeah, Eric, for S2, anything and everything that happens proves his point, even if those things are polar opposites. Fess didn't play much last year, but had a decent series against Denver when Memo went down. Then he kinda fell apart against LA. So how does S2 reconcile alla this?

Well, after screaming all year that Fess couldn't "develop" without more playing time, once the completely "undeveloped" Fess plays decent againt Denver, S2 says it "proves" what he has been saying all along--that Sloan should have played Fess more (because he is too good to leave on the bench). How it is even remotely possible for Fess to play well without extended in-game experience is not addressed by S2 at that point, of course.

Then when Fess falls down against LA, it once again proves his point as he reverts to his (now contradictory) claim that Sloan prevented him from developing and should have played him more.

At times S2 talks likes he believes in-game experience is a fully sufficient condition for NBA success--as if a 3-year old, if just allowed to play 30 minutes a game for a few years, would then be a fully competent NBA player. When pressed, of course, he backs off this absurd suggestion, but he often implies it nonetheless.

He does consistently suggest that it is a necessary, if not sufficifient, condition for NBA success, however. So how can guys like Lebrron and Durant come straight to the NBA from high school or a year of college and be amongst the league's best? Where did their "development" come from, if not actual NBA games? Big-*** mystery, there, know what I'm sayin?

Every player, at any level, high school, college, pro, or whatever, will get better with time, as long as they keep practicing, playing (even pick-up games), studying the game, working on conditioning, etc., even if they are the 12th man off the bench. If Fess is better after 4-5 years of additional maturation, practice, hard physical work, etc., then that proves to S2 that he should have played from day 1, and would have, if only he had been allowed to play in a Denver series his first year, however raw.

Kinda comfy when your whole thought pattern is "heads I win, tails you lose," eh? Seems to work for S2, anyway.

 

[go4jazz]

Lakers

Yeah, Eric, for S2, anything and everything that happens proves his point, even if those things are polar opposites. Fess didn't play much last year, but had a decent series against Denver when Memo went down. Then he kinda fell apart against LA. So how does S2 reconcile alla this?

Well, after screaming all year that Fess couldn't "develop" without more playing time, once the completely "undeveloped" Fess plays decent againt Denver, S2 says it "proves" what he has been saying all along--that Sloan should have played Fess more (because he is too good to leave on the bench). How it is even remotely possible for Fess to play well without extended in-game experience is not addressed by S2 at that point, of course.

Then when Fess falls down against LA, it once again proves his point as he reverts to his (now contradictory) claim that Sloan prevented him from developing and should have played him more.

At times S2 talks likes he believes in-game experience is a fully sufficient condition for NBA success--as if a 3-year old, if just allowed to play 30 minutes a game for a few years, would then be a fully competent NBA player. When pressed, of course, he backs off this absurd suggestion, but he often implies it nonetheless.

He does consistently suggest that it is a necessary, if not sufficifient, condition for NBA success, however. So how can guys like Lebrron and Durant come straight to the NBA from high school or a year of college and be amongst the league's best? Where did their "development" come from, if not actual NBA games? Big-*** mystery, there, know what I'm sayin?

Every player, at any level, high school, college, pro, or whatever, will get better with time, as long as they keep practicing, playing (even pick-up games), studying the game, working on conditioning, etc., even if they are the 12th man off the bench. If Fess is better after 4-5 years of additional maturation, practice, hard physical work, etc., then that proves to S2 that he should have played from day 1, and would have, if only he had been allowed to play in a Denver series his first year, however raw.

Kinda comfy when your whole thought pattern is "heads I win, tails you lose," eh? Seems to work for S2, anyway.

So explain to us how game 3 against the lakers and especially game 4 were bad games for Fes. Also why don't you dig up Bynum's stat line against the Jazz versus the rest of the teams he played in the playoffs.