What to do with Taylor Hendricks year one

[Saint Cy of JFC]

I never said the cycling was game to game. Obviously there are probably reasons behind the minutes to some extent, but he clearly would just randomly give Udoka minutes to get him engaged. At one point he benched NAW when he was seemingly playing great so he could get THT back into the rotation for a stretch (no injuries, just did it). There wasnt always an obvious "this guy has played bad so he got benched"

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

He would also randomly let Fontecchio get a longer stretch to give him cracks at getting a groove.

 

[idiot]

I think there's two different things being talked about here. I think HH is talking about cycling on a game to game basis. Normal variation throughout the season based on performance/injuries seems to be more what you're talking about.

If that's what HH was arguing (game-to-game cycling), I don't understand why that was his argument; nobody had really claimed that Hardy was cycling game-to-game, had they?

I would also dispute that injuries really had any role in the cycling. All four players we're talking about had relatively healthy years. So while other injuries might have played a role in total minutes played, their own injuries likely played very little role in their minutes relative to one another.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

If that's what HH was arguing (game-to-game cycling), I don't understand why that was his argument; nobody had really claimed that Hardy was cycling game-to-game, had they?

I would also dispute that injuries really had any role in the cycling. All four players we're talking about had relatively healthy years. So while other injuries might have played a role in total minutes played, their own injuries likely played very little role in their minutes relative to one another.

His argument is he wants to argue with me because he is obsessed with me.

 

[idiot]

I never said the cycling was game to game. Obviously there are probably reasons behind the minutes to some extent, but he clearly would just randomly give Udoka minutes to get him engaged. At one point he benched NAW when he was seemingly playing great so he could get THT back into the rotation for a stretch (no injuries, just did it). There wasnt always an obvious "this guy has played bad so he got benched"

Yes, this is generally my memory, as well. Maybe there was the possible exception with Jones/Dok that they got minutes a bit more based on the center(s) we were playing against in a particular game (ie, Dok got the big strong guys and Jones the stretch centers). At least this is the Jones/Dok pattern I thought I discerned at one point; I'd have to go back to check to really be sure.

 

[fishonjazz]

Look at D Will, drafted at #3. Didn't start for the first 1/3 of the season at least.

Well that is because we were stacked at the position. We had Keith Mcleoud and milt palacio. Pretty hard to get playing time with talent like that on the roster.

 

[KqWIN]

If that's what HH was arguing (game-to-game cycling), I don't understand why that was his argument; nobody had really claimed that Hardy was cycling game-to-game, had they?

I would also dispute that injuries really had any role in the cycling. All four players we're talking about had relatively healthy years. So while other injuries might have played a role in total minutes played, their own injuries likely played very little role in their minutes relative to one another.

I won't speak for anyone else, but it wouldn't be the first time two people talked passed each other lol. From the outside, I can't really tell what the point of contention is. Of course a rotation spot will be contested until someone establishes themselves and it is no longer contested. Don't see what the big deal is.

Gathering any kind of intel on Hardy's preferences from tanking time is a futile exercise imo. I don't think giving Jones and Doke extended minutes, for example, is any kind of coaching strategy beyond putting a warm body out there.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

If that's what HH was arguing (game-to-game cycling), I don't understand why that was his argument; nobody had really claimed that Hardy was cycling game-to-game, had they?

Post Conley trade I am not looking to read anything into the minutes distributions. That was tank season.

The claim was that we will cycle through 4 guys for a 10 minute bench role. The term cycling means you rotate and take turns at something... and it usually indicates that it will happen quickly... I'm not saying game to game but it would seem to indicate maybe weekly? Take your pick there on what you think it means. I do not think Hardy rotates through Samanic, Henny, Sensabaugh, Simone etc. and gives everyone their turn every 3-5 games. There will be a regular rotation and the spot will be filled by someone until they play their way out of the spot or other things... injuries, guys balling out in practice or G League, require other guys moving in or out of the rotation. There will also be consideration given to "other things" like how Rudy Gay was an absolute lock to be in the rotation (ironically until tank season came) when healthy even though he was just putrid. He's a vet... yada yada.

In general the way it works is a coach will find a rotation and stick with it until a player performs poorly enough to be demoted or another guy gets a chance to play because of injury and performs well. Imagine Taylor gets rotation minutes the first 5 games and is just okay... but is then pushed out of the rotation because its someone else's turn. That gonna boost his confidence and help his development? If he sucks then sure send him to the G League. Say you give Samanic 5 games and he is just okay... but then you hand the keys to the rookie... Luka is fighting for his NBA life... that ain't gonna fly over well either.

Someone will win the first crack at the minutes in camp/preseason and will need to be knocked off the pedestal or knock themselves off the pedestal. That's how it works unless you are a tanking team.

I would also dispute that injuries really had any role in the cycling. All four players we're talking about had relatively healthy years. So while other injuries might have played a role in total minutes played, their own injuries likely played very little role in their minutes relative to one another.

Of course it did... don't be ridiculous. Mike and Sexton being out is what causes the spikes on your graph.

 

[idiot]

Of course it did... don't be ridiculous. Mike and Sexton being out is what causes the spikes on your graph.

You misread if you thought that was my point. I said explicitly that injuries to others (Mike/Sexton) affected total minutes played (thus having a role in the spikes); but if you look at minutes relative to each other, THT's and NAW's minutes were not affected by their own injuries (these minutes relative to each other can also be seen from the graph).

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

. Imagine Taylor gets rotation minutes the first 5 games and is just okay... but is then pushed out of the rotation because its someone else's turn. That gonna boost his confidence and help his development? If he sucks then sure send him to the G League. Say you give Samanic 5 games and he is just okay... but then you hand the keys to the rookie... Luka is fighting for his NBA life... that ain't gonna fly over well either.

Uhh, no matter what the coach does someone is going to be upset with their minutes, it's inevitable.

 

[idiot]

Post Conley trade I am not looking to read anything into the minutes distributions. That was tank season.

The claim was that we will cycle through 4 guys for a 10 minute bench role. The term cycling means you rotate and take turns at something... and it usually indicates that it will happen quickly... I'm not saying game to game but it would seem to indicate maybe weekly? Take your pick there on what you think it means. I do not think Hardy rotates through Samanic, Henny, Sensabaugh, Simone etc. and gives everyone their turn every 3-5 games. There will be a regular rotation and the spot will be filled by someone until they play their way out of the spot or other things... injuries, guys balling out in practice or G League, require other guys moving in or out of the rotation. There will also be consideration given to "other things" like how Rudy Gay was an absolute lock to be in the rotation (ironically until tank season came) when healthy even though he was just putrid. He's a vet... yada yada.

In general the way it works is a coach will find a rotation and stick with it until a player performs poorly enough to be demoted or another guy gets a chance to play because of injury and performs well. Imagine Taylor gets rotation minutes the first 5 games and is just okay... but is then pushed out of the rotation because its someone else's turn. That gonna boost his confidence and help his development? If he sucks then sure send him to the G League. Say you give Samanic 5 games and he is just okay... but then you hand the keys to the rookie... Luka is fighting for his NBA life... that ain't gonna fly over well either.

Someone will win the first crack at the minutes in camp/preseason and will need to be knocked off the pedestal or knock themselves off the pedestal. That's how it works unless you are a tanking team.

Here's my perspective:

• Hardy's rotations last year exhibited more "cycling" characteristics than we ever saw from Quin; so saying what coaches "in general" do is begging the question a bit. I think in this "cycling," Hardy seems to follow a bit of the Popovich model more than the Snyder/Sloan model.
• The cycling was primarily with Dok/Jones and THT/NAW, rather than with anyone else, though I think Cy is right that maybe Simone's playing time might fit in a bit here as well. It wasn't Hardy's primary mode of determining playing time in relation to the whole team, or even the whole back end of the roster.
• I can only guess at the reasons for Hardy's cycling of playing time in the apparent cases from last year.
• I have no idea whether he'll use any of this cycling moving forward in upcoming seasons, though to rule it out seems a bit premature.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

You misread if you thought that was my point. I said explicitly that injuries to others (Mike/Sexton) affected total minutes played (thus having a role in the spikes); but if you look at minutes relative to each other, THT's and NAW's minutes were not affected by their own injuries (these minutes relative to each other can also be seen from the graph).

When I say injuries affected their playing time I'm talking about others injuries... not their own... I never said their injuries were part of the reason.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Here's my perspective:

• Hardy's rotations last year exhibited more "cycling" characteristics than we ever saw from Quin; so saying what coaches "in general" do is begging the question a bit. I think in this "cycling," Hardy seems to follow a bit of the Popovich model more than the Snyder/Sloan model.

Quin was really rigid and had a roster that was really established. We had a roster in complete flux that changed completely at the trade deadline. Coaches generally have a rotation (or pecking order) and break from that when given a reason (poor performance, injuries, tank season, GM intervention).

• The cycling was primarily with Dok/Jones and THT/NAW, rather than with anyone else, though I think Cy is right that maybe Simone's playing time might fit in a bit here as well. It wasn't Hardy's primary mode of determining playing time in relation to the whole team, or even the whole back end of the roster.

Throwing a guy a bone here for a game is not cycling. Simone or Dok poking their head in here and there is just keeping them involved/engaged.

• I can only guess at the reasons for Hardy's cycling of playing time in the apparent cases from last year.

I mean with THT and NAW you can kind of see why. End of the year was a rotation **** show. Not gonna worry about why he alternated Jones and Dok lol.

• I have no idea whether he'll use any of this cycling moving forward in upcoming seasons, though to rule it out seems a bit premature.

Whatevs... I really don't think he cycles through Henny, Simone, Sensabaugh, Samanic in that 10-15 minute bench role that might be there. I think someone wins the job and keeps it until injury or poor performance change things... that's at least how things have really worked historically. Maybe Samanic gets those minutes to start the season until they feel Hendricks or whoever is ready for those minutes... assuming Luka isn't dominating. I think its fair/reasonable to pencil in 10-15 minutes pretty early on for Taylor if he is healthy. He may have to wait for an injury to open up some minutes.

For now I'm good on this conversation... prolly gonna bounce for a week or two unless there is actual news.

 

[infection]

For now I'm good on this conversation... prolly gonna bounce for a week or two unless there is actual news.

Why do that when you can just pop on over to general discussion and have other conversations like this but on steroids?

 

[KqWIN]

I think you’re lost in the sauce if you are using Jones/Dok minutes as an indication of how Hardy coaches. Come on now. When the franchise objective is to lose on purpose, you really can’t gain much knowledge from that time period.

I still don’t understand what the point of contention is here. THT and NAW were playing for their NBA lives early on in the season. No one established themselves and Hardy tried different things. Turns out that when you don’t have enough established players through injury, roster quality, or otherwise there is more variability.

If Hardy had an established roster with proven vets that filled every role it would have been more static. I do agree with HH’s point here (I think) that one player will have the spot until he establishes himself. If he doesn’t, well the next guy up gets his chance. Is that cycling? Who knows at this point but that’s a normal way to do things. The player who plays will be dictated by performance. One player will win the job, it will be his, and his performance (as well as the others in practice) will determine if he keeps the role. Isn’t that obvious?

I’m not sure Hendricks gets the first crack at it. But I’m not sure anyone is the odds on favorite either. In theory he might the best fit and I thought he was an NBA ready prospect but the franchise has poured a lot of cold water on that idea.

 

[KqWIN]

FWIW, I did a little mock rotation outline with these 7 players being "locks". I think it's a good exercise to go minute by minute to see what makes sense in a semi realistic rotation plan. In parentheses I have a basic estimate for their MP. Tbh, there's more minutes available that I expected.

Kessler (30)
Collins (30)
Markannen (36)
Clarkson (30)
Sexton (30)
Olynyk (24)
Agbaji (24)

That leaves 18 minutes for a "PG" and 18 more minutes for a "wing". If it were up to me, I'd probably pick Dunn and Hendricks. My best guess is that it will be Dunn and THT....but that's honestly a really bad combo.

If you're interested, this is what my rotation plan looks like:

 

[silesian]

His offensive game will be spot up shooting and rim running. Those are 100% nba skills and they should translate quickly. Over time hopefully he also develops more of an off the dribble game and post game but he can have a very successful nba career being a high level spot up shooter and rim runner.

Hope you are right. The expectations seem way premature. He’s going against men for the first time, Lebron, Zion, AD, KAT, Mobley. Different from matchups with ole miss, Evansville and ECU. Gonna get eaten alive until he develops his body and learns the nba game.

I’m very high on him long term, this year will be filled with necessary struggles. Mistake, learn, mistake, learn.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

FWIW, I did a little mock rotation outline with these 7 players being "locks". I think it's a good exercise to go minute by minute to see what makes sense in a semi realistic rotation plan. In parentheses I have a basic estimate for their MP. Tbh, there's more minutes available that I expected.

Kessler (30)
Collins (30)
Markannen (36)
Clarkson (30)
Sexton (30)
Olynyk (24)
Agbaji (24)

That leaves 18 minutes for a "PG" and 18 more minutes for a "wing". If it were up to me, I'd probably pick Dunn and Hendricks. My best guess is that it will be Dunn and THT....but that's honestly a really bad combo.

If you're interested, this is what my rotation plan looks like:

View attachment 14976

I think Keyonte ends up in the rotation... whoever ends up starting will cause kind of a ripple effect on the rest of the guys minutes. I think Sexton is a good choice to start but have a feeling they push him to the bench and end up going with JC and Ochai or JC and Dunn. If Ochai starts it will cut into Sexton's minutes a bit. I also wonder if you gave George the starting job with JC and the others... but only played him like 12-16 minutes (the Keith Bogans start if you will) if it would help mix and match things while providing development minutes. (small side tangent... if we can't get 15 minutes a night for Taylor and Keyonte then WTF are we doing here? We are a play in team right now so I'd say player development is basically just as important as winning or damn close.)

The other thing I wonder is if they will put KO and JC as the backup 5 full time or if they sneak in 4-6 minutes of Yurtseven... maybe in the first half and then stay small for the 4th quarter? I would do the frontcourt rotation the same way you have it here... I think Hardy is pretty flexible.

Not disagreeing with anything just discussing and wanted to give some appreciation to a well thought out post here... good job.

 

[LogGrad98]

FWIW, I did a little mock rotation outline with these 7 players being "locks". I think it's a good exercise to go minute by minute to see what makes sense in a semi realistic rotation plan. In parentheses I have a basic estimate for their MP. Tbh, there's more minutes available that I expected.

Kessler (30)
Collins (30)
Markannen (36)
Clarkson (30)
Sexton (30)
Olynyk (24)
Agbaji (24)

That leaves 18 minutes for a "PG" and 18 more minutes for a "wing". If it were up to me, I'd probably pick Dunn and Hendricks. My best guess is that it will be Dunn and THT....but that's honestly a really bad combo.

If you're interested, this is what my rotation plan looks like:

View attachment 14976

FWIW I think there is value in carrying over players from one quarter to the next in the lineup even if it is just for a minute or 2. That continuity can pay dividends. Otherwise I like your plan. Ball don't lie.

 

[KqWIN]

A few good things to talk about here:

I think Keyonte ends up in the rotation... whoever ends up starting will cause kind of a ripple effect on the rest of the guys minutes. I think Sexton is a good choice to start but have a feeling they push him to the bench and end up going with JC and Ochai or JC and Dunn. If Ochai starts it will cut into Sexton's minutes a bit. I also wonder if you gave George the starting job with JC and the others... but only played him like 12-16 minutes (the Keith Bogans start if you will) if it would help mix and match things while providing development minutes.

I was actually considering giving Dunn the Keith Bogans. If Dunn is going to play 15-18 minutes, it kinda makes sense for him to get those in with the starters. 1) That matches him up with the best opposing players and makes the most use out of his defense. 2) The starters have 3 great play finishers (Kessler, Collins, Markannen), might as well get our best passer in with those lineups. It's probably the best situation for him.

(small side tangent... if we can't get 15 minutes a night for Taylor and Keyonte then WTF are we doing here? We are a play in team right now so I'd say player development is basically just as important as winning or damn close.)

Not disagreeing with anything just discussing and wanted to give some appreciation to a well thought out post here... good job.

This is a good point. I think we can all agree that there are 7 players who are locks to be in the rotation and 2 spots left. If you were an outsider, you'd probably look at the Jazz with two promising rookies and say "those two stupid" and that's tough to argue. I think the Jazz will end the season this way, but the question is how long it will take us to get there. I think one of THT/Dunn will play to start and take one of those spots for sure. The other spot.....honestly could see it going to Hendricks, George, or THT and to a lesser extent Brice or Simone. Injuries will happen and open up opportunities throughout the year, but if I had to guess it would be Dunn and Hendricks.

But like you said, what are we actually doing if we're not playing George and Hendricks? That means we're playing Dunn and/or THT instead....and what that amounts to is probably a couple more wins over the course of a season. Is that worth it? I think it will feel like it's worth it while we're in the thick of a play in race. But whether we win that race or not, I feel like it won't be worth it after the first round. As much as I despise the incentive structures of the NBA, you have to play the game and I'm certain that one year from now we would be happier with our pick instead of a play in/first round whooping.

It's a common sentiment that you should just play the young guys and see how far they take. You win, or you win. But it doesn't happen as often as you would think.

The other thing I wonder is if they will put KO and JC as the backup 5 full time or if they sneak in 4-6 minutes of Yurtseven... maybe in the first half and then stay small for the 4th quarter? I would do the frontcourt rotation the same way you have it here... I think Hardy is pretty flexible.

My first instinct is to write this off. I think if you're thinking of putting in Yutserven at C, you should really just be thinking about playing Hendricks instead in some kind of small ball configuration. But who knows. With the Paul Reed attempted signing it seems like they may have had plans to fill more C minutes. I think we have more than enough as is with Kessler, Olynyk, and "small" ball lineups enabled by Lauri and Collins.