He was ready no later than last season. Evidence of this (mostly not introduced by me) showed that his focus, discipline, practice performance AND on-court performance were all improved and substantive by the middle of last season. And Sloan mentioned publicly that it would be good to get him more minutes. But he didn't. Result? Utah had an inexperienced C in the playoffs who held his own in nearly every game in the playoffs but wasn't able to do more than that. And his deficiencies are mostly experience related. He averaged 18 MPG in the playoffs, so conditioning relative to 5 to 10 MPG wasn't an issue; he didn't magically become "in shape" in April or May. He was ready for more time before then, and his performance in the playoffs only confirmed that. You are disingenuous if you claim otherwise.
At no point was Fesnko a better option than Okur in the starting lineup last season (effectively his rookie season) nor than Millsap off the bench, until Okur was injured. If Fesenko hadn't wasted two years, he would have had the time and the experience to step in.
That Fesenko played 18 minutes does not mean that he was really ready to (although there are other indications that he was), it means that Boozer and Millsap couldn't play 48.
Correct. My puzzlement over your mythical concepts that a player can develop without on-court time is disproven not only in the NBA but also in pretty much every other team sport.
You won't find a single coach or player in the NBA who says that can't develop in any fashion unless they have on-court time. I have been very clear about the types of things one can and can't develop on-court, and you have not provided a reason to dispute any of them. I even offered a simple test that would allow you to prove your point. Instead, you balked.
One other point: you can also develop bad habits when you are on the court, especially if you are not truly ready. By not playing Fesenko, Sloan may actually have been helping him avoid bad habits.
Humility really has nothing to do with my comment about Sloan's poor subsitution patterns unless the reason for them is lack of humility rather than good old-fashioned stubbornness or inattention to detail.
You think he has poor substitution patterns. I disagree. I see no reason to value your opinion.
Again, it's not desperation if Fesenko's on-court contribution is similar to--or arguably superior to--Okur's.
It never has been, overall.
Your contined implied defense of playing Okur (and Millsap for 28 MPG at the expense of developing a backup center--clearly a bigger need) is illogical.
I'm aware of your opinion. I see Okur's defensive contributions as being slightly below-average, not horrendous, and his offensive contributions as being significant. So far, Fesenko's defensive contributions were slightly above-average (for every lane blocked, he missed a rotation assignment or played a pick-and-roll badly) and his offesive contributions minimal. So, overall, Okur contributed more.
At 300 pounds, he had better speed and agility than Okur at 250,
No, he didn't. At 292 pounds, he had slightly better agility than Okur. Not at 305.
Now you have really exposed your ignorance (further). Okur's defense has continued to be poor since the first season. His help defense has been abysmal. His shot-blocking is subpar for a center.
No argument there. On the other hand, his post defense is quite solid, he's a good rebounder and decent at blocking out.
This isn't just my opinion;
Very few opinions are so unlikely that only one person shares them.
Against Kendrick Perkins--who is known for his defense anyway--MO was called a "lump of nothing" defensively.
Cherry-picking a game or not is not evidence, its anecdote.
So it's really sad for Okur if conditioning (or strength) is a problem and yet he is still known as a pathetic defender.
Conditioning has not been a problem for Okur after his first season here.
Absolutely hilarious that you would claim that Slowkur's conditioning is acceptable.
Do you have reason to say it isn't? Conditioning is different from speed.
Your defense of Okur's conditioning and your denial of Fesenko's adequate conditioning prior to this year is absolute hogwash and a sign that you are just providing blind, reflexive statements that are short and nonsubstantive.
Do you have reason to say it isn't?
Good. There is hope amidst your delusion. You have acknowledged that he was in improved condition last year, and you acknowledge that he has talent.
I follow the evidence. The evidence indicates his conditioning has improved and that he has talent. No delusion involved.
He was making shots in practice (just like CJ and KK were, btw). Utah needed a backup center.
Hopefully, in his "sophmore" season, now that he's finally looking ready, he'll be used that way.
Again, his weight wasn't holding him back because he wasn't playing enough time to test that weight,
Again, Sloan says otherwise, and I believe Sloan over you. Reapeating this point over and over will not make you more convincing.
And you have continued to confirm your acknowledgement that he was in shape by the middle of last season.
He was in better shape toward the middle of last season, but not as good a shape as he is in today. It's not like conditioning is a bivalued variable.
Millsap could develop (wait; you don't believe in on-court development) with 20-25 MPG. Sloan dropped the ball.
If you were following the team back then, you should be aware that Millsap has been lauded by Sloan for doing everything that was asked of him right from the start. He earned his time before he got it. In that respect, he was the anti-Fesenko. To claim that fesenko deserved the same treatment is ludicrous.
I'll take my arguments over your continued lack of providing anecdote or evidence. Just because you say it enough times doesn't make it true.
Completely correct. My saying it means nothing, I'm not a basketball expert by any stretch of the imagination. That's why I trust the opinions of the experts who see Fesenko almost every day during the season. That does not mean you.
Problem is that he wasn't getting beaten on the court because of conditioning. And Fes--even with his lack of experience, was "timing blocks" at a greater rate than Okur. So if anything, Okur was the more poorly conditioned (and poorly focused defensively) on the court.
No, Okur is merely less talented at those aspect than Fesenko. Talent and conditioning are not the same thing.
