# JAZZERS?



## HighNDry

Awfully quiet with the Jazz being in the playoffs and all.
Any predictions for a good old SWEEP?


----------



## Kwalk3

Lol. Someone loves to be negative about the Jazz. They may get swept this year. Houston is a great team, and more importantly, a terrible matchup for the Jazz style of play, both offensively and defensively. So much had to go against the Jazz for this matchup to happen. Too bad, with the way the Jazz played to close the season. 

That being said, I have enough faith in Quin and the team that I think they'll win at least a game, and probably 2. Rockets in 6.


----------



## 3arabians

Ya I’m still stirring about how they ended up with Houston. Portland would have been a much better matchup. Agree Rockets in 6


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Catherder

I don't predict a Jazz win but you never know with regards to competitiveness. Look at Golden St/Clippers last night. It was a bad break on the matchup. I would have liked our chances with all the teams on the other side of the bracket. 

With Boogie Cousins going down for the duration, Houston has a decent chance to win it all this year.


----------



## hunting777

I look at it this way, If the Jazz lose tonight. I think that they are done. If they win, it would be a huge confidence builder. Maybe win a couple more. Rockets in 6 is my prediction. Tonight is going to be the deciding factor! I would love to see an upset, just don't see it happening this year. Personally, I think Rubio is hurting the jazz. His defensive play was embarrassing last game. 

Go Jazz!


----------



## hunting777

So, I have to eat my own words. From what I watched last night, which was most of the third and a little of the forth quarters. Rubio was the only one who looked like they had energy and was trying to get the team rallied. Not the prettiest game last night. Jazz could not make anything and the Rockets couldn't miss. There is still hope, but very little. I will cheer for them regardless. GO JAZZ!


----------



## PBH

I hate the Jazz. They are my favorite team. I watch every game. Sometimes I watch them recorded, but I don't miss a game. I have not missed a game this entire season (or last season). Until last night.

We had 3 softball games last night (all 3 teams won!). I knew it would be a late night, and I wouldn't get home until about 11:30pm. I get up every day at 4:30am to be to work. For the first time in a very long time, I knew that I wasn't going to watch Game 2. I would just have to look at the box score, and read the recaps.

I checked the score [Jazz] at the start of our second game. It was 9 - 25. I figured I made a good decision. For the remainder of that game, and for the next game I simply focused on softball. Our girls fought. They played well. We won (all 3!). I went home and went to bed. Now I'm at work -- and I'm glad I didn't waste any time watching another Jazz game.

I have yet to even look to see when Game 3 is. This is so liberating.


----------



## hunting777

PBH said:


> We had 3 softball games last night (all 3 teams won!). I knew it would be a late night, and I wouldn't get home until about 11:30pm. I get up every day at 4:30am to be to work. For the first time in a very long time, I knew that I wasn't going to watch Game 2. I would just have to look at the box score, and read the recaps.
> 
> I checked the score [Jazz] at the start of our second game. It was 9 - 25. I figured I made a good decision. For the remainder of that game, and for the next game I simply focused on softball. Our girls fought. They played well. We won (all 3!). I went home and went to bed. Now I'm at work -- and I'm glad I didn't waste any time watching another Jazz game.


I'm glad you was able to at least watch teams you cheer for win. Congrats to your girls.

Seems like Jazz have had no heart playing in Houston.


----------



## 2full

I just wish the Jazz would at least show up.......

Houston is a very good team, for sure. But, WOW.


----------



## Kwalk3

I'll be honest, I thought they'd at least make these 1st 2 games competitive. Appears I was wrong. I went for a run up the mountain last night and got back into the car at the end of the 1st quarter. Made the executive decision to not worry about the game last night. Sounds like it was the right decision. Looks like HND may not have been wrong about his prediction.


----------



## Vanilla

I never believed the Jazz were true contenders this year, but I did believe they were just a step back from those that were. It appears I was wrong. 

The good thing about getting a major playoff beatdown is it makes management make decisions. They can’t preach “continuity” going into next year again, like they have virtually every other year in recent memory. 

They are a good team, but need another legit scorer to even be considered as a threat.


----------



## 3arabians

Man, what a bummer. The jazz have been a tough team to figure out all year. Early in the season they were getting their butts handed to them at home far too often. Then they would suddenly flip the switch and pull off some big road wins against top teams. Very inconsistent team until the last 20 games where they played like a contender. Houston is a worst case first round opponent but with that said I don’t think they would have faired much better at Portland in these first 2 games the way they played. Very disheartening that they couldn’t even compete in these first 2 games. However an 0-2 deficit is not the end of the series. If we can find our competitive spirit and hit some dang shots at home it will be tied 2-2. Hang in there JAZZERS!! I’m not sold on a sweep yet. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## RandomElk16

The Jazz, in my mind, are a disappointment this season. They made some role player additions this year, and have the same group as last year. With all the change the NBA saw, and an extra year of experience, I expected them to be better than last season.

I know it's the Rockets, but I think they would be struggling against any of the other teams with how they are playing right now. It starts with the defense (or lack their of). That has always been their identity.

I know Hayward regressed, but for everyone who said Ingles was better - he isn't. Sometimes he plays over his head, but I think this series we are seeing what Ingles would look like on most teams.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I

RandomElk16 said:


> The Jazz, in my mind, are a disappointment this season. They made some role player additions this year, and have the same group as last year. With all the change the NBA saw, and an extra year of experience, I expected them to be better than last season.
> 
> I know it's the Rockets, but I think they would be struggling against any of the other teams with how they are playing right now. It starts with the defense (or lack their of). That has always been their identity.
> 
> I know Hayward regressed, but for everyone who said Ingles was better - he isn't. Sometimes he plays over his head, but I think this series we are seeing what Ingles would look like on most teams.


Nah, Houston is the worst possible matchup. Houston plays a switching defense which is almost impossible to score against when you only have one guy (Donovan) who can initiate his own offense. The Jazz have a great offensive system, that works against most teams, but it can't work against he Rockets because they have to many guys who can switch and guard multiple positions. When Donovan drives they're just sending 2,3, sometimes even 4 defenders his way into the paint, then he has to pass it out to guys who can't shoot, once you miss you have 3-4 Rockets already in the paint waiting on the rebound so you never get second chance points. When you have a roster that can switch on defense as well as the Rockets and have so few guys who can create on the Jazz this is the result. The Jazz need a PG that can shoot, and probably one more guy that can shoot. The Jazz would be better off against Golden State than Houston, Houston is the absolute worst matchup they could have drawn. I actually think any other opponent would have been better on the Jazz because their offense could run. The biggest issue they're having is they can't score. Sure, their defense isn't great but part of that is because their offense is terrible. Ingles can't get going because Quins offense is what frees these guys up to get their shots, Houston is able to completely stop the Jazz's offensive system. This is what I expected. Houston is just a horrible matchup for how the Jazz operate and Houston has a real chance of knocking off GS if Harden continues his ridiculous pace. Crowder, Rubio, and others will have to hit their 3's for the Jazz to get a game or two, because the defenders aren't leaving Ingles or Mitchell, and honestly. Korver having a bad knee isn't helping anything either, he can't get free at this point so he's pretty much worthless when he's on the court.


----------



## HighNDry

Kwalk3 said:


> I'll be honest, I thought they'd at least make these 1st 2 games competitive. Appears I was wrong. I went for a run up the mountain last night and got back into the car at the end of the 1st quarter. Made the executive decision to not worry about the game last night. Sounds like it was the right decision. Looks like HND may not have been wrong about his prediction.


I wasn't really making a prediction for a sweep, I just casually asked if anyone was predicting a sweep.

From the first 2 games, I'm pretty sure Houston is the better team with a pretty good coach (even though I can't really stand their coach). When asked after the first game if he thought Harden could be stopped, he said that Harden can't be stopped. That teams have tried to stop Harden all year and have they succeeded? No. He said Harden is the scoring leader because he can't be stopped. That's some pretty confident talk coming from a coach.

I don't think coach Snyder is that confident about any of his players.


----------



## 3arabians

HighNDry said:


> I wasn't really making a prediction for a sweep, I just casually asked if anyone was predicting a sweep.
> 
> From the first 2 games, I'm pretty sure Houston is the better team with a pretty good coach (even though I can't really stand their coach). When asked after the first game if he thought Harden could be stopped, he said that Harden can't be stopped. That teams have tried to stop Harden all year and have they succeeded? No. He said Harden is the scoring leader because he can't be stopped. That's some pretty confident talk coming from a coach.
> 
> I don't think coach Snyder is that confident about any of his players.


Ya haha!! I really don't like D'Antoni either. He is ****y as hell. He thinks he is Phil Jackson or Red Auerbach but no titles unless you count the Italian league. SMH

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Kwalk3

3arabians said:


> Ya haha!! I really don't like D'Antoni either. He is ****y as hell. He thinks he is Phil Jackson or Red Auerbach but no titles unless you count the Italian league. SMH
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I feel the same way. Houston looks like they might have a chance to get it done this year though!


----------



## 3arabians

The refs have a serious man crush on Harden. They fantasize about him before bed. 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BigT

Houston is a tough team for me to watch starting with the head coach. These guys spend way too much time complaining about calls or non calls. Harden is an amazing talent and from what I can tell, a pretty good dude.. But when he's on the court, he's an award winning actor. I would have loved to see him take it to the basket against Malone with his wipe aways he keeps tagging Gobert with. I believe he'd stick with his step back 3s... which have been pretty accurate anyways. 

Nonetheless, the Jazz are so far over matched that it doesn't matter. The Jazz lack shooting, and athletes. Mitchell is a stud of an athlete and will only get better... But we're seeing the limitations of Ingles, Crowder, and even Rubio. I like Rubio, but he can't shoot to save his life. Ingles is funny and fun to watch at times, but isn't much more athletic than a thumbtack. Perfect example is late in game 3 when he couldn't get in front of his guy PJ Tucker for a defensive rebound that kept the Jazz from having a chance to tie. Ingles would be a great guy to come off the bench to sit in a corner for kick-out threes like Tucker is to the Rockets. I love Crowders defensive intensity and physical play but he just can't shoot! 

The Jazz will have a hard time recruiting any top free agent with constant things happening with fans. It paints the community with a broad brush though it's very limited to few people. I saw there was a fan who was issued a warning an hour before the game started on Saturday. 

Lastly, the Rockets are good, but they're still not the Warriors.. Even with the Warriors losing Cousins, they're still the best team in the league. And oh by they way, is anyone watching Lillard taking it to Westbrook? Now that's been fun to watch.


----------



## RandomElk16

#1DEER 1-I said:


> Nah, Houston is the worst possible matchup. Houston plays a switching defense which is almost impossible to score against when you only have one guy (Donovan) who can initiate his own offense. The Jazz have a great offensive system, that works against most teams, but it can't work against he Rockets because they have to many guys who can switch and guard multiple positions. When Donovan drives they're just sending 2,3, sometimes even 4 defenders his way into the paint, then he has to pass it out to guys who can't shoot, once you miss you have 3-4 Rockets already in the paint waiting on the rebound so you never get second chance points. When you have a roster that can switch on defense as well as the Rockets and have so few guys who can create on the Jazz this is the result. The Jazz need a PG that can shoot, and probably one more guy that can shoot. The Jazz would be better off against Golden State than Houston, Houston is the absolute worst matchup they could have drawn. I actually think any other opponent would have been better on the Jazz because their offense could run. The biggest issue they're having is they can't score. Sure, their defense isn't great but part of that is because their offense is terrible. Ingles can't get going because Quins offense is what frees these guys up to get their shots, Houston is able to completely stop the Jazz's offensive system. This is what I expected. Houston is just a horrible matchup for how the Jazz operate and Houston has a real chance of knocking off GS if Harden continues his ridiculous pace. Crowder, Rubio, and others will have to hit their 3's for the Jazz to get a game or two, because the defenders aren't leaving Ingles or Mitchell, and honestly. Korver having a bad knee isn't helping anything either, he can't get free at this point so he's pretty much worthless when he's on the court.


None of this can be true because I was told they were better off without Hayward.

Celtics injury removed- he was the space creator before. I made the vary argument on here that him and Donovan would have been a good thing because you have two guys who can do just that - create - and was shut down and told how much Rubio helped them.

While I agree Houston isn't a great matchup - that excuse doesn't work for effort. They played effortless, deflated basketball the first two games. I am fine with the loss in game 3 because it looked like they tried. That's all I wanted the first two games. Scoring wasn't even my main gripe, it was defense the first two games. Then when you look at how they guarded Harden in crunch time game 3... well I wouldn't put it on the offense. I feel like the excuse every Jazz fan is making (matchup) seems to be the same thing the Jazz told themselves before the series even started. At some point, you need to pull up your britches and get it done!

Effort should always be on display. The Jazz flat out played the first two games with no heart.

EDIT: At least Jazz fans can be happy that Dame is destroying OKC


----------



## #1DEER 1-I

BigT said:


> Houston is a tough team for me to watch starting with the head coach. These guys spend way too much time complaining about calls or non calls. Harden is an amazing talent and from what I can tell, a pretty good dude.. But when he's on the court, he's an award winning actor. I would have loved to see him take it to the basket against Malone with his wipe aways he keeps tagging Gobert with. I believe he'd stick with his step back 3s... which have been pretty accurate anyways.
> 
> Nonetheless, the Jazz are so far over matched that it doesn't matter. The Jazz lack shooting, and athletes. Mitchell is a stud of an athlete and will only get better... But we're seeing the limitations of Ingles, Crowder, and even Rubio. I like Rubio, but he can't shoot to save his life. Ingles is funny and fun to watch at times, but isn't much more athletic than a thumbtack. Perfect example is late in game 3 when he couldn't get in front of his guy PJ Tucker for a defensive rebound that kept the Jazz from having a chance to tie. Ingles would be a great guy to come off the bench to sit in a corner for kick-out threes like Tucker is to the Rockets. I love Crowders defensive intensity and physical play but he just can't shoot!
> 
> The Jazz will have a hard time recruiting any top free agent with constant things happening with fans. It paints the community with a broad brush though it's very limited to few people. I saw there was a fan who was issued a warning an hour before the game started on Saturday.
> 
> Lastly, the Rockets are good, but they're still not the Warriors.. Even with the Warriors losing Cousins, they're still the best team in the league. And oh by they way, is anyone watching Lillard taking it to Westbrook? Now that's been fun to watch.


This. I hope Jazz and fans here realize one of the biggest hurdles the Jazz face is the select few fans that are assholes at games. You don't think these guys talk and are friends? It seems insane to me anyone would go to the game and say something ridiculous for several reasons. Jazz are a great organization and while SLC is not a city that is up there for an NBA player in lifestyle, it also has changed a lot in the last 10 and 20 years that make it a much better place to be. My general statement to fans that go to a game is be loud, boo, whatever, but being an ******* is another thing entirely and hurts not just the Jazz but our entire state and community on a world stage when those sorts of things happen in our arena. It's true it's very few people, but our NBA team is one of the most well known parts of Utah on a world stage and those few idiots can absolutely ruin the perception of this place in so many ways. The fan who was issued a warning card was yelling "flopper" which obviously is nothing out of bounds, but I can see why the Jazz are being cautious and heavy handed with warning fans. That being said I have a twitter and many guys who have played here have genuinely enjoyed it. Trevor Booker, Deron Williams (who lives here still during the summer months), DeMaree Carrol,Millsap, all have complimented there time here. DeMaree Carrol even a few days ago mentioned that Houston played well at home, but the fans in SLC are amazing and he expected much more of a fight in game 3. Having someone like Donovan willing to put himself out there as a kid from NYC is something the Jazz haven't really ever had, and his comments, opinions, and his advocacy is a great asset for the Jazz. Donovan's pitch will mean much more to an NBA player than the Jazz could ever make. That's why the select few idiots going to games and undercutting what he's trying to do is even more embarrassing. The dude has tried his best to change that narrative of this community, and a few idiots in the arena have to cross a lines and make us all look bad. If you go to games, report those idiots or call them out, and please never be one of those idiots.

As for game 4 who knows what happens, game 3 might have been too much of a gut punch. Jazz do have a lot of money to spend in the off-season and the pool of free agents is large. The team will not look the same at the start of next season.


----------



## Vanilla

I think it's funny that people think fans in Utah are any different than any other place around the NBA. 

Are there people in The Viv that make idiots out of themselves and say super inappropriate things? Absolutely. Just like there are in 28 other NBA arenas as well.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I

Vanilla said:


> I think it's funny that people think fans in Utah are any different than any other place around the NBA.
> 
> Are there people in The Viv that make idiots out of themselves and say super inappropriate things? Absolutely. Just like there are in 28 other NBA arenas as well.


This is too much of an excuse for me. Just because there are a**holes everywhere doesn't mean a**holes here are okay. There also has to be a little consideration into the fact that Utah is not the most diverse place out there and I can see why there might be more sensitivity to the crowd here as well as an ignorance to what you say to a player vs how the player is going to receive what's being said.

I can assure you the perception of fans here is one of the biggest hurdles the Jazz face. The franchise, ownership, coaching staff, GM, and overall front office is respected in the league as one of the best. They renovated everything for the players to have everything they need. Obviously they'll always face the small market issue, but in the age of social media it means far less. Mitchell has a signature shoe and endorsement deals from several large brands already. I don't think the Jazz will have an issue keeping Gobert just from much of what I've seen. Donovan is essentially here for at least 6-7 more years, getting that 3rd guy is a challenge but they have a bit of time to do so. The perception of fans here doesn't help though. I agree they're in every arena, and all that but the perception problem isn't everywhere and when something does happen here, it has much more of an impact. Like or not, fair or unfair, Jazz fans have a bad rep among NBA circles and it hurts us much worse than other arenas when one idiot makes us look bad. It's also a slap in the face to someone like Mitchell who's done what he can to start changing that narrative.


----------



## Vanilla

Nobody said it was okay for the idiotic remarks to happen. Stop with the straw man arguments. 

I challenge your assertion that Jazz fans have any worse rap than any other fan base out there. A player that plays for a division rival that has had multiple run ins with fans in our arena and other arenas as well says something, but it doesn’t mean it’s true. You see how the same guy treats the media every night? I was listening to a Houston beat writer on the radio today talking about how she gets in trouble with Rockets fans because she’s regularly tweeting about how great Utah fans are for their team. Utah is often hailed as the toughest place to play away games. Players LOVE the fans here. So...I’m not buying it. Even if there are dirt bags that say stupid stuff, just like the 28 other arenas as well. 

And I REALLY challenge that the reason the Jazz have trouble bringing in free agents is due to the fans. That is crazy talk. That isn’t even close to being true.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I

Vanilla said:


> Nobody said it was okay for the idiotic remarks to happen. Stop with the straw man arguments.
> 
> I challenge your assertion that Jazz fans have any worse rap than any other fan base out there. A player that plays for a division rival that has had multiple run ins with fans in our arena and other arenas as well says something, but it doesn't mean it's true. You see how the same guy treats the media every night? I was listening to a Houston beat writer on the radio today talking about how she gets in trouble with Rockets fans because she's regularly tweeting about how great Utah fans are for their team. Utah is often hailed as the toughest place to play away games. Players LOVE the fans here. So...I'm not buying it. Even if there are dirt bags that say stupid stuff, just like the 28 other arenas as well.
> 
> And I REALLY challenge that the reason the Jazz have trouble bringing in free agents is due to the fans. That is crazy talk. That isn't even close to being true.


K it's not one player, several players have mentioned Utah and Boston as the fans that cross the line most often. There's a list. NBA media will tell you the Jazz are well respected as an organization around the league, they will just as quickly tell you they have the worst rep of any fanbase in the league among players. And yes it is true. It may not matter when a player has the choice between LA and Utah, but if it comes down to Utah and say....Denver or Portland, it matters when a dude is factoring in where to move his family. Now I agree it's a handful of assholes, but it hurts the organization nonetheless.


----------



## Vanilla

#1DEER 1-I said:


> And yes it is true.


I guess if you say so...


----------



## Kwalk3

Avoided the sweep!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## hunting777

JAZZ FOR THE WIN!!!! it was fun watching Mitchell turn it on in the 4th quarter.


----------



## RandomElk16

I had a die hard Jazz fan tell me yesterday he wanted the sweep.

He said: 
"I don't want any moral victories. Then next year everyone will point and say 'well if you look at how we played in game 4, and if we do that'... We need change and we always have an excuse why we don't."


I agree with the sentiment. Korver's knee got brought up earlier. A 38 year old role player shouldn't be one of the excuses in the playoffs. They need another space creator (true PG maybe?), and also... can anyone tell my why rudy can't be a 2-way player? I mean he scores in the paint, but of the like 3 mid range jumpers he has taken this year he has made them. I don't see why he couldn't get a couple of shots off and be a 22 or so ppg player. Then you have Mitchell in the mid 20's, and get one more 20+ ppg player. The person I spoke with is also one of few that have agreed with me about the Jazz having this weird attachment to Exum. He was the final straw in the Conley trade and was just completely off the table. It's odd. Jazz had some great trade potential at the deadline, and we know that a FA is a hard sell. 


I dunno. What are your thoughts? Is the Moral Victory enough for you? Do you really feel good about the last few seasons or do you want more out of the team?


----------



## RandomElk16

Vanilla said:


> I think it's funny that people think fans in Utah are any different than any other place around the NBA.
> 
> Are there people in The Viv that make idiots out of themselves and say super inappropriate things? Absolutely. Just like there are in 28 other NBA arenas as well.


Honestly - Utah has a hostility about them. Not sure if it's because we have a main religion where everyone is calm most the time-- until it comes time for sports. Just look at church ball. I have seen more injuries and more hard fouls than my time in organized sports. It gets insane.

I have been to multiple arenas. I would say the "exception" people are more common in Utah. Especially in "what" we say. In 2013 when BYU fans were throwing stuff at the refs and acting a fool.. that's not weird behavior in Utah. Passion is one thing, but I feel like in Utah sometimes we can't draw the line between passion and down right ***hole behavior.

We keep making this excuse that "every team does it"... Okay, I always remember with my employees that Reality matters, but just above that is Perception. If the perception is misaligned, it doesn't matter what's "real". While I think we are worse, and you don't, it really doesn't matter what's "real". Utah has a perception. If that means the fans need to stop being jack***es and hold ourselves to a higher standard - than we should. The perception needs to change.


----------



## Kwalk3

RandomElk16 said:


> I had a die hard Jazz fan tell me yesterday he wanted the sweep.
> 
> He said:
> "I don't want any moral victories. Then next year everyone will point and say 'well if you look at how we played in game 4, and if we do that'... We need change and we always have an excuse why we don't."
> 
> I agree with the sentiment. Korver's knee got brought up earlier. A 38 year old role player shouldn't be one of the excuses in the playoffs. They need another space creator (true PG maybe?), and also... can anyone tell my why rudy can't be a 2-way player? I mean he scores in the paint, but of the like 3 mid range jumpers he has taken this year he has made them. I don't see why he couldn't get a couple of shots off and be a 22 or so ppg player. Then you have Mitchell in the mid 20's, and get one more 20+ ppg player. The person I spoke with is also one of few that have agreed with me about the Jazz having this weird attachment to Exum. He was the final straw in the Conley trade and was just completely off the table. It's odd. Jazz had some great trade potential at the deadline, and we know that a FA is a hard sell.
> 
> I dunno. What are your thoughts? Is the Moral Victory enough for you? Do you really feel good about the last few seasons or do you want more out of the team?


I don't really buy the moral victory thing. I think it's been very apparent, even with a better showing in each of the last two games, that the Jazz are a tier below the best teams. I think management and coaching are very aware of what this team is missing.

I do think it's important for Donovan and Rudy and anyone else that sticks with the team going forward, to fight and win a game. I also think it means something to the fans. That place was loud last night!


----------



## Vanilla

RandomElk16 said:


> In 2013 when BYU fans were throwing stuff at the refs and acting a fool.. that's not weird behavior in Utah.


This statement illustrates my whole problem with the narrative going on here. If this is "not weird" for Utah, can you show us a single other example of when it has happened? This is the only time my memory has of fans throwing things at refs after a game. Is it fair to say between college and professional sports we have thousands of games every year in this state? And we can point to one incident? That's the very definition of weird. I disagree entirely with your opinion on this. I think it's completely inaccurate. With all due respect and bless your heart.



RandomElk16 said:


> We keep making this excuse that "every team does it"...


I'm excusing nothing. The behavior of the few is terrible and unacceptable. The only assertion I'm making is against those that are saying it is worse here than other places. It's not.


----------



## RandomElk16

Vanilla said:


> This statement illustrates my whole problem with the narrative going on here. If this is "not weird" for Utah, can you show us a single other example of when it has happened? This is the only time my memory has of fans throwing things at refs after a game. Is it fair to say between college and professional sports we have thousands of games every year in this state? And we can point to one incident? That's the very definition of weird. I disagree entirely with your opinion on this. I think it's completely inaccurate. With all due respect and bless your heart.
> 
> I'm excusing nothing. The behavior of the few is terrible and unacceptable. The only assertion I'm making is against those that are saying it is worse here than other places. It's not.












This is one of the worst things I have seen, especially as a father. Couple that with the "cancer" chants and it was an awful display. Utah treats players who leave like ****. Not hard to find Hayward injury tweets. It's completely classless.

The racial comments is nothing new for Utah either. MULTIPLE teams have talked about it. Maybe we aren't always throwing things at refs, I used that example because BYU is a religious institution with high standards and a heavy code of conduct, and it still happens there. Utah fans can be some of the best people in the world, until they show up at a stadium/arena.

Again, *perception* is what matters here.


----------



## RandomElk16

Kwalk3 said:


> I think it's been very apparent, even with a better showing in each of the last two games, that the Jazz are a tier below the best teams.


Except all I hear is "the Rockets are the worst matchup"... "Denver rigged the standings"... etc, etc...

However, what fans see and what the org sees are two different things. They could have made an important trade THIS season. If they don't land at least one scoring starter this offseason, I would be mad as a fan.


----------



## caddis8

Outclassed. Outmanned. Out coached. Out executed.

The Jazz should have won game 3. Games 1 and 2 were horrible by any standards. 

Sweep is bad for anyone. I'm glad they won a game. I would love them to win another one in Houston. 

As a fan (and a high school basketball official) watching the Rockets is painful. The NBA is a lot different than college and high school, I get it. However, watching the NBA (Harden, Westbrook, Paul are the worst) creates kids that think they can run into people and then throw a fit when there's no foul. It bothers me greatly that Harden gets to the line by shoving off and then flailing around to get a call. He hit Mitchel right in the nuts somewhere in the 3rd quarter on a push off, then step back three. That's the NBA though. 

Overall thoughts, Ingles has been a no show this series- largely by Houston's defensive scheme. He shot 4 times all night and wasn't on the floor during the stretch. Favors has been a monster and I'm glad to see him play well. Gobert hasn't been an offensive threat- and I think has been out played by Capella- that dude is pretty good. 

Jazz need to make some roster changes, but not wholesale. They have a lot of money to spend and they've been pretty smart about it in the past. Exum is gone, too many injuries. I don't think Rubio will be around- too many stupid turnovers and inconsistent play. He can't shoot and shouldn't shoot. Crowder is a maybe for me. Ball hog without the percentage to back that up. However, those two were huge in the first half. I like Crowder's toughness and he's good for the team. But someone else could do that and be a more efficient scorer. 

Quinn's offensive strategy isn't for every team and that's ok. I don't think everyone is a good fit for Quinn because he wants defensive effort and intensity. The offense relies on ball movement and discipline. So who could be available in that role? Thoughts? 

For those who say Utah is bad for fans and Utah has a bad rap in the NBA circles....I'm not in those circles so I have no idea. Utah isn't for everyone, but the players who play for the Jazz most of them love the organization. What I know is that there are bad fans everywhere. They yell, they scream. 
They swear. You also have to consider the sources of the complaints and 
their behavior. Westbrook complaining about a fan? He's had several run ins with several teams/players/dogs/cats/chairs, etc. The fan who got booted wasn't being racial. He was vulgar and foul, but not racial, in my opinion. Wasn't called for. But you also want fans that can give the team a legitimate advantage. We don't clap for everyone- except for exceptional performances. There is a line and it shouldn'be be crossed. However, I wouldn't think it a stretch to say that most places have fans who cross that line as much or more than Utah. Fact. I've seen it in a lot of places even in po-dunk high school gyms. It's a society thing, not a Utah thing. 

Several have left for championship opportunities or for other reasons. Jazz have let some go because of finances- because this is a business. However, I would say a lot of the teams who are succeeding aren't the large market teams. Golden State has continued success and I wouldn't call them a large market team- or at least wasn't one until they started winning. San Antonio not a large market team. OKC- as much as I can't stand them isn't a large market team. Denver, mid market. So, I think the trend isn't about large markets as much anymore because of other avenues of exposure. I think it's a lot more about the possibility of winning on whatever team can win that will be the deciding factor for a lot of players, and how much teams are willing to pay for it. 

I don't see Golden State being the same team they are this year next year- becuase there are a lot of players looking to make a ton of money next year. I would love Klay Thomsen to come to the Jazz. I think that he'd be a good fit for the team and a great piece. Favors and Gobert are solid at the #4 and #5. Ingles has been good this year and is a great guy. He's been solid and think belongs on the team, but maybe not in the same role. Korver type role for Ingles. He has deceptively good defense, but the whole team has struggled with fast scorers like Lillard, Harden, Westbrook. Good point guards have tore the Jazz up the last several years because don't have anyone that can contain them. They're not really containable, but we've been torched by guys like them regularly for a while. 

Anyway, glad they won. I'd love for them to win another one.


----------



## Vanilla

RandomElk16 said:


> Again, *perception* is what matters here.


Whose perception? Yours? I don't think yours matters any more or less than mine, and my "perception" is completely meaningless when it comes to NBA players and what they think.

I agree, the reaction to Fischer was terrible. But for me to be wrong in my assertion, similar showings of terrible behavior would have to have never happened at other arenas around the NBA. For every negative incident of fan behavior at Vivint, there is one somewhere else as well. And that is my whole point. You all are buying and furthering the false narrative, hook-line-and sinker.

Fan is short for fanatic. Fantatic is one that is filled with excessive and single-minded zeal. It's not just Utah Jazz fans that say and do stupid stuff. And that is my point. If you want to argue that, and you're really prepared to suggest that these same types of things don't happen around the NBA, then I probably can't help you understand that the sky is blue or that President Trump is going to tweet today either.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I

RandomElk16 said:


> I had a die hard Jazz fan tell me yesterday he wanted the sweep.
> 
> He said:
> "I don't want any moral victories. Then next year everyone will point and say 'well if you look at how we played in game 4, and if we do that'... We need change and we always have an excuse why we don't."
> 
> I agree with the sentiment. Korver's knee got brought up earlier. A 38 year old role player shouldn't be one of the excuses in the playoffs. They need another space creator (true PG maybe?), and also... can anyone tell my why rudy can't be a 2-way player? I mean he scores in the paint, but of the like 3 mid range jumpers he has taken this year he has made them. I don't see why he couldn't get a couple of shots off and be a 22 or so ppg player. Then you have Mitchell in the mid 20's, and get one more 20+ ppg player. The person I spoke with is also one of few that have agreed with me about the Jazz having this weird attachment to Exum. He was the final straw in the Conley trade and was just completely off the table. It's odd. Jazz had some great trade potential at the deadline, and we know that a FA is a hard sell.
> 
> I dunno. What are your thoughts? Is the Moral Victory enough for you? Do you really feel good about the last few seasons or do you want more out of the team?


People make the Conley thing sound way too simple. Memphis front office is a mess and likely the reason that deal didn't get done. In their exit interviews Memphis President and GM's answer to where the franchise was going was "I'm not sure right now"......The President of the Grizzlies basically said that the coach there was not going to lose his job. Hours later both the President and coach were fired after Memphis ownership allowed them to take media exit interview questions. It's hard to make deals happen when a franchise is incompetent and has no idea what direction they are going. From what's been reported that not getting done had just as much to do with Memphis not being the greatest trade partner as the Jazz not being willing to do it.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I

Vanilla said:


> Whose perception? Yours? I don't think yours matters any more or less than mine, and my "perception" is completely meaningless when it comes to NBA players and what they think.
> 
> I agree, the reaction to Fischer was terrible. But for me to be wrong in my assertion, similar showings of terrible behavior would have to have never happened at other arenas around the NBA. For every negative incident of fan behavior at Vivint, there is one somewhere else as well. And that is my whole point. You all are buying and furthering the false narrative, hook-line-and sinker.
> 
> Fan is short for fanatic. Fantatic is one that is filled with excessive and single-minded zeal. It's not just Utah Jazz fans that say and do stupid stuff. And that is my point. If you want to argue that, and you're really prepared to suggest that these same types of things don't happen around the NBA, then I probably can't help you understand that the sky is blue or that President Trump is going to tweet today either.


Obviously the perception of players is what matters in this situation. Here's the issue, the Jazz actually have a star that is well respected around the league by his peers, that is having no issue getting exposure and endorsement deals, that speaks fondly of Utah and the Jazz. Even if it is only a few idiots, because of some previous issues, it completely undercuts what he is trying to do for the organization when these things happen, and it sucks. Whether it's perception or reality, it's still an issue. Now there is also a long list of players who have said how much they enjoyed there time here. Raja Bell, who has every reason to be upset with the Jazz for how things ended, a couple days after the Westbrook incident said how great the fans here are, how much he liked living here, and how he turned down offers to go to LA, Miami, and Chicago because he had kids and wanted to be with a stable good organization in a nice place. I do believe RandomElk's portrayal is a bit much. I mean Deron Williams left on pretty bad terms and came back and faced the crowd as an opponent and got the other side of the crowd and he still lives here with his family and spends a lot of time here so he can't think this is too bad of a place to be. Whether you think the perception is fair Vanilla is not really what matters, it's the fact it's out there and we should do whatever we can to make it better.


----------



## Vanilla

#1DEER 1-I said:


> Whether you think the perception is fair Vanilla is not really what matters, it's the fact it's out there and we should do whatever we can to make it better.


Has nothing to do with what is fair or what is not fair. I'm saying that I don't agree that the perception widely exists. A few players that are pretty much giant idiots and couple guys on an internet hunting forum do not a national perception make.

The word "excuse" was thrown around a lot above. This seems like someone looking for an excuse to explain why Utah has never been able to bring in top flight free agents. That answer is simple. The same reason 20+ other teams have the same problem. But you've already said their fans are not as bad as Jazz fans, so it can't be that...


----------



## Brookie

Just go to a high school game and see how bad the fans are. I look at them and can't believe the switch that is turned on during church, it sickens me.


----------



## wyoming2utah

RandomElk16 said:


> They need another space creator (true PG maybe?), and also... can anyone tell my why rudy can't be a 2-way player? I mean he scores in the paint, but of the like 3 mid range jumpers he has taken this year he has made them. I don't see why he couldn't get a couple of shots off and be a 22 or so ppg player. Then you have Mitchell in the mid 20's, and get one more 20+ ppg player. The person I spoke with is also one of few that have agreed with me about the Jazz having this weird attachment to Exum. He was the final straw in the Conley trade and was just completely off the table. It's odd. Jazz had some great trade potential at the deadline, and we know that a FA is a hard sell.


1) Rudy is a 2-way player. In fact, he is very underrated as an offensive player. Not only did he lead the league in FG%, but his screen assists are the highest in the NBA as well. What he does for the Jazz his help create open shots for others or get dunks. When he sets high screens and ball-handlers drive off those screens, Rudy dives hard forcing defenses to either cover him down low and open up the three in the corners or on the perimeter or allow him to get lob dunks. Also, Rudy shooting mid-range jumpers is the epitome of bad shot selection and against all the metrics of the NBA. The value and risk of him shooting those just doesn't make sense. Read this: http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/26420295/rudy-gobert-season-most-underrated-offensive-weapon

2) As a Jazz fan, I was scared to death that the Jazz were going to make the trade for Conley. I did NOT want it at all. When rumors began flying about Conley not wanting to come to Utah, I knew he wasn't the right fit. But, when the rumors surfaced that Rubio and Exum were what the Grizzlies wanted, I was scared to death it would happen. I get it...Exum has underwhelmed as a player on the court and been oft injured. I know why people are down on him and rightfully so. But the risk of having an unhappy veteran guard in Conley breaking up the unity of the Jazz and bringing contention was too big of a risk this year and for what? A chance at losing one round further in the playoffs? Conley isn't the missing linl. To me, Exum is still worth investing some time and effort in because he has a huge upside. Rubio may be gone this summer and that is ok as long as the Jazz find another option...which I think they will.


----------



## HighNDry

Well...Jazz could have it evened up 2-2 if Jazz would have hit some shots and made free throws in game 3. But I guess the same could be said for Houston and Harden too in both game 3 and 4. Houston looked and played pathetic.


----------



## RandomElk16

wyoming2utah said:


> 1) Rudy is a 2-way player. In fact, he is very underrated as an offensive player. Not only did he lead the league in FG%, but his screen assists are the highest in the NBA as well. What he does for the Jazz his help create open shots for others or get dunks. When he sets high screens and ball-handlers drive off those screens, Rudy dives hard forcing defenses to either cover him down low and open up the three in the corners or on the perimeter or allow him to get lob dunks. Also, Rudy shooting mid-range jumpers is the epitome of bad shot selection and against all the metrics of the NBA. The value and risk of him shooting those just doesn't make sense. Read this: http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/26420295/rudy-gobert-season-most-underrated-offensive-weapon


I mean.. Javale McGee is number 3 on FG%.... That wasn't my point. Maybe him shooting mid was the wrong example, but small sample size or not his entire career he has shot significantly better from MR than the Non-RA area.

He is 5th on the team in attempts, but is second in PPG. He gets those easy paint baskets. I think he could be featured in more of the offense.

If you think he is at his ceiling and should be the 5th option, that's ok. I simply think he can be more.

As far as the trade.. The Jazz are going to have to win over a player. Rubio and Exum would have been fine for a player with 2 years on his contract to see if you could win him over. The playoffs with Mitchell might have been enough to show him. They have to have a different approach to getting talent, or they will just land the guys none of the good markets wanted at a cost above what other teams would pay. Missing link? Well shoot darn if we got some big name here it would be great. We know what the Jazz could really use, but they won't get that so they need to be creative.

If they had Conley and beat the Rockets - then played the Warriors who they match up better against... They maybe could have had one of the biggest postseasons in playoff history. It's a stretch sure, but looking at where they are lacking this series, Conley would fit the bill.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I

wyoming2utah said:


> 1) Rudy is a 2-way player. In fact, he is very underrated as an offensive player. Not only did he lead the league in FG%, but his screen assists are the highest in the NBA as well. What he does for the Jazz his help create open shots for others or get dunks. When he sets high screens and ball-handlers drive off those screens, Rudy dives hard forcing defenses to either cover him down low and open up the three in the corners or on the perimeter or allow him to get lob dunks. Also, Rudy shooting mid-range jumpers is the epitome of bad shot selection and against all the metrics of the NBA. The value and risk of him shooting those just doesn't make sense. Read this: http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/26420295/rudy-gobert-season-most-underrated-offensive-weapon
> 
> 2) As a Jazz fan, I was scared to death that the Jazz were going to make the trade for Conley. I did NOT want it at all. When rumors began flying about Conley not wanting to come to Utah, I knew he wasn't the right fit. But, when the rumors surfaced that Rubio and Exum were what the Grizzlies wanted, I was scared to death it would happen. I get it...Exum has underwhelmed as a player on the court and been oft injured. I know why people are down on him and rightfully so. But the risk of having an unhappy veteran guard in Conley breaking up the unity of the Jazz and bringing contention was too big of a risk this year and for what? A chance at losing one round further in the playoffs? Conley isn't the missing linl. To me, Exum is still worth investing some time and effort in because he has a huge upside. Rubio may be gone this summer and that is ok as long as the Jazz find another option...which I think they will.


I feel you're very wrong on Conley. Exum did not play this series and Rubio not being able to hit a 3 is the biggest issue the Jazz face. If Rubio could hit a 3 life would be a lot easier on both Gobert and Mitchell. The series is 2-2 with a few more 3's hit. Conley can shoot. Conleys contract came off the books at the exact time you have to start paying Donovan large money. Exum will be back and has the exact problem Rubio has. He can't shoot. Rubio is not likely going to be re-signed. The Conley trade would have been a benefit, especially during this series.


----------



## PBH

My thoughts are this: Lillard just left Westbrook and Paul George wondering "what just happened?". Good for him. Good for Hood. Good for Kanter. Good for Portland.

PG -- "that was a bad shot". See you on the water.


----------



## wyoming2utah

RandomElk16 said:


> I mean.. Javale McGee is number 3 on FG%.... That wasn't my point. Maybe him shooting mid was the wrong example, but small sample size or not his entire career he has shot significantly better from MR than the Non-RA area.
> 
> He is 5th on the team in attempts, but is second in PPG. He gets those easy paint baskets. I think he could be featured in more of the offense.
> 
> If you think he is at his ceiling and should be the 5th option, that's ok. I simply think he can be more.
> 
> As far as the trade.. The Jazz are going to have to win over a player. Rubio and Exum would have been fine for a player with 2 years on his contract to see if you could win him over. The playoffs with Mitchell might have been enough to show him. They have to have a different approach to getting talent, or they will just land the guys none of the good markets wanted at a cost above what other teams would pay. Missing link? Well shoot darn if we got some big name here it would be great. We know what the Jazz could really use, but they won't get that so they need to be creative.
> 
> If they had Conley and beat the Rockets - then played the Warriors who they match up better against... They maybe could have had one of the biggest postseasons in playoff history. It's a stretch sure, but looking at where they are lacking this series, Conley would fit the bill.


As much as Rudy has improved and probably still will improve on the offensive end, no....I don't think Rudy needs to be featured more in the offense. Though he is only 5th on the team in FG attempts, he is by far number one on the team in free throw attempts. What that tells me is that he is getting a lot of opportunities in the paint to score that aren't reflected in FG attempts because he is being fouled on shots. Also, I don't ever see him as a dynamic back-to-the-basket post-up player and he will probably never be able to hit outside jump shots consistently enough to warrant them. I believe the Jazz are using Rudy exactly how they should be.

As for Conley....he is a good player (probably all-star caliber). But, and this is a big BUT, the guy didn't want to be in Utah. So, why risk a guy coming in and being another Anthony Davis and demanding a trade, wreaking PR havoc, destroying team chemistry, just to do what? Maybe go one round further in the playoffs. I wouldn't have made that trade if it were just Rubio for Conley, but the price that included Favors, Exum, and Rubio was too high. I can't imagine where the Jazz would have been against the Rockets without Favors. He has played perhaps better than any other Jazz player.


----------



## Catherder

PBH said:


> PG -- "that was a bad shot". See you on the water.


Actually, Paul, you should have said it was a BAAAAD shot. Just incredible last night.

Since everyone else is pontificating about the Jazz, I guess I'll join in.

1. The biggest deficiency they have had this series has been the inability to hit wide open 3's. Ingles has been nonexistent. I know he is very popular and does other things, but his 3 point shooting regressed this year and it has been even worse in this series. When he is the 3 point threat he was, the Jazz can be competitive against tough teams, like last year. When he is not, you get what we've seen this series.

2. On a more general trend, the Jazz have gone all in on analytics and shoot almost as many 3's as Houston. However, the shooters like Rubio, Crowder, and now Ingles taking a lot of them and making below league average, it can put our offense at a disadvantage. Sadly, I think Korver may be at the end of the road and even Mitchell Donovan shoots a bit below league average. This will need to somehow be remedied in the offseason for there to be progression. Our defense is still elite.

3. Even though it delayed the inevitable, I really had fun watching Monday night. It was a fun game.

4. As for problem fans, the incident involving Westbrook this year apparently was corroborated by multiple sources and I believe the lifetime ban was appropriate. The fact that all the Jazz players were 100% in support of Westbrook is telling. I don't know if it is worse elsewhere or not, but regardless, there is a narrative that some continue to perpetuate that we are a bunch of racists here. Bad incidents just support that and I do applaud the Jazz's zero tolerance policy they currently implemented.


----------



## wyoming2utah

Catherder said:


> 1. The biggest deficiency they have had this series has been the inability to hit wide open 3's. Ingles has been nonexistent. I know he is very popular and does other things, but his 3 point shooting regressed this year and it has been even worse in this series. When he is the 3 point threat he was, the Jazz can be competitive against tough teams, like last year. When he is not, you get what we've seen this series.
> 
> 2. On a more general trend, the Jazz have gone all in on analytics and shoot almost as many 3's as Houston. However, the shooters like Rubio, Crowder, and now Ingles taking a lot of them and making below league average, it can put our offense at a disadvantage. Sadly, I think Korver may be at the end of the road and even Mitchell Donovan shoots a bit below league average. This will need to somehow be remedied in the offseason for there to be progression. Our defense is still elite.


I'm going to disagree with the above two comments a bit:
1) Though their 3-point shooting has been bad in the playoffs, it wasn't that bad during the regular season. Why? Just an aberration or a real reflection of who they are? Personally, I believe that their 3-point shooting in the playoffs is at least, if not all, attributable to Houston's defense.

2) Overall, the Jazz ranked 10th league-wide (not great but not bad either and well above league average) during the general season on their 3-point shooting percentage. Where the Jazz were truly deficient was in their overall number of field goal attempts (29th in the league) which was largely a result of turnovers (27th in the league). Also, the Jazz were poor in their free throw shooting percentage (26th in the league). To me, these are the areas the Jazz need to improve upon if they want to move up in the standings and fare better in the playoffs. How were these same stats in their series versus Houston so far? Not coincidentally, in the Jazz win the Jazz had fewer turnovers, a higher free throw percentage and number of free throws made, and a higher total number of field goal attempts. Guess what? IN the losses, those numbers were flipped!

So, if the Jazz want to improve both in the regular season and in the playoffs, they must find a way to shoot better from the free throw line, commit fewer turnovers, and get more field goal attempts per game. Does that require different players? I'm not sure.


----------



## RandomElk16

wyoming2utah said:


> I'm going to disagree with the above two comments a bit:
> 1) Though their 3-point shooting has been bad in the playoffs, it wasn't that bad during the regular season. Why? Just an aberration or a real reflection of who they are? Personally, I believe that their 3-point shooting in the playoffs is at least, if not all, attributable to Houston's defense.
> 
> 2) Overall, the Jazz ranked 10th league-wide (not great but not bad either and well above league average) during the general season on their 3-point shooting percentage. Where the Jazz were truly deficient was in their overall number of field goal attempts (29th in the league) which was largely a result of turnovers (27th in the league). Also, the Jazz were poor in their free throw shooting percentage (26th in the league). To me, these are the areas the Jazz need to improve upon if they want to move up in the standings and fare better in the playoffs. How were these same stats in their series versus Houston so far? Not coincidentally, in the Jazz win the Jazz had fewer turnovers, a higher free throw percentage and number of free throws made, and a higher total number of field goal attempts. Guess what? IN the losses, those numbers were flipped!
> 
> So, if the Jazz want to improve both in the regular season and in the playoffs, they must find a way to shoot better from the free throw line, commit fewer turnovers, and get more field goal attempts per game. Does that require different players? I'm not sure.


So what is your offensive answer?

I agree with you about Houston's defense this series... which I think featuring Rudy more down low would open up.

The Jazz offensive scheme isn't anything masterful. It's super predictable. I believe, given what they have, featuring Rudy more in post/elbow situations spreads things for them. Helps create space outside of Donovan. If you don't get a guy like Conley, they have to adjust. Is Rudy the long term number 2? No, but if they sit on their butt and never make a meaningful trade for a guy like Conley he will be. You can't rely on Hood in the past, and Ingles, and Crowder, and 38 year old Korver for buckets.

This isn't the regular season. Come playoffs the Jazz offense is too basic to do anything special. If they don't feature their 2 best players on offense, their best hope is to slow the pace incredibly, and hope the other team shoots like ****.


----------



## PBH

Catherder said:


> 4. As for problem fans, the incident involving Westbrook this year apparently was corroborated by multiple sources and I believe the lifetime ban was appropriate. The fact that all the Jazz players were 100% in support of Westbrook is telling. I don't know if it is worse elsewhere or not, but regardless, there is a narrative that some continue to perpetuate that we are a bunch of racists here. Bad incidents just support that and I do applaud the Jazz's zero tolerance policy they currently implemented.


I also applaud the Jazz's zero tolerance policy, and support the ban of the fan in the Westbrook incident.

My question is: Where does Westbrook's accountability play in that incident? Is it OK for an NBA player to yell back at a fan, dropping the F-bomb left and right? I know Westbrook was fined, but was the fine appropriate for the circumstance? What about the use of the "N" word, and why is it OK for some groups to use, but not others? I would think that word should never be OK for anyone to use, just like the F word.....but I'm just a middle-aged, balding, over weight, privileged, mormon white guy....


----------



## Catherder

wyoming2utah said:


> 1) Though their 3-point shooting has been bad in the playoffs, it wasn't that bad during the regular season. Why? Just an aberration or a real reflection of who they are? Personally, I believe that their 3-point shooting in the playoffs is at least, if not all, attributable to Houston's defense.


It would be comforting as a Jazz fan if it was just Houston's defense, but they track "wide open" vs "contested" 3's and through the first 3 games, our percentage of makes from "wide open" 3's was dismal. The so called eyeball test also supports that too. The gross number of "wide open" 3's was quite large as well. That certainly suggests to me that it was more than Houston's defense.

You are spot on about the turnovers and I should have said something about that in my earlier post. I'm not sure about the solution either. Part of it could be the coaches system with a lot of passes which can lead to a fabulous shot but also can predispose to a turnover if there is an errant pass. Part of it is doubtless the revolving door of injuries to our 3 "true" point guards, and some can be from Donovan having long stretches of being both the de facto point guard as well as the lead scorer. I do think Donovan will improve on this next year but other solutions may be elusive.


----------



## PBH

RandomElk16 said:


> So what is your offensive answer?


Wasn't that clearly laid out already?



wyoming2utah said:


> So, if the Jazz want to improve both in the regular season and in the playoffs, they must find a way to shoot better from the free throw line, commit fewer turnovers, and get more field goal attempts per game. Does that require different players? I'm not sure.


1. Shoot better from the free throw line.
2. Commit fewer turnovers
3. More field goal attempts per game


----------



## wyoming2utah

Catherder said:


> It would be comforting as a Jazz fan if it was just Houston's defense, but they track "wide open" vs "contested" 3's and through the first 3 games, our percentage of makes from "wide open" 3's was dismal. The so called eyeball test also supports that too. The gross number of "wide open" 3's was quite large as well. That certainly suggests to me that it was more than Houston's defense.


This may be true, but again compared to the regular season that is an aberration and not the norm. Changing players based on one series--a small sample size--to me is not smart. Virtually all players and all teams go through the ups and downs of bad shooting stretches. I would also suggest that the difference comes down to matchups as well and rhythm within a game. Both Korver and Ingles have seen fewer and fewer minutes as the series has gone on...why? I believe it is because the switching defense Houston is playing is not giving them the same opportunities they have gotten against most teams throughout the year.

The thing that scares me about bringing in a bunch of new players is the loss of chemistry that this team possesses. The Jazz could bring in better players and be worse.


----------



## wyoming2utah

RandomElk16 said:


> So what is your offensive answer?
> 
> The Jazz offensive scheme isn't anything masterful. It's super predictable.
> This isn't the regular season. Come playoffs the Jazz offense is too basic to do anything special. If they don't feature their 2 best players on offense, their best hope is to slow the pace incredibly, and hope the other team shoots like ****.


This sounds like the arguments that were always made against the Jazz when Jerry was coaching and Stockton was running pick-n-rolls to Malone. That super predictable offense took them pretty darn far. To me, the Jazz brass need to take the same approach they did back then--build around their superstars by maintaining the status quo for the most part and adding a piece here and there. Back in the day, the trade that sent an aging Jeff Malone away for Hornacek was the final piece that made the Jazz go from good to great. Remember that trade? They didn't sell the house to get Hornacek; Malone was all they lost with a number one pick that didn't amount to anything. This Conley trade was giving way too much for an aging veteran. Hardly worth the price. IF the Jazz can make a trade similar to the Hornacek trade where they get a good point or another wing that can shoot the three and play good D without giving up too much, I say go for it.

Also, in terms of predictability, the Houston offense is much easier to predict with all of the isolations they run for Harden. Personally, I think the Jazz offense is really difficult to defend because of all the dribble hand-offs and high picks with Gobert and Favors.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I

wyoming2utah said:


> As much as Rudy has improved and probably still will improve on the offensive end, no....I don't think Rudy needs to be featured more in the offense. Though he is only 5th on the team in FG attempts, he is by far number one on the team in free throw attempts. What that tells me is that he is getting a lot of opportunities in the paint to score that aren't reflected in FG attempts because he is being fouled on shots. Also, I don't ever see him as a dynamic back-to-the-basket post-up player and he will probably never be able to hit outside jump shots consistently enough to warrant them. I believe the Jazz are using Rudy exactly how they should be.
> 
> As for Conley....he is a good player (probably all-star caliber). But, and this is a big BUT, the guy didn't want to be in Utah. So, why risk a guy coming in and being another Anthony Davis and demanding a trade, wreaking PR havoc, destroying team chemistry, just to do what? Maybe go one round further in the playoffs. I wouldn't have made that trade if it were just Rubio for Conley, but the price that included Favors, Exum, and Rubio was too high. I can't imagine where the Jazz would have been against the Rockets without Favors. He has played perhaps better than any other Jazz player.


It was reported by a Jazz reporter that knows Favors very well that Favors was not part of that trade. It was Exum, Rubio and a bunch of cash exceptions they had built up.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I

Catherder said:


> Actually, Paul, you should have said it was a BAAAAD shot. Just incredible last night.
> 
> Since everyone else is pontificating about the Jazz, I guess I'll join in.
> 
> 1. The biggest deficiency they have had this series has been the inability to hit wide open 3's. Ingles has been nonexistent. I know he is very popular and does other things, but his 3 point shooting regressed this year and it has been even worse in this series. When he is the 3 point threat he was, the Jazz can be competitive against tough teams, like last year. When he is not, you get what we've seen this series.
> 
> 2. On a more general trend, the Jazz have gone all in on analytics and shoot almost as many 3's as Houston. However, the shooters like Rubio, Crowder, and now Ingles taking a lot of them and making below league average, it can put our offense at a disadvantage. Sadly, I think Korver may be at the end of the road and even Mitchell Donovan shoots a bit below league average. This will need to somehow be remedied in the offseason for there to be progression. Our defense is still elite.
> 
> 3. Even though it delayed the inevitable, I really had fun watching Monday night. It was a fun game.
> 
> 4. As for problem fans, the incident involving Westbrook this year apparently was corroborated by multiple sources and I believe the lifetime ban was appropriate. The fact that all the Jazz players were 100% in support of Westbrook is telling. I don't know if it is worse elsewhere or not, but regardless, there is a narrative that some continue to perpetuate that we are a bunch of racists here. Bad incidents just support that and I do applaud the Jazz's zero tolerance policy they currently implemented.


Then the other video of a fan calling Westbrook "boy" and seeing the responses that didn't understand why that was bad kind of spoke to some of the ignorance some have in this bubble. I see the comment "I've never heard anything racist at a Jazz game" followed by "why is calling him boy racist?" Even Mitchell's response was 100% in support of Westbrook as well as his comment "this is not the first time something like this has been said in our arena". I mean come on people, Utah, whether you want to admit it or not has plenty of work to do in regards to race related issues. Yes everywhere does, but Utah is predominantly one religion and one race, living in a bubble culture.


----------



## wyoming2utah

RandomElk16 said:


> If they don't feature their 2 best players on offense, their best hope is to slow the pace incredibly, and hope the other team shoots like ****.


What makes you think the Jazz aren't featuring their two best players? They certainly are--not only is Donovan taking the most shots and making the most shots, but Rudy is also a primary factor in that with his screen assists. Rudy sets more screens than any other big in the league; they are certainly using him to maximize their offense and featuring him much the same way as the Jazz did with Stockton and Malone.

Good team basketball on the offensive end requires that teams take what is given and that the basketball is shared. I believe the Jazz are excellent in doing just that. If you were to examine the metrics, you would also see that the Jazz offense is trending upward both in pace of play and in efficiency. A big reason for that is the improvement and play of both Donovan and Rudy. These improvements are also manifest in the win column as they continue to win more games at the same time.

I think the disappointment of this playoff season has some fans dillusional and short-sighted. Remember, Houston is a team that dang near knocked off Golden State last year and probably would have had Paul stayed healthy. This year they are probably still the second best team in the West and only a 4 seed because of injuries in the middle of the season to Paul and Capela. This one playoff series should not alter the Jazz direction nor its offensive game plan and strategy.


----------



## wyoming2utah

#1DEER 1-I said:


> It was reported by a Jazz reporter that knows Favors very well that Favors was not part of that trade. It was Exum, Rubio and a bunch of cash exceptions they had built up.


Bologna. Favors' agent directly contacted the Jazz and asked if he were part of that and he was told yes. The deal was Favors, Rubio, and Exum for Conley."Utah's final offer to the Grizzlies for Mike Conley First-round pick, second-round pick, and expirings, dollar for dollar. Grizzlies asked for Exum and were told no." The two "expiring" contracts were Rubio and Favors.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I

wyoming2utah said:


> Bologna. Favors' agent directly contacted the Jazz and asked if he were part of that and he was told yes. The deal was Favors, Rubio, and Exum for Conley."Utah's final offer to the Grizzlies for Mike Conley First-round pick, second-round pick, and expirings, dollar for dollar. Grizzlies asked for Exum and were told no." The two "expiring" contracts were Rubio and Favors.


There was more than one deal, and the reporter knows Favors personally and Favors was told he was not a part of the final offer the Jazz made the Grizzlies.


----------



## wyoming2utah

Not according to the Dnews Jazz guy Woodyard (who also knows him personally):
"As far as the expiring contract players are concerned, it appears the Jazz's Ricky Rubio and Derrick Favors would have been included in this proposed deal for Conley, according to Eric Woodyard of the Deseret News." That was the final offer and counteroffer from Grizzlies.

https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/...zzlies-guard-memphis-may-decide-to-keep-star/

What's your source?


----------



## #1DEER 1-I

wyoming2utah said:


> Not according to the Dnews Jazz guy Woodyard (who also knows him personally):
> "As far as the expiring contract players are concerned, it appears the Jazz's Ricky Rubio and Derrick Favors would have been included in this proposed deal for Conley, according to Eric Woodyard of the Deseret News." That was the final offer and counteroffer from Grizzlies.
> 
> https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/...zzlies-guard-memphis-may-decide-to-keep-star/
> 
> What's your source?


Tony Jones knows Favors personally, they are friends. A fan was saying the exact same thing that you're saying that Favors has been great and he was part of the trade. Tony replied on twitter and said "I don't want to start anything, but Favors was not a part of that trade".

Here's his tweet

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1116379038539337728


----------



## RandomElk16

I mean, do you really want to use the all-time assist leader and top 5 all time scorer as an example of today's Jazz?

Stockton was a career 10 apg. Karl was a career 25 and 10 player. A predictable offense is way easier when you have stars. The triangle offense also use to win championships... The game today requires something different.

I agree FT% is something they should work on. Rudy, who you were happy got FT attempts, is a 63% shooter. With the turnovers though, you don't think that's more than just being sloppy? You don't think that's a result of their system a bit?


I am not overreacting that it's the Rockets. I don't care if the Jazz don't win. But they never made it over the hump back then, and they aren't anywhere close to making it over the hump now. I suppose good is good enough.


----------



## caddis8

The turnover issue I think has two parts to it. 

In the Jazz system, the amount of passes they attempt and complete has inherent risk for increased turnovers. 

Houston is an improved defensive team from last year. That has made the Jazz struggle a bit. There are forced turnovers and stupid turnovers. 

Rubio has driven into the paint a whole bunch and had nowhere to go. Is that because Houston's defense is that good? Probably partly. Is that because he's trying to force it a little? Probably. Overall the Jazz have had increased turnovers and give up points off of turnovers. That there is not a real speedy true PG hurts them because the faster, quicker players are off and running. Jazz transition defense hasn't been that great this year. 

The first 3 games were full of stupid turnover which is in my mind a lack of focus. Granted, these people are professionals and I don't know what goes through their mind. There have been a lot of uncharacteristic TOs at very inopportune times. 

Free throws are basic at any game. Good teams shoot free throws well. Again, to me that is a focus thing. 

Mitchel has had his share of turnovers also. It's not an excuse, but often it is because he's trying to do too much and not take what's given. He's not at Harden's level and likely won't get foul calls that the mega stars get. He will likely get there, but he's not there yet. 

Houston is a really good team. Better than their #4 seed and had the best record after the All Star break. Injuries were hard on them and took them a bit to get their chemistry back. But it's back. 

I don't like their style of play, but it's hard to argue against its effectiveness. Harden is good. Really good. A great shooter. Do I like him? Nope. Do I think what he does is good for the game? No. But it doesn't take away that he's a really good player. 

Jazz are overmatched this year. I think they do need to get a couple more pieces to help Mitchell. I don't know that they need to be superstars. I think if they can get some


----------



## Catherder

Ugh. Missing wide open 3's, turnovers. That was there for the taking. :roll:

Well, it was all the stuff we talked about before the game. 

The offseason will be interesting..............


----------



## Vanilla

#1DEER 1-I said:


> Tony Jones knows Favors personally, they are friends. A fan was saying the exact same thing that you're saying that Favors has been great and he was part of the trade. Tony replied on twitter and said "I don't want to start anything, but Favors was not a part of that trade".
> 
> Here's his tweet
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1116379038539337728


I feel like this is a "my dad can beat up your dad" argument. Until they actually fight, I guess we'll never really know...

Jazz are a good team that had a good season. They are not a great team, and need to make some changes to become one. The NBA landscape could look VASTLY different in 3 months. It's unfortunate that Jazz fans suck so bad that while SLC, Utah has always been a premier free agent destination, we will miss out because of all these bubble racists we have here!


----------



## Critter




----------



## #1DEER 1-I

Vanilla said:


> I feel like this is a "my dad can beat up your dad" argument. Until they actually fight, I guess we'll never really know...
> 
> Jazz are a good team that had a good season. They are not a great team, and need to make some changes to become one. The NBA landscape could look VASTLY different in 3 months. It's unfortunate that Jazz fans suck so bad that while SLC, Utah has always been a premier free agent destination, we will miss out because of all these bubble racists we have here!


I'm telling you what's easy to read between the lines of what I see from NBA media. There's a difference in being a less appealing destination and being dead last on the list. And I'm sorry that I would bring up that a place that's nearly 90% white and over 60% one religion might live in a bubble and be a bit ignorant of some things. I live in rural Utah and yes that bubble is a real thing.

As for the summer. The Jazz aren't going to land anyone great but here's what you have to hope. You have to hope Donovan can convince someone to give Utah a chance. In the case of getting any decent player to sign here, Donovan is the only thing that gives it any chance whatsoever of happening. The have money to spend, and probably one of the most well-liked charismatic young talents in the NBA. He is what will have to sell a player to give it a shot, hopefully he can do so.


----------



## Vanilla

#1DEER 1-I said:


> And I'm sorry that I would bring up that a place that's nearly 90% white and over 60% one religion might live in a bubble and be a bit ignorant of some things.


Race and religion are protected classes. All races and all religions, despite popular belief. Bias exists on all sides. Sometimes we have to look at ourselves in the mirror to see where the problem lies.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cb...ything-you-need-to-know-about-the-market/amp/

Any of these guys players that any of us Jazz fans want? Any of them realistic options?

Tobias Harris
Malcom Brogdan (RFA) 
Khris Middleton

Those are my top 3 targets as a fan. I have no clue how realistic any of those are. I think both the Sixers and Bucks will have a hard time keeping their rosters together due to the salaries they will command, but the 76ers May elect to keep Harris and let Butler walk.

I believe each of these guys will be max players. Contract is certainly a consideration. Can the Jazz afford three max players? (Mitchell factored in for future)


----------



## PBH

I'd take JJ Redick too, but may be too expensive.
I don't think Kemba Walker is realistic, but would be a nice replacement for Rubio.
Middleton would be great.

Dany Green, Terry Rozier, Patrick Beverly....


----------



## RandomElk16

Vanilla said:


> Race and religion are protected classes. All races and all religions, despite popular belief. Bias exists on all sides. Sometimes we have to look at ourselves in the mirror to see where the problem lies.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cb...ything-you-need-to-know-about-the-market/amp/
> 
> Any of these guys players that any of us Jazz fans want? Any of them realistic options?
> 
> Tobias Harris
> Malcom Brogdan (RFA)
> Khris Middleton
> 
> Those are my top 3 targets as a fan. I have no clue how realistic any of those are. I think both the Sixers and Bucks will have a hard time keeping their rosters together due to the salaries they will command, but the 76ers May elect to keep Harris and let Butler walk.
> 
> I believe each of these guys will be max players. Contract is certainly a consideration. Can the Jazz afford three max players? (Mitchell factored in for future)


I tend to think that Middleton and Tobias will stay where they are on nice contracts. But not sure the bucks want to spend to keep both Brogdon AND Middleton. Tobias will be max.

The Jazz could have attempted to trade for Tobias. But we don't want to risk losing Exum, right?

It was cool to hear CP3 say they didn't want to come back to Utah "That place was loud last time. It made me miss that free-throw."

I was unfortunately prepared for him to say something negative, but that was quite the compliment to the fans at the game!


----------



## #1DEER 1-I

Vanilla said:


> Race and religion are protected classes. All races and all religions, despite popular belief. Bias exists on all sides. Sometimes we have to look at ourselves in the mirror to see where the problem lies.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cb...ything-you-need-to-know-about-the-market/amp/
> 
> Any of these guys players that any of us Jazz fans want? Any of them realistic options?
> 
> Tobias Harris
> Malcom Brogdan (RFA)
> Khris Middleton
> 
> Those are my top 3 targets as a fan. I have no clue how realistic any of those are. I think both the Sixers and Bucks will have a hard time keeping their rosters together due to the salaries they will command, but the 76ers May elect to keep Harris and let Butler walk.
> 
> I believe each of these guys will be max players. Contract is certainly a consideration. Can the Jazz afford three max players? (Mitchell factored in for future)


Where did I say they weren't all protected? My point is this is a bubble that doesn't consider/understand other cultures all that well, and yes that's true in most places but trying to be better at instead of ignoring issues with it is a reasonable ask.

As for those FA Tobias and Middleton are staying put IMO. Brogdan is your most likely of those 3 because Milwaukee can't pay everyone they're going to need to pay. But you'll also probably have to hand out a max contract to get him out of the Bucks hands and outbid others. As for contracts. Rudy is likely to be eligible for a super max extension. Next summer Donovan will be eligible for a 5 year max contract extension. If the Jazz can win a lot then maxing our Brogdan would be worth it, if they aren't then it could be a costly mistake. Donovan won't be getting paid big money for 2 more seasons. The most years you could sign Brogdan is 4 years, so really they'd only be on the hook for 2 years where salaries could be ridiculous. Either way, the next two seasons are when they have financial flexibility to do something that is a bit risky. Cause after that Donovan will be getting paid around $31 million a year and Rudy probably $40 million a year if he's eligible for a super max. Idk, NBA revenue has been crazy so they may be fine financially doing so.


----------



## Vanilla

#1DEER 1-I said:


> Where did I say they weren't all protected? My point is this is a bubble that doesn't consider/understand other cultures all that well, and yes that's true in most places but trying to be better at instead of ignoring issues with it is a reasonable ask.


Substitute "black baptist" for "white mormon" and see how that plays, regardless of what you are saying. Utah is the only place that race and religion makes it okay for people subject to criticism based only on being a member of those classes. Swap the race or the religion out for any other group and there would be hellfire and damnation all across the board. It's okay to do here for some reason? Interesting sociological study, if you ask me.

Anyway, I think I've sufficiently made my point about how ridiculously wrong you are with all this (see the quote posted from Chris Paul?) so I can just focus on putting on my GM hat and fixing the Jazz's issues now.

I think we should just sign Jimmer and play him 30 minutes per night. If you read KSL/Des News/Tribune comments, the only reason he isn't All-NBA is the conspiracy each team he has been on has had against him to not play him. -O|o-o-||


----------



## RandomElk16

Is Rudy worth the Supermax? Or only to the Jazz?


----------



## Kwalk3

RandomElk16 said:


> Is Rudy worth the Supermax? Or only to the Jazz?


Yes


----------



## HighNDry

Brookie said:


> Just go to a high school game and see how bad the fans are. I look at them and can't believe the switch that is turned on during church, it sickens me.


Don't let it sicken you, that is what church is for: A place where we sinners go to learn how to change our behavior, to repent and then try to do better. If we were perfect in our actions, thoughts and behavior, then we wouldn't need church. Glad people can go there and learn, try, and eventually become just a little better--even if just for a short time.


----------



## Catherder

Vanilla said:


> I think we should just sign Jimmer and play him 30 minutes per night. If you read KSL/Des News/Tribune comments, the only reason he isn't All-NBA is the conspiracy each team he has been on has had against him to not play him. -O|o-o-||


The first sentence nearly made me throw up in my mouth. The second sentence made me laugh so hard I nearly asphyxiated on the barf from the first sentence. You win the internet today.:O||:

Danny Green is a FA? He would be perfect for our system. So would Redick in the "Korver" role from this years team. Interesting.

I liked this quote from Zach Lowe's column today. Goes along with what we've been talking about.

"Utah is clearly good -- perhaps the third-best team in the West. The Jazz shot about 25 percent -- preposterous! -- on wide-open 3s, per NBA.com; hit at an average rate, and the series looks different.

The Jazz are better at producing good shots than making them, but this was an anomalous performance even by their standards."

Improve the shotmaking and turnovers, we could have something.


----------



## PBH

Catherder said:


> Danny Green is a FA?


Unrestricted.


----------



## RandomElk16

Catherder said:


> The first sentence nearly made me throw up in my mouth. The second sentence made me laugh so hard I nearly asphyxiated on the barf from the first sentence. You win the internet today.:O||:
> 
> Danny Green is a FA? He would be perfect for our system. So would Redick in the "Korver" role from this years team. Interesting.
> 
> I liked this quote from Zach Lowe's column today. Goes along with what we've been talking about.
> 
> "Utah is clearly good -- perhaps the third-best team in the West. The Jazz shot about 25 percent -- preposterous! -- on wide-open 3s, per NBA.com; hit at an average rate, and the series looks different.
> 
> The Jazz are better at producing good shots than making them, but this was an anomalous performance even by their standards."
> 
> Improve the shotmaking and turnovers, we could have something.


This is just like the lakers though. You can't play the 3pt game if you don't have 3pt shooters.


----------



## RandomElk16

Kwalk3 said:


> Yes


Can you elaborate?

Just figuring out why he is worth as much as Curry, Kawhi, Lebron, KD, etc....

I am the anti-max though. The league is screwing itself. Middleton is like a Tier 4 player, but will get the same money as Tier 1.

Guys like Draymond, Brogdon, Middleton, etc... aren't "Max" guys. Rudy to me isn't a 40M a year player. To the Jazz, yeah, because they can't get anyone else. Now it seems like you are either Max, Vet, or overpaid mid tier guy.


----------



## caddis8

I think Rudy is close to Max if not Super Max. 

His statistics are crazy good in most metrics. Yes, is isn't the traditional scorer by which most people measure. However, his statistics about screen assists, dunks, defense, shots altered, shots avoided, etc. etc. are league leading. 

In short. He alters people's games. I think he can put on a bit more weight and muscle- which I think will help him and I anticipate he will do- like Mitchell needs to and alluded to after he was out physicalled by Houston this series. He was bumped, pushed, bodied, smacked and overall owned by Tucker- who is bigger and more physical than Mitchell, and a good defender- even though I don't care for him. Mitchell said he needed to be in better shape after the game last night. 

Playoff basketball gets physical. The refs let a lot go during the playoffs and it usually favors the more physical team. Every team needs to have an enforcer. Crowder sort of fills that role- but he isn't a very good shot. Tucker played his role. Play good defense and shoot when needed- especially the corner 3. 

Ingles sort of has that role but he's not fast enough to handle the 2/3 guard forward. 

Jazz need a PG and a better 2/3 scoring option and they'll contend. They lacked some toughness this year.


----------



## Kwalk3

RandomElk16 said:


> Can you elaborate?
> 
> Just figuring out why he is worth as much as Curry, Kawhi, Lebron, KD, etc....
> 
> I am the anti-max though. The league is screwing itself. Middleton is like a Tier 4 player, but will get the same money as Tier 1.
> 
> Guys like Draymond, Brogdon, Middleton, etc... aren't "Max" guys. Rudy to me isn't a 40M a year player. To the Jazz, yeah, because they can't get anyone else. Now it seems like you are either Max, Vet, or overpaid mid tier guy.


I don't make the rules. I tend to agree with you about the three contract categories. There are way more guys that get max contracts than are actually one of the elite players in the league.

That being said and the contracts in the NBA being what they are, Rudy is definitely a max guy as he is absolutely one of the most elite defenders in the game and also has a huge, albeit less noticeable impact on the offensive side of the ball.

Yeah, sure, some of that is system, but that's more of an attempt to diminish what Rudy is as a player, than a valid argument against giving him the max IMO. You can also flip that around and say that the success of the Jazz system is based on Rudy's attributes as a player. He's deserving, no question.


----------



## Vanilla

RandomElk16 said:


> Is Rudy worth the Supermax? Or only to the Jazz?


In my opinion, no. I think there are maybe 10 guys that should earn the super max in the entire NBA, and not even all of those 10 guys will qualify for it based upon the criteria. Rudy is not one of the best 10 players in the league, and he is not a guy that will be the unquestioned leader on a championship contending team. If you are not that, I personally would not pay you the super max if I was the one making the decision. But then again, I'm not paying any of these guys anything, so what do I know?

If Mitchell continues to progress, I do think he will be worth it down the road, however. And I think Rudy will get that offer from the Jazz when the time comes if he qualifies for it.


----------



## PBH

Rudy Gobert
2018 - 2019 advanced stats

Win Shares: 14.36 -- #2 in the NBA (behind Hardin)


that's higher than Antetokounmpo, Lillard, PG, Durant, Lebron, Westbrook, Curry, Kawhi....and even Spida Mitchell.

Statistically, his value to the Jazz is probably higher than Mitchell's.

to put it bluntly: Gobert makes his team better.
Any team in the league would want to have this guy on their team. Is he worth a max contract? Absolutely.


----------



## Vanilla

There is a difference between a ‘max’ and a ‘super max’ contract. Seems like they’re being used interchangeably, but they’re different things. 

And I didn’t argue that Gobert doesn’t help the Jazz. I argued he’s not the unquestioned leader that will carry them. And he’s not that. At least not now.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I

Vanilla said:


> There is a difference between a 'max' and a 'super max' contract. Seems like they're being used interchangeably, but they're different things.
> 
> And I didn't argue that Gobert doesn't help the Jazz. I argued he's not the unquestioned leader that will carry them. And he's not that. At least not now.


Rudy is the most important player on the team. If he wasn't there the Jazz would get lit up every night on defense. If he's eligible for super max, I'm sure he'll get super max. In a small market, you do what you have to to keep talent. I truly hope the Jazz can find Donovan some sort of offensive help this offseason via whatever pathway it takes. To be quite honest with you they owe it to him to do everything possible to get him that. He was exhausted last night. Rudy is currently the most impactful player on the team, but every decision you make from this point forward should be to make Donovan's life easier. I thought this article laid it out, probably pretty accurately, that yes I'd love to see the Jazz get to the top of the mountain at least one time in my life, but if it doesn't that's okay too.

https://kslsports.com/408640/oconnell-the-jazz-wont-win-maybe-ever-and-thats-okay/


----------



## PBH

'Nilla -- I agree with you. Rudy is not the leader. Mitchell is. No question. And Donovan is the guy that will probably get that super max. But Rudy's statistics prove he's the more impactful player.

We need to name a street, or bridge after Rudy. Maybe a a row of power lines. Or just a grove of trees in Liberty Park. Maybe a cat shelter. A museum (The Rudy Gobert Utah Museum of Fine Arts?). Something. At some point Rudy is going to want that spotlight turned in his direction.


----------



## Catherder

PBH said:


> 'Nilla -- I agree with you. Rudy is not the leader. Mitchell is. No question. And Donovan is the guy that will probably get that super max. But Rudy's statistics prove he's the more impactful player.
> 
> We need to name a street, or bridge after Rudy. Maybe a a row of power lines. Or just a grove of trees in Liberty Park. Maybe a cat shelter. A museum (The Rudy Gobert Utah Museum of Fine Arts?). Something. At some point Rudy is going to want that spotlight turned in his direction.


Do we have an unnamed arch or natural landmark down in Southern Utah we could name "Gobert arch"? I think he would appreciate that more than a cat shelter. We can use the shelter for Rubio.


----------



## PBH

Yes! This ^^

This is awesome! I'm going to be spending the rest of the day looking through photos to try to find the best natural geographic rock formation in the southern Utah deserts to name after our very own rock-solid center: Rudy Gobert!



how do we get the Jazz, and the State of Utah (BLM? FS? National Parks?) involved in this? If we name a butte, mesa, arch, natural bridge, spire, canyon, or mountian after Gobert -- he'd never be able to leave!!!


(I'm ready to rename Lake Powell to Lake Gobert!!)


----------



## Catherder

PBH said:


> Yes! This ^^
> 
> This is awesome! I'm going to be spending the rest of the day looking through photos to try to find the best natural geographic rock formation in the southern Utah deserts to name after our very own rock-solid center: Rudy Gobert!
> 
> how do we get the Jazz, and the State of Utah (BLM? FS? National Parks?) involved in this? If we name a butte, mesa, arch, natural bridge, spire, canyon, or mountian after Gobert -- he'd never be able to leave!!!
> 
> (I'm ready to rename Lake Powell to Lake Gobert!!)


What about the new National Park in Escalante? (I suppose Zinke NP won't cut it anymore.) The area is long and imposing, just like Gobert, and the access we are used to will be blocked, just like a weak arse layup attempt against the defensive player of the year.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I

I figure, I'll throw this on here. Donovan has been good in and around the community and is nominated an NBA community assist award. Go click on his face and vote for him here:

https://nbaworld.jebbit.com/tvt56vo...Zv-I2e1fcxTkoyus93WqYD7hRlK6tFTlfRyBDWS_RDa8c


----------



## 2full

Done
My vote is in.


----------



## PBH

Vanilla said:


> And I didn't argue that Gobert doesn't help the Jazz. I argued he's not the unquestioned leader that will carry them. And he's not that. At least not now.


Rudy is making a case that he will be the leader to carry the Jazz. He's certainly sticking it to the US right now...

FIBA

#GobertRock
#RudyGobertNationalParkOfTheEscalanteRiver
#GiveHimTheKeysToTheState


----------



## Catherder

I had forgotten that they played today. Sounds like Gobert was dominant. So much for the overrated talk. :roll:



PBH said:


> #GobertRock
> #RudyGobertNationalParkOfTheEscalanteRiver
> #GiveHimTheKeysToTheState


This needs to happen! What is the holdup? Chris Stewart hoping the NP will be named after him? A campaign in Piute and Wayne county to name it Bundy NP?

C'mon, 435ers, lets get this done!


----------



## Vanilla

So a guy has a big game in a tournament where the world's best players are not involved and that is conclusive evidence that he going to the Hall of Fame? 

Rudy is a fine player, and an incredible defender. Let's slow our roll, though.


----------



## RandomElk16

Vanilla said:


> So a guy has a big game in a tournament where the world's best players are not involved and that is conclusive evidence that he going to the Hall of Fame?
> 
> Rudy is a fine player, and an incredible defender. Let's slow our roll, though.


Are you freaking kidding me? This is Utah, the sports capital of the world. We will overreact whenever we feel like it Vanilla!! (Which is like, all the time)


----------



## PBH

Vanilla said:


> So a guy has a big game in a tournament where the *USA's* best players are not involved and that is conclusive evidence that he going to the Hall of Fame?
> 
> Rudy is a fine player, and an incredible defender. Let's slow our roll, though.


fixed it for you.



Gregg Popovich said:


> I think it's a disrespectful notion to even bring something like [the stars who withdrew] up. That's disrespectful to France and whoever else is in this tournament. France beat us. It doesn't matter who was on the team.


France (with Rudy Gobert leading the way) advances.
Austrailia (with Joe Ingles leading the way) advances.

We just might end up with Gobert vs Ingles in the championship!

USA -- we're going fishing!!


----------



## Vanilla

PBH, I know this is breaking news, but in basketball, the USA’s best players are the world’s best players.


----------



## RandomElk16

Vanilla said:


> PBH, I know this is breaking news, but in basketball, the USA's best players are the world's best players.


Curry, Klay, Lebron, KD, AD, Kemba, Harden, PG, Bradley Beal, Damian Lillard, CJ McCollum, Donovan Mitchell...

Get a few of them and they run over any other team.


----------



## Vanilla

Every once in a while you throw in a foreign dude like Giannis or Dirk in his prime that creep up towards the top, but there aren’t 3 international players today that would crack the top 10 overall in the world, right? 

Is it even more than 1 at the moment?


----------



## Kwalk3

Vanilla said:


> Every once in a while you throw in a foreign dude like Giannis or Dirk in his prime that creep up towards the top, but there aren't 3 international players today that would crack the top 10 overall in the world, right?
> 
> Is it even more than 1 at the moment?


Giannis is the only sure bet I can think of. Maybe Jokic in a few years? You could make an argument for him now, though I personally wouldn't put him top 10. Probably firmly in that 11-20 range though.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Catherder

Kwalk3 said:


> Giannis is the only sure bet I can think of. Maybe Jokic in a few years? You could make an argument for him now, though I personally wouldn't put him top 10. Probably firmly in that 11-20 range though.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I was reading a Zach Lowe column on Espn the other day that argued Gobert could be in the top 15 now. Who knows if he's hit his ceiling yet. Jokic could make a case, Doncic too, in 3-5 years.


----------



## Vanilla

So some agreement that right now there is only 1 sure bet. How many of those other 9 didn’t play in this tournament? 

Which takes me back to my original point. Hobert dominated a game in a tournament that doesn’t include the world’s best players. I like Rudy. He’s a good player. If you want to crown him, then crown him! (In your best Dennis Green voice.)


----------



## Catherder

Vanilla said:


> If you want to crown him, then crown him! (In your best Dennis Green voice.)


I just want a National Park named after him. 

My advocacy will be done once we get Gobert NP, Mount Whittingham, and just for you, Rimando peak.


----------



## wyoming2utah

How soon we forget...USA hockey beating the Russians.

It is and never will be who has the best players...it will be and always is about who has the best team.

The USA didn't have the best team in FIBA this year; we will never know if they could have had the best team if...because just like in 1984, talent doesn't always win in sports. That's why they play the games.

So, all this talk about Harden and KD and Lebron....is garbage just like Pop explained. Right now, the USA isn't the best in basketball. Period. All the hypotheticals need to end.


----------



## Critter

It is as been said before, this year the USA sent their C or D team to play. Not the A, or even the B team. Most of these players will not even qualify for next years Olympic Team unless the best that the NBA US players decided not to play.

Even when this team was formed the talk was that France was going to be their toughest game and there was no mention of Australia. But Australia showed up to play in their game and France showed that they were the better team, this year.


----------



## wyoming2utah

Again, you are assuming we sent our C or D team to play. But, what the USA hockey team story teaches us is that it is not about talent. Go back and look at the history of USA hockey prior to that...we were sending our NHL all-stars to the olympics and getting pounded by the Russians and others. Those NHL all-star teams couldn't hold a candle to the best TEAMS in the world regardless of us sending our best "talent." So, what did Herb do? He gathered up the players who fit specific roles to fill out the best team he could. And, where did those players come from? Colleges. He created the best TEAM.

Talent doesn't always equate to the best teams. Sorry, but it is completely nonsense to say that we didn't send our best "team." We can only say we didn't send our most talented players. Big difference. Popovich nailed it.

Also, FWIW, Jerry Colangelo is hinting that players that committed to TEAM USA and then backed out of their commitments will not be invited to play in the olympics.


----------



## Critter

I have watched the Miracle on Ice about the 84 hockey team and admit that on any given night a pick up team can beat a pro team. But this years USA team wasn't it and wasn't much better than a college all star team and then they sent them out to play with the pro's.


----------



## RandomElk16

I mean.. sure, on any given day someone can win. But if you actually put together a team of the USA best basketball players, they are winning 49 out of 50 games against another country.

Not even close games. It would look like a freaking all star game. 

I don't know why you are pushing the argument with this. Talent in basketball does usually equate to the best team. The Warriors have been the best team, because of talent. When they added KD, that was further proved talent matters. When they had injuries, very few injuries too said talent, they lost. 


The USA has entered the olympics 18 times. They have won 15 of those and medaled every single time. FIBA always struggles to have the best players participate, and we have still kicked plenty of *** there. Since NBA players could participate in the Olympics, we won all but once. And in 2004, it was because 9 of the 12 2003 FIBA team didn't play. Again, it was a year we didn't use the most talented and had a bunch of young nba players. 


I get it with some stuff, ESPECIALLY with amateurs.... but when it comes to professional basketball the best players, and best complete team, would be from the USA.


----------



## wyoming2utah

Talent in basketball usually means the best team...usually. So, when does it not? You mean like how the more talented OKC Warriors with Westbrook, George, and Melo lost to the no-name Jazz just two years ago? Or, prior to that when the Jazz upset Griffin, Paul, Jordan and company?

What about when the lesser-talented Cavs beat the Warriors in the finals? Yes, those Warriors....

Good grief, even in the NBA we see upsets happen all the time in playoff series. Upsets where the more talented team loses.

Again, how soon we forget about that collegiate team of USA amateurs that beat the professional Russian hockey team that dominated hockey...

...so, yeah, 49 out of 50. But, that's sports...why play the games if it is predetermined who is the best? Sorry, but we don't know who would win because there is always that 1. FIBA or not...we didn't win, and you cannot definitively say we would have had we sent our most talented players just like I can't definitively say we would have won that game against the French and the Serbs with Tatum, Smart, and Kuzma playing (though I think we do).

You see, these foreign teams are talented (maybe not the most talented, but they are talented) and they have one major advantage over our US team--continuity. "Just look at the French team that beat them Wednesday. Vincent Collet has been France's head coach since 2009. Rudy Gobert and Evan Fournier have played for the national team since the 2014 World Cup. Nicolas Batum was on the 2010 World Cup team. Most of this roster has been together for quite some time. Team USA has never been able to match that continuity, and frankly, it has never tried."

As long as the US continues to throw together these last second collections of guys, they will continue to be at risk of losing because they aren't building any kind of team. Just go back to 2004's team to see how that can play out...

...you know that "team" that had the likes of Iverson, Marbury, Dwade, Boozer, Melo, Lebron, and Duncan (geez, some of those guys are among the best EVER) but only won Bronze. I mean, come on, what team had more talent than that?


----------



## Catherder

Stepping away from the other arguments here and looking at this particular USA team, it is apparent why they struggled. They had no bigs! Brook Lopez is nothing more than a "seasoned veteran" and Miles Plumlee? Second string on the Nuggets Miles Plumlee? Give me a break. I thought the guards and wings on this team were capable, but the lack of quality bigs against "A" level competition had an inevitable result. --\\O

Which segues to another point worth bringing up. 


"Curry, Klay, Lebron, KD, AD, Kemba, Harden, PG, Bradley Beal, Damian Lillard, CJ McCollum, Donovan Mitchell...

Get a few of them and they run over any other team."


It is true that the US still produces the best wings and guards, but look at this list. Only one big,(AD) who himself is trying to convince the league that he is a power forward. Of the top bigs, I could only think of AD and Karl Anthony Towns, who are from the US. The other best bigs in the league, Embiid, Gobert, Jokic, maybe Capela or Nurkic, all foreign. This could be an area other nations could exploit in international play, even if we send more of our "A" listers. 

Now, I know that the response is that the NBA is getting smaller, and this is true. However, those top bigs listed above do just fine in the modern league. Even the death lineup of the Warriors required Draymond and KD to play capably as "bigs" on the defensive end for them to have their devastating success.


----------



## Vanilla

RandomElk16 said:


> I don't know why you are pushing the argument with this.


Because that is what the hepps do on here! He doesn't even believe what he's writing here.


----------



## wyoming2utah

Vanilla said:


> Because that is what the hepps do on here! He doesn't even believe what he's writing here.


Sure I do. I've been coaching basketball way too **** long not to. The most talented teams don't always win; that's why we play the games.

You can't tell me that the 2004 team wasn't the most talented team...yet, they only won bronze.


----------



## Vanilla

The most talented teams at the level you coach don’t always make the “best teams.” I will agree with that. And yes, even at the highest level there are upsets, but that wasn’t your argument. Your argument was talent doesn’t take the best teams, and others responded that at the level we’re talking about (professional level) that talent makes the best teams. So now you’re changing your argument to show that the best team sometimes gets upset. Which is very different from where you started here. Which was to be expected with a crazy argument like the one you put forward and clung to. 

The whole point is we sent neither our best talent nor our best team to this tournament. I was the one that started that discussion point, so I know. That’s the part your conveniently glossing over to try and make a point that has little to do with what others have been saying.


----------



## PBH

Vanilla said:


> The whole point is we sent neither our best talent nor our best team to this tournament. I was the one that started that discussion point, so I know.


Actually, you said:

[quote='Nilla Wafer] ...the world's best players are not involved[/quote]

to that point, I would argue that the World's best players certainly ARE involved. It is only the USA's best players that failed to participate.

They can ONLY be the best _players_ if they PLAY.

The issue is that of risk. While other countries players feel a sense of country pride, our USA players are more concerned with risking the millions they'll make in the NBA. They won't risk their "brand" to represent a country many of them loathe, due to our current political climate. They won't risk their reputations of "the best players in the world" by participating, and risking a potential loss.

FIBA is much like the slam dunk contest. Our USA players simply will not put their reputation on the line because the the World has caught up and a potential loss would damage the perception that those USA players are the "best" in the world. That risk is currently too high. So our so called "best" players pull out. They simply will not risk their reputation.

I miss the days when USA players took pride in competition. I'm proud of those who did. I'm really proud to say I'm a Jazz fan.

#RudyGobertNationalParkOfTheEscalanteCanyons
#HeadBandJoeIngles
#SpidaMitchell


----------



## wyoming2utah

NO, Vanilla, that wasn't my argument. Go back and read. My argument was that the most talented players don't always make the best teams. Big difference. You can't tell me that our amateur USA hockey team had anywhere near the same amount of talent that the Russians had but they did have talent. Certainly, the best teams have talent. Heck, the French are loaded with talented players as is this year's USA team. But, the most talented teams don't always win and the most talented teams aren't always the best teams...

I don't believe that sending the most talented players would necessarily make the most talented team. Just like in 2004, our USA team was loaded with talent and had far more talent than any other team, but it also had a lot of big egos that wouldn't work together well as a team.

The point I have continued trying to make is that just because we didn't send over our most talented players does NOT mean our team would have been the best. I haven't changed that argument....


----------



## wyoming2utah

This is what I am saying:

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/27606497/kobe-titles-no-longer-automatic-team-usa

"I hear that a lot: 'Did we send the best possible team that we can put out there?'" Bryant said.

"You have to remember, on the Redeem Team we needed a hell of a fourth quarter to beat Spain. That was a hell of a team we had. We still needed a real late push to beat Spain in that gold-medal match. So I say that to say put the best players that you think are going to make the best U.S. team out on the floor, we are still going to have challenges. It's not going to be a cakewalk. The days of the '92 Barcelona Dream Team are gone. They're over, so it's going to be tough."

The assumption that we would have won gold easily had we sent our best "team" or best players is what bugs me...


----------



## Vanilla

wyoming2utah said:


> NO, Vanilla, that wasn't my argument. Go back and read. My argument was that the most talented players don't always make the best teams.


This quote above is responding to the following:



wyoming2utah said:


> And yes, even at the highest level there are upsets, but that wasn't your argument. Your argument was talent doesn't take the best teams


Tell me where I did not say EXACTLY what you just back and said. Now you're arguing with me when I literally am saying your argument is the exact same thing that you clarified your argument to be. You can't help yourself sometimes, can you?



wyoming2utah said:


> You can't tell me that our amateur USA hockey team had anywhere near the same amount of talent that the Russians had but they did have talent.


USA's hockey team was not better than the Soviets. (Aren't you a history teacher?) They played better on one night and pulled one of the largest upsets of all time. That wasn't the only game they had played against the Soviets that year, and what was the other results? I'll let you know, they lost 10-3 on American soil. Heck, listen to Herb Brooks speech. "If we played them 10 times, they might win 9." It was an upset. Nobody, even that team and their coach, would say they had a better team than the Soviets.



wyoming2utah said:


> But, the most talented teams don't always win and the most talented teams aren't always the best teams...


As I illustrated in my previous post, these two things are saying COMPLETELY different things, and yes, you are changing your argument right in the middle of it if you try to say that these two things are the same thing or that this was your point all along. Because it wasn't. It's documented.



wyoming2utah said:


> The point I have continued trying to make is that just because we didn't send over our most talented players does NOT mean our team would have been the best. I haven't changed that argument....


And that point would be incorrect. It was incorrect when you first said it, and it's still incorrect now. If we sent LeBron James, Steph Curry, Kawhi Leonard, Anthony Davis, James Harden, Damian Lillard, Paul George, Kyrie Irving, Russell Westbrook, and Jimmer Fredette we would have had the best team in the tournament. (I didn't even include KD and Klay because they are injured and unavailable) You can argue against that all you want, but you will be wrong. I like the mental gymnastics though. You aren't the only one that likes a good debate!


----------



## RandomElk16

wyoming2utah said:


> This is what I am saying:
> 
> https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/27606497/kobe-titles-no-longer-automatic-team-usa
> 
> "I hear that a lot: 'Did we send the best possible team that we can put out there?'" Bryant said.
> 
> "You have to remember, on the Redeem Team we needed a hell of a fourth quarter to beat Spain. That was a hell of a team we had. We still needed a real late push to beat Spain in that gold-medal match. So I say that to say put the best players that you think are going to make the best U.S. team out on the floor, we are still going to have challenges. It's not going to be a cakewalk. The days of the '92 Barcelona Dream Team are gone. They're over, so it's going to be tough."
> 
> The assumption that we would have won gold easily had we sent our best "team" or best players is what bugs me...


And yet, the only time we lost since NBA players were allowed was a year that was led by 3 players coming off a rookie season(Melo, Wade, Bron) and a year that Shaq and Kobe won the ship but weren't on the team. Neither were a ton of the Allstars.

The only thing I can agree on as far as "team" goes is a lot of the other countries play together every year. We throw a team together each year. But in basketball, a team of Lebron, Curry, KD, AD, and Klay will still beat any other country.


----------



## wyoming2utah

Vanilla said:


> USA's hockey team was not better than the Soviets. (Aren't you a history teacher?) They played better on one night and pulled one of the largest upsets of all time. That wasn't the only game they had played against the Soviets that year, and what was the other results? I'll let you know, they lost 10-3 on American soil. Heck, listen to Herb Brooks speech. "If we played them 10 times, they might win 9." It was an upset. Nobody, even that team and their coach, would say they had a better team than the Soviets.
> 
> And that point would be incorrect. It was incorrect when you first said it, and it's still incorrect now. If we sent LeBron James, Steph Curry, Kawhi Leonard, Anthony Davis, James Harden, Damian Lillard, Paul George, Kyrie Irving, Russell Westbrook, and Jimmer Fredette we would have had the best team in the tournament. (I didn't even include KD and Klay because they are injured and unavailable) You can argue against that all you want, but you will be wrong. I like the mental gymnastics though. You aren't the only one that likes a good debate!


I guess we will agree to disagree. To me, the best team wins the biggest games. The USA hockey team lost an olympic warm-up match 10-3, but they won the Gold medal game. Was it an upset? Based on talent, yes. But, they proved to be the best team in the biggest game.

Am I a history teacher...no.

Again, you are assuming that we would win based on talent. But, we don't know whether we would win or not. That's why the games are played. This idea that had we sent our best talent would would have won is dumb. Just like that 2004 team that a lot more talent and was led by AI than any other team in the world lost and took bronze, and just like Kobe said, there are no guarantees anymore because the world has caught up to us in basketball.


----------



## PBH

RandomElk16 said:


> But in basketball, a team of Lebron, Curry, KD, AD, and Klay will still beat any other country.


No they wouldn't. They would probably fair worse than the team we just sent to the FIBA world cup.

That team you mentioned above would basically be a 3 vs 5 situation. Those FIBA teams are good enough to exploit 2 players with significant injuries.

How can anyone continue to include KD and Klay in a conversation about the best players in the world? Those guys can't run, jump, or play any defense right now. They are not in the top 100. Heck, they may never return to that status. Time will tell.


----------



## wyoming2utah

RandomElk16 said:


> And yet, the only time we lost since NBA players were allowed was a year that was led by 3 players coming off a rookie season(Melo, Wade, Bron) and a year that Shaq and Kobe won the ship but weren't on the team. Neither were a ton of the Allstars.
> 
> The only thing I can agree on as far as "team" goes is a lot of the other countries play together every year. We throw a team together each year. But in basketball, a team of Lebron, Curry, KD, AD, and Klay will still beat any other country.


So, you are saying that the 2004 team had less talent than their competition? Really? Even though their two leaders--Duncan and Iverson--are among the best ever. And that their roster was built on current and past all-stars?


----------



## wyoming2utah

This is my argument, has been my argument, and will continue to be my argument. It hasn't changed:


wyoming2utah said:


> It is and never will be who has the best players...it will be and always is about who has the best team.


Read this: https://www.concordmonitor.com/Analysis-The-US-isn-t-the-best-team-at-this-World-Cup-_-yet-28232160

"But even those glitzy U.S. teams, gold medalists from the last two World Cups and last three Olympics, weren't great "teams."

They just had the best talent in the world, got along, and made it work.

Teams - in an ideal scenario - are put together over time, forged through bonds that sometimes take years. Serbia has six players here who were on its Olympic team three years ago and six returnees from the last World Cup team in 2014. Spain has five players back from the Olympics. Turkey's roster still has holdovers from the group that went to the World Cup final nine years ago.

"Execution-wise, we're not there yet," Popovich said.

That's reality, though it's certainly not an excuse for nearly losing to Turkey on Tuesday night. Ersan Ilyasova, Cedi Osman and Furkan Korkmaz - players with a combined zero NBA All-Star appearances, players with a combined NBA scoring average of 10 points per game - were pretty much doing whatever they wanted, but Turkey let the U.S. off the hook in a 93-92 overtime final.

Put simply, Turkey choked.

And that's what it took for the U.S., the world's No. 1-ranked program, the three-time defending Olympic champions and two-time defending World Cup champions, to win a game over a squad that isn't even ranked among the top 10 in Europe.

"Every game we learn something new about our group and what we have to do and how we have to play," Popovich said. "We already know how good the other teams are, so our respect is there for that, and that goes without saying. But, we still have to use every game kind of like a practice in a sense to try to get better in so many ways."

And while the U.S. is anything but a lock - as everyone can now plainly see - there's still time to get it right. But it is going to take a Herculean effort for this team to win gold in China.

Maybe, just maybe, Turkey provided the lesson or spark that the Americans needed.

*Yes, the best U.S. talent is back home but the Americans still have the most talented roster at the World Cup from top to bottom.* There's no other team in China with 12 NBA players on the roster, not even close."

WE HAD THE MOST TALENTED TEAM, but WEREN'T THE BEST TEAM!


----------



## RandomElk16

wyoming2utah said:


> So, you are saying that the 2004 team had less talent than their competition? Really? Even though their two leaders--Duncan and Iverson--are among the best ever. And that their roster was built on current and past all-stars?


They had slightly more talent, and as I just said they were thrown together that year. And you posted another post backing that up. 9/12 players on the 2003 FIBA team didn't play in 2004. That's to our disadvantage.

I am saying, if we had the 12 best players from the US, or even the top 3-5 at that time, we would have overcome that disadvantage.

But you coach basketball, so I'm sure I am wrong.

Kevin Garnett, T Mac, Jason Kidd, Kobe Bryant, Paul Pierce, Vince Carter, Shaq, Ray Allen... Those were some of the top players in the world at that time and not a single one played on that team.

AND STILL MISSING VANILLA'S POINT lol.... *The best players in the world didn't participate*. No Bron, KD, AD, Steph... the top ranked didn't play. Even a few from other countries.


----------



## wyoming2utah

I am not missing that point...I am conceding that point. I agree with it. Many of our best players did not play and did not go. But, I don't agree that sending those players means we would have undoubtedly won. That's where we disagree.

Let me put it this way...I a pretty sure that the team I coach will be better this year than last even though we will have less talent. I am losing two really talented kids...but, one of them was really selfish and was more worried about her own stats and recognition than winning and the other struggled on the defensive side of the ball. The kids I have replacing them will be more team oriented and, I believe, will make us better even though they aren't as skilled or as athletic.


----------



## Vanilla

wyoming2utah said:


> just like Kobe said, there are no guarantees anymore because the world has caught up to us in basketball.


The only reason there are no guarantees is because we don't send our best. Period. End of story. But maybe this loss will inspire the next up and comers the way 2004 did for LeBron to take pride in USA basketball. We'll see.

And I thought you were a history teacher. My bad. Explains why you don't know the difference between the Russians and Soviets in 1984!

Ziiiiiing!


----------



## wyoming2utah

Vanilla said:


> And I thought you were a history teacher. My bad. Explains why you don't know the difference between the Russians and Soviets in 1984!
> 
> Ziiiiiing!


Russians/Soviets....same thing.


----------



## Vanilla

Just like your dual arguments you've created in this thread at the same thing.

DOUBLE ZIIIIIIING! 

All I know is we beat them in the 80s in hockey and in boxing. 

Long live Rocky Balboa!


----------



## #1DEER 1-I

I figure I would throw these on here. These are probably the only version of his shoe that I could buy and feel comfortable wearing. But it's cool to see a Jazz player have his own signature shoe with the 2nd largest shoe brand in the world. So far his shoe has sold well. For the most part I believe the first two colors of it sold out and one version of it sold out within minutes to a point they did a 2nd run of them. There's several more colors coming including a purple/white/mountain/mailman color-way of the shoe to go with the Jazz coming back with the purple jerseys they just released. If you're looking for a new shoe, try his out it would do him good if they sell well, these release tonight

https://www.adidas.com/us/d.o.n.-issue-1-shoes/EG5670.html

Also a red color available
https://www.adidas.com/us/d.o.n.-issue-1-shoes/EG0490.html
And a green/black 
https://www.adidas.com/us/d.o.n.-issue-1-shoes/EF2805.html

The white/black are the ones I feel like I can wear. I think all of these versions are also available in youth sizes as well. It's good to see him be so successful. He's done very well and is a very sellable dude. He's also got custom hats and socks as well. If you want some camo socks, here's his custom socks, but I realize $20 a pair may be a bit steep lol.

https://www.stance.com/mitchell-team-camo--m558c19mit-multi-l/190107346269.html


----------

