What's new
By:

Exit Interviews

Ineptimusprime said:
Conley’s answer pissed me off. We made him an All-Star. If he leaves, we lose the asset. I honestly don’t care about losing Mike Conley from a roster perspective, I just hate losing him for nothing.

Also, Joe’s answers suggest he is convinced he’ll be back. Not sure what to make of that.
Click to expand...

Conley is a depreciating asset.
 
MT Steve said:


This comment really rubs me the wrong way.

You left a god damn 41% 3 pt shooter completely wide open all game. As in you literally didn't even guard him from 3.

What did you think would happen?
Click to expand...

In all fairness what else do you expect the man to say?

Like "I don't believe in my guys any more and I want them gone by the end of this off season?"

Or "this FO sucks and they are not giving me the players that I need to beat the Clippers, tell the owner I want a different guy in charge?"

It's just one of those fancy talks that every HC would do in that situation. Whatever his true intentions/thoughts are, that is going to get communicated upstairs, not in front of the media.
 
Defensively, the Jazz don't remember what it's like to have a legit help defender and not just Rudy trying to guard the whole floor.
Offensively, the Jazz don't remember what it's like to have a guy who can drive and finish at the rim, as well as knock down open shots.
Even one guy like Jerami Grant checks those boxes and changes the outlook of this team.

If that means taking Mike Conley or Bojan Bogdanovic off the floor to make space for that kind of player, you have to do it.
 
NUMBERICA said:
Playing the averages in an elimination game is ****ing stupid. Is he familiar with the law of large numbers? It's not that weird to flip 5 tails in a row, but in order for regression to happen, you need a larger and larger sample. The sample size where the averages matter is gone in an elimination game. It's not a question of a sample, it is the population. It is the whole thing.
Click to expand...
I’ve posted about this before but I think a huge problem is that DL and Quin have a very flawed view on moneyball. Maybe I’ll post more later but it’s like Vegas always winning. It’s not because they have some huge odds advantage. It’s because their volume is so large that it will much more significantly approximate the numbers. A casino owner who puts the entire casino’s amount of cash down on one bet with a patron and thinks “the house always wins” is a fool who should and will be parted from his cash. That’s exactly what we do because we mistake trends in large samples for being relevant for one game, or one quarter, or one possession, and then we’re completely dumbfounded by the results.

Best comparison is rebounding. I believe we may have had the best rebounding differential. But when the calculus changes in the final minutes, anyone who’s even casually watched the Jazz the past few years knows we can’t secure defensive rebounds.
 
infection said:
I’ve posted about this before but I think a huge problem is that DL and Quin have a very flawed view on moneyball. Maybe I’ll post more later but it’s like Vegas always winning. It’s not because they have some huge odds advantage. It’s because their volume is so large that it will much more significantly approximate the numbers. A casino owner who puts the entire casino’s amount of cash down on one bet with a patron and thinks “the house always wins” is a fool who should and will be parted from his cash. That’s exactly what we do because we mistake trends in large samples for being relevant for one game, or one quarter, or one possession, and then we’re completely dumbfounded by the results.

Best comparison is rebounding. I believe we may have had the best rebounding differential. But when the calculus changes in the final minutes, anyone who’s even casually watched the Jazz the past few years knows we can’t secure defensive rebounds.
Click to expand...
I feel like people that rely on statistics to evaluate their strategies should be required to understand what statistics actually are. Maybe they should take a course.
 
infection said:
I’ve posted about this before but I think a huge problem is that DL and Quin have a very flawed view on moneyball. Maybe I’ll post more later but it’s like Vegas always winning. It’s not because they have some huge odds advantage. It’s because their volume is so large that it will much more significantly approximate the numbers. A casino owner who puts the entire casino’s amount of cash down on one bet with a patron and thinks “the house always wins” is a fool who should and will be parted from his cash. That’s exactly what we do because we mistake trends in large samples for being relevant for one game, or one quarter, or one possession, and then we’re completely dumbfounded by the results.

Best comparison is rebounding. I believe we may have had the best rebounding differential. But when the calculus changes in the final minutes, anyone who’s even casually watched the Jazz the past few years knows we can’t secure defensive rebounds.
Click to expand...
I think you base your system off of smart theories but you also just have to play basketball and adjust when parts of the system aren’t perfect. Can’t have such emphasis on the system that it supersedes the basketball.
 
Avery said:
Can we actually draft a PG rather than continually trade out our picks for one?

I know the pickings will be slim late in the draft, but sick of giving up picks for vets.
Click to expand...

I have a feeling their focus is going to be on wing defenders in this draft.
 
NUMBERICA said:
Conley's gone and our team president is finally gonna maybe ask some questions NOW about "small-ball" when the Warriors terrorized the league with it eight ****ing years ago.

Can this ****ing clown.
Click to expand...
Normally he’s only 2-3 years slow on adjusting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top