"You Gotta Love It Baby" Official Jazz thread

[Eddie]

Are we still talking about the Enes comment? I'm legitimately not concerned about the fact that he played 3 minutes in one half of one game, despite having played well in his previous six. To me that word indicates some type of worry, uneasiness, etc., the implication being that you think a degree of harm or damage is going to occur. SMR then said he was concerned, so I was asking him what specifically he was concerned about. His response seemed to indicate that he wasn't concerned either, so I just figured we agreed.

And generally speaking, I'm not concerned about the amount of minute the C4 are getting this year. Of course I would like it to be more, but that they're not each playing 5 minutes more per night or whatever doesn't particularly worry me.

I haven't followed the Jazz as closely this year as I have in the past. A lack of time and a lack of interest in watching the organization decide what to do with a combination of unexciting vets that play a lot and young guns that play a little just doesn't have me excited to watch.

If I were to say I was "concerned" or "worried" - it wouldn't be about the young guys being ruined. It would be about the ability of the coaches and front office. It would be fair to say I'm concerned about their ability to utilize the talent they have to maximize outcomes. I think they want to win and build a winning organization. I'm concerned that they don't know how to - aren't willing to take what seems like minor risks to do so.

[MarkGrace]

If I were to say I was "concerned" or "worried" - it wouldn't be about the young guys being ruined. It would be about the ability of the coaches and front office. It would be fair to say I'm concerned about their ability to utilize the talent they have to maximize outcomes.

The answer to this is just a rehash of yesterday, isn't it?

I think they want to win and build a winning organization. I'm concerned that they don't know how to - aren't willing to take what seems like minor risks to do so.

Of course they do. The Utah Jazz are one of the winningest organizations in the history of the NBA. They consistently win, more so than all but a handful of franchises in the league. The last question that should be on your mind is whether they can build a winning franchise.

[Eddie]

The answer to this is just a rehash of yesterday, isn't it?

Probably.

Of course they do. The Utah Jazz are one of the winningest organizations in the history of the NBA. They consistently win, more so than all but a handful of franchises in the league. The last question that should be on your mind is whether they can build a winning franchise.

They've been successful - but they were awful stable for a long time and have undergone a lot of changes. How much was Sloan and then Layden responsible? And how long did they coach? How much of it was Larry? They've gone through some major transitions - the "new" guys have to show what they've got.

Utah basketball showed they had the ability to be very successful too - until Giac and Boylen showed up.

I'm typically a pretty optimistic guy. Maybe what worries me most is my lack of interest and lack of optimism that things are going to get better any time soon.

I always kind of figured the Jazz could be competitive against the good teams - particularly at home - and wouldn't lose too many games that they "shouldn't". I figured they were always good for 40-50 wins, a spot in the playoffs, and when things really come together for them maybe even a little run at a western conference championship. I'm not feeling it any more.

[MarkGrace]

Probably.



They've been successful - but they were awful stable for a long time and have undergone a lot of changes. How much was Sloan and then Layden responsible? And how long did they coach? How much of it was Larry? They've gone through some major transitions - the "new" guys have to show what they've got.

Utah basketball showed they had the ability to be very successful too - until Giac and Boylen showed up.

The transition periods we've seen over the last decade are exactly what show they know what it takes to win. John and Karl leave, and the cupboard was absolutely bare. The only had one losing season and by the fourth year had already made it back to the WCF with a team based around Deron and Booz. Then they turn over Deron and Booz, and have only had one losing season in the last three years so far since (year three is this year -- who knows, maybe they'll end up with a losing record again).

This franchise always knows how to win, changes and all. Really my only concern right now is Ty, though that has nothing to do with minutes distribution. I'm just worried he's not a very bright coach. We'll see what the organization does with him.

[The_Douger]

If anything the WCF trip was a fluke. Dallas got upset that year, the GSW team we played was the absolute worst matchup they could have drawn with the way Utah plays. Utah regressed from that point, winning less in the playoffs as time went on, which was probably their ceiling to begin with.

[Jacob]

Favorite part of the game was Kanter's spin move. Then, Favors matches him with his own.

[MarkGrace]

Zach Lowe did a follow up interview with 1280 after his Grantland article.

Were you surprised the Jazz didn’t make a move at the trade deadline?

I was not very surprised. I mean, what surprised me more than anything else was the number of people who were telling me, you know, “We didn’t even hear from the Jazz,” or you know, “We tried to engage…they essentially hung up on us or told us they weren’t really interested in talking.”

Why are the Jazz so horrific defensively?

They’ve been bad for, I mean, essentially, the last two or three years without really showing much progress. And you know, I don’t think it’s really any secret. They just don’t defend the pick and roll very well.

They don’t have, they have big men who are neither sort of mobile and very good at containing the pick and roll nor are they rim protectors underneath that can really play above the rim and challenge shots like a Serge Ibaka or a DeAndre Jordan, who, you know, their positioning isn’t perfect, their technique isn’t perfect, but they make up for it with just, you know, length and athleticism.

And it’s just hard to be a good defensive team when your core big men, the guys who are playing 30, 35 minutes a game, just aren’t mobile enough or intuitive enough. And I think Paul Millsap is, by the way, but he’s just sort of small for his position.

But when they can’t defend the pick and roll, and hey, look, just watch the Spurs series from last year. That’s their worst possible opponent. A pick and roll team with a really good point guard. They just have no chance. They just can’t do it.

What’s your take on Tyrone Corbin?

You know, look, he’s just starting. I do think the defensive issues are problematic and they don’t seem to have a lot of coherence on that. And the rotation has been weird and I think that he should probably mix and match some lineups a little bit and use some lineups that just clearly don’t work a lot less.

But again, he’s got a weird roster at a weird time and you know, probably the ceiling of this team just isn’t that much higher than what their record is now.

What’s your take on Al Jefferson?

He’s a very nice guy, which makes it harder [to acknowledge his flaws]. But for the money that he’s going to command in the off-season, I just don’t think he’s going to justify the price, and I don’t think he lives up to his contract now. Just because, you know, it’s hard to base your team around a big guy who’s a minus defensive player.

You can do it; I think a comparable is someone like Carlos Boozer in Chicago who I think is a little better defensively than Big Al, but is still a minus on that end, but fits within a successful team defense because he’s got [Luol] Deng and he’s got [Joakim] Noah, two of the 10 or 12 best defenders in the league, around him, and a coach with a system that is absolute and to which the players are like maniacally committed, because if they don’t play exactly the way [Tom Thibodeau] is asking and make every little decision the right way, they’ll be on the bench.

Are you bullish on the core four?

[Alec] Burks is a case that we, you know, as tantalizing as he is, he hasn’t shot the ball very well. And we just haven’t seen him play that much. I mean, he’s been in and out of the rotation. Mostly out. So he’s still a giant question mark.

[Derrick] Favors, I think, is, I’m very bullish on Favors and [Enes] Kanter both, but especially Favors just because a guy, a big guy that can play defense like that is just a huge asset to any team. I mean, he’s going to be a very good NBA player. Needs to polish up his offensive game, but you know, so did every big man who came into the league at 21.

Kanter looks great; we’ve gotten to see more of him. He’s been wonderful this year, shooting 55 percent or whatever.

[Gordon] Hayward to me is the interesting piece. He’s clearly a good NBA player, sort of a Swiss Army knife, can do a little bit of everything. It’s unclear if he’s the third best player on a very good team or maybe can he develop into the second best player on a very good team? I think that’s probably his ceiling. And the difference between those two things is big both in terms of salary and then the potential of the team and whether they need another lead ball handler, which they do, but you know, how good does that guy need to be? Hayward, to me, is sort of the X-factor.

The Jazz’s defensive woes: Coaching or personnel?

I would lean towards personnel. I do think the schemes are problematic. They’re just, you can see it in that piece. The rules are inconsistent and the decisions of how to guard certain plays are a little bit puzzling compared to how the best defensive teams guard them.

But if you combine Al Jefferson with a bunch of young players…young guys historically really struggle to learn NBA defense…you put all those pieces together, I think the pendulum swings a little bit towards personnel. But I don’t think the coaching is helping.

[MarkGrace]

Some Tomic action.

The reason why Ante Tomic is on this list is not the numbers he produces, which are similar to 2009-10 and 2010-11 seasons, or the results achieved by FC Regal Barcelona. No doubt, FC Regal Barcelona is currently the best team in Europe and Tomic is one of team's main strengths.

The consistency of Tomic in Euroleague Top 16 stage is the difference as the Croatian center constantly plays as an MVP on every game. Tomic became a game changer as he leads the Euroleague in plus-minus (+/-) rating with 13.1 points per 50 possessions. Tomic finished in double scoring figures in all ten Top 16 stage games so far and if the 25-year-old center maintains this pace, he has all the potential to be considered as a candidate to win MVP award in near future.

[Blueintheface]

Great pregame stat: the big line-up with Gordon at the 2: +76 in just 124 min. The big line-up with anyone else at the 2: -2. Corbin is a really good coach.

[MarkGrace]

Favors having himself a hell of a night at the line.

[Blueintheface]

Unmotivated and simply unable. Absolutely no inside presence going against Copeland, Thomas, and Martin. Fucking ridiculous.

[BGRTHNUMEGO]

Want to see some stats on how the off. efficiency of Kanter/Favors/Burks changes when they share the court with Hayward and when they don't.

[BGRTHNUMEGO]

Al and Mo on the court and the Jazz stick Hayward into the old Bobby Hansen role: pass, screen away, stand without the ball.

[Blueintheface]

Mo has a terrible basketball IQ.

[Blueintheface]

Mo has a terrible basketball IQ.

Bump x2