What's new

We've officially played more games without Mo Williams than with Mo Williams.

Xsy

Well-Known Member
We've played 25 games without Mo, 24 with. The Jazz are 16-9 in games without Mo Williams, 11-13 in games with Mo Williams.

It's weird. We've seen him on the court, and we know he's better than Jamaal or Watson, but the record looks like it says something else. What do you think? Was it just Mo playing our more road-heavy schedule, then going down when we got our homestretch? Something more? Something less?
 
Mo does not play well with Al. They both dominate the ball and need shots. You can't have both. Same with Hayward/Al. This is why Hayward is so much better off the bench. Al sucks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Xsy
Not to make this another Al thread, but it's a good point that you say we know that Mo's good, but the results show otherwise. Very similar to many cholesterol-lowering drugs (sans statins), some of them reduce cholesterol fantastically. The unfortunate part is that it does not reduce risk. This is the dilemma we have with a lot of issues that I feel the front office, and a large portion of fans, think that just because something/someone is good that that's enough justification for it and to not do something that's 'good' would be stupid.
 
It's not all because of Mo being out; but it's a part of it. When Mo was running the offense, 80% of the time one of two things would happen. Mo would push the ball up the court and then either take it to the rack or take a spot up jumper. Or Mo would walk the ball up the court dump down to Al, Al would tap dance with the ball in his hands for 4 or 5 seconds and then shoot. In either case, the other 4 players on the court would give up on the play. No screens, no cutting - zip. In some ways Mo was just as bad as Al, if he was pushing the ball up the court and he still had the ball in his hands by the time he got to the three point line - he was shooting the ball - almost 10 times out of 10. Maybe a drive, maybe a jumper - but he was shooting.

It's not brain surgery. When you have pass first guys running the offense, you play more alert, you move more, you cut more, you help out your team by screening more, and you pass more because you feel like you're going to get the ball back. I like Mo but unfortunately a lot of that stuff wasn't happening when he was running the point.
 
Mo does not play well with Al. They both dominate the ball and need shots. You can't have both. Same with Hayward/Al. This is why Hayward is so much better off the bench. Al sucks.

Asinine. Has Mo dominated the ball ever in his career? Maybe in his days with the Bucks.
 
This is a nice update to the thread I made a month ago. Is it not mind-boggling that a substitution of Earl Watson and Tinsley for Mo could possibly not throw us into full tank mode?! (yes, and Burks and Foye)

It's clear that we play better at home, and there probably is a bit of balancing to be done there, but at the end of the day he has not been taking us to a new level. At best he is net 0, at worst a small detriment.

One place Mo hurts us is that he has NOT been clutch. In half the games, he only trails Al in attempts and his efg% is 27%.

I really like Mo the person, but I have to be honest in assessing his contributions to the team. Perhaps he could contribute off the bench if we had a decent pg?
 
This is a nice update to the thread I made a month ago. Is it not mind-boggling that a substitution of Earl Watson and Tinsley for Mo could possibly not throw us into full tank mode?! (yes, and Burks and Foye)

It's clear that we play better at home, and there probably is a bit of balancing to be done there, but at the end of the day he has not been taking us to a new level. At best he is net 0, at worst a small detriment.

One place Mo hurts us is that he has NOT been clutch. In half the games, he only trails Al in attempts and his efg% is 27%.

I really like Mo the person, but I have to be honest in assessing his contributions to the team. Perhaps he could contribute off the bench if we had a decent pg?

Exactly, Mo is a good backup. That is all.
 
mo does not play well with al. They both dominate the ball and need shots. You can't have both. Same with hayward/al, millsap/al, kanter/al, foye/al, marvin/al, favors/al, burks/al, evans/al. This is why hayward is so much better off the bench. Al sucks.

fixed
 
At about the same time mo went out, that is when burks started to get more minutes.

nuff said.
 
Top