What's new
By:

2025 Playoffs Chat & Chill Thread

Schrödinger's Gerbil said:
It's not uncommon for teams to experience a few years of playoff flameouts before they break through, while tinkering around the edges, or otherwise keep a core in place. I guess the question is who's the "core" at Cleveland? I say Mitchell and Mobley definitely. Garland and Allen less so. We'll see.

I am very skeptical that any team can win the title with Mitchell as the #1 option. Sooner or later, he'll suck the balance out of the offensive flow and it becomes too Mitchell centric. He's not shown that he can be reliable in this role.
Click to expand...
Plus he plays no defense. Not that he's defensively limited like Steph, he chooses not to play defense, which is severely worse. Steph at least puts in some effort. A player with limited skills who tries will always be preferable to a player with skills who makes no effort. Mitchell is the latter and it will always torpedo the team when the game or series is on the line. At least the player making an effort will be like the blind squirrel who will find a nut now and then. But the player that doesn't try is just purposely avoiding the nuts scattered all around them, when even just picking up one or two of them could make the difference and win the game.
 
It’s kind of fascinating to see two teams in the East that are likely going to make the finals that are unconventional teams built through unconventional means. It’s way harder in the West, but the Jazz should be paying close attention to how these teams go about their business.
 
LogGrad98 said:
Plus he plays no defense. Not that he's defensively limited like Steph, he chooses not to play defense, which is severely worse. Steph at least puts in some effort. A player with limited skills who tries will always be preferable to a player with skills who makes no effort. Mitchell is the latter and it will always torpedo the team when the game or series is on the line. At least the player making an effort will be like the blind squirrel who will find a nut now and then. But the player that doesn't try is just purposely avoiding the nuts scattered all around them, when even just picking up one or two of them could make the difference and win the game.
Click to expand...
Why do I get the feeling you’ve used the squirrel and nuts example with your subordinates before in numerous mentoring sessions?
 
Coach Ellis said:
It’s kind of fascinating to see two teams in the East that are likely going to make the finals that are unconventional teams built through unconventional means. It’s way harder in the West, but the Jazz should be paying close attention to how these teams go about their business.
Click to expand...
I'm semi-convinced that because these strategies don't have a nice, tidy label a lot of people will be convinced that these strategies can't work because they aren't real strategies. One thing "tanking" has going for it is that it has a simple label that encompasses a simple, easy-to-understand process.
 
HermanG said:
After the recent report that Kerr benched him for looking off Steph multiple times in their game against the Blazers, I want nothing to do with him. Even if he develops into a great offensive player, the kind of mindset you must have to look off the GOAT shooter is a massive red flag.

I want guys who do the right things... at least when the right thing is that freaking obvious.
Click to expand...
Eh, I'm just not a grudge holder and believe everyone makes mistakes and deserve another chance at redemption. Especially young folks who made the wrong play in one game, which seems a pretty minor offense to me, but to each their own.

Sent from my OPD2203 using Tapatalk
 
Coach Ellis said:
It’s kind of fascinating to see two teams in the East that are likely going to make the finals that are unconventional teams built through unconventional means. It’s way harder in the West, but the Jazz should be paying close attention to how these teams go about their business.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I remember a time when we were a pretty well-run organization that other teams aspired to. My how the mighty hath fallen. I don't think we've been a truly well-run organization in nearly 2 decades. We got lucky with some draft picks, but that isn't the same thing.
 
fishonjazz said:
Eh, I'm just not a grudge holder and believe everyone makes mistakes and deserve another chance at redemption. Especially young folks who made the wrong play in one game, which seems a pretty minor offense to me, but to each their own.

Sent from my OPD2203 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Do you think Kerr benches him for 1 time violation? Dude sat out until Butler injury forced him back to rotation.

Looking off a guy is disrespect. If JC looks off Cody thats one thing, but to look off Steph you gotta be a moron.
 
Coach Ellis said:
It’s kind of fascinating to see two teams in the East that are likely going to make the finals that are unconventional teams built through unconventional means. It’s way harder in the West, but the Jazz should be paying close attention to how these teams go about their business.
Click to expand...

I would argue that building a team like the Knicks and Pacers did is ENTIRELY the conventional, most reproduceable way to build a team.
 
HermanG said:
Do you think Kerr benches him for 1 time violation? Dude sat out until Butler injury forced him back to rotation.

Looking off a guy is disrespect. If JC looks off Cody thats one thing, but to look off Steph you gotta be a moron.
Click to expand...
I was just going off what you said.
Anywho there was this dude name Kobe that raped someone, and a dude named Malone who did some stuff with a young girl and didn't take care of his many kids and many other dudes with some serious transgressions on and off the court.
I'm willing to give a dude who looked off a teammate a second chance as I dont see that as an unforgivable sin that can't be corrected going forward but like I said, to each their own. For you that is unforgivable and behavior that is permanent and for me it's forgivable and may be correctable.
 
Coach Ellis said:
It’s kind of fascinating to see two teams in the East that are likely going to make the finals that are unconventional teams built through unconventional means. It’s way harder in the West, but the Jazz should be paying close attention to how these teams go about their business.
Click to expand...
What unconventional about them?
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
What unconventional about them?
Click to expand...
They both are defensive-oriented teams who developed their star point guard (Brunson / Haliburton) after they acquired them and then built a solid team of role players around them by churning their roster. Both teams became contenders by having “their guy” and then using their resources to build around him quickly.
 
Coach Ellis said:
They both are defensive-oriented teams who developed their star point guard (Brunson / Haliburton) after they acquired them and then built a solid team of role players around them by churning their roster. Both teams became contenders by having “their guy” and then using their resources to build around him quickly.
Click to expand...
That sounds like the most basic way to build a championship team. The Lakers did this with Kareem and to a lesser degree Magic. The bulls did this with Michael. Spurs did this with Duncan and their big 3, so they were a bit less conventional as they had a big 3. A few other teams had their big 2, Jazz, Bulls including Pippen, Lakers with Shaq and Kobe. But generally speaking the teams that they there find their guy (or a couple of guys, often falling into their lap), then use their assets to build the secondary level players and churn the roster to fill in the gaps. That's like the most basic way a winning team is built in the NBA.

Unconventional would be like the Pistons with no real "the guy" or "big 3" or anything winning the championship on united team play or LeDouche deciding where to take his buddies to win his next ring, or the Lakers being gifted players for scraps (Luka, Gasol, Magic). Those are highly unconventional.
 
SoberasHotRod said:
I would say that the similarity with IND and NYK is that they both traded for guys who then leveled up to all stars.

The same thing happened with us with Lauri, but instead of leaning in to it we tore it down.
Click to expand...
The Knicks signed their guy in free agency, but otherwise, I totally agree with you.
 
Coach Ellis said:
They both are defensive-oriented teams who developed their star point guard (Brunson / Haliburton) after they acquired them and then built a solid team of role players around them by churning their roster. Both teams became contenders by having “their guy” and then using their resources to build around him quickly.
Click to expand...
That sound fairly conventional to me. And the Pacers are definitely not a defensive oriented team.
 
idiot said:
I'm semi-convinced that because these strategies don't have a nice, tidy label a lot of people will be convinced that these strategies can't work because they aren't real strategies. One thing "tanking" has going for it is that it has a simple label that encompasses a simple, easy-to-understand process.
Click to expand...

Besides the title and label, it’s just not as easy to draw a direct line. With tanking, it’s easy to process the line of thinking. Be bad, get good draft pick, draft good player, be good.

You can’t really “plan” what the Knicks or Pacers did besides saying that you need to make good moves from all different methods to improve. It’s something we all know needs to happen, but there is no step by step guide to execute it.

Tanking is simpler, wouldn’t say it’s necessarily easier or more effective.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top