Alec Burks has added six inches

[fishonjazz]

Darrell Griffith. Pre-leg injury. After he turned largely into a spot-up shooter.

Not a bad example.
Reppppeddd

 

[zbone]

This is going to be fun. I can't wait until he is proving all the dumb asses on here wrong. I wouldn't be surprised at all if he ends uo being our best player.

How adding 6 inches to his vertical is a sign of him might being or best player? Burks' problem is not his vertical which already was damn good.

 

[franklin]

Imo the vert increase is good, but alec is special due to his speed and abilitly to finish/draw fouls.

If the jazz knew how to utilize a player like burks then he could be special..... but alas they don't.
They will have burks spotting up for threes and running off screen/curls for 15 footers instead of putting him in isos and pick n roll where he would excel.

I cant think of a single shooting guard that the jazz have ever had that was a one on one scorer and penetrator successfully.

The jazz have not shown me that they know how to use a player with alecs skills set

LOL I never thought I'd see the day a fan indicts the Jazz because CJ, Giricek, Howard, Bell, and DeShawn sucked. Damn that Jerry Sloan!

BTW, Horny and D-Will both played excellent 2's here.

 

[GVC]

They will have burks spotting up for threes and running off screen/curls for 15 footers instead of putting him in isos and pick n roll where he would excel.

His performance out of pick and rolls and isos has been mediocre through his first two seasons. He also got plenty of opportunities in pick and rolls last season. Maybe he just isn't that good.

 

[fishonjazz]

He also got plenty of opportunities in pick and rolls last season.

I call BS.

Being a huge burks fan, I watch every minute he plays very closely..... I have not seen alot of pick and rolls with burks.

Were these pick n rolls happening during his dnp's or the games when he was getting 12 minutes?

 

[GVC]

I call BS.

Being a huge burks fan, I watch every minute he plays very closely..... I have not seen alot of pick and rolls with burks.

Were these pick n rolls happening during his dnp's or the games when he was getting 12 minutes?

22% of his terminal plays (shot/foul/turnover) came out of pick and rolls last season. He was below league average when shooting out of pick and rolls. He was below league average in isos. What makes you think he'll get more efficient when being counted on to carry more of the load/going up against starters?

 

[fishonjazz]

22% of his terminal plays (shot/foul/turnover) came out of pick and rolls last season. He was below league average when shooting out of pick and rolls. He was below league average in isos. What makes you think he'll get more efficient when being counted on to carry more of the load/going up against starters?

Faith

 

[LogGrad98]

Right after anyone proves that ten minutes of game time is worth more than hours of practice and scrimmage. Kanter won't learn footwork in a game, and he won't get to start using his brain until the fundamentals are natural.

Is there an NBA law that for every extra 10 min of PT they lose the same or some other amount of practice and scrimmage? Can't they happen concurrently? Is there any proof that adding the extra 10 min of PT on top of the practice and scrimmage reduces their development?


Also, you completely avoided the original question while trying to hide it in a snide remark. Could it be there is no way to support your position?

Can you provide any examples as requested?



For the record I am not arguing with Corbin's decisions on how he played the younger guys. They had hitched their wagon to AJ and Paul and needed to see how that played out. I would have expected them to get the bulk of the PT, as their job was trying to win then and there. But as soon as it was clear they were not the future the focus should shift to the younger guys since they are supposed to be just that, the future.

 

[franklin]

Faith

This guy named Burks' unit The Red Stag. Drink freely.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

Jonathan Bender?

 

[GVC]

For the record I am not arguing with Corbin's decisions on how he played the younger guys. They had hitched their wagon to AJ and Paul and needed to see how that played out. I would have expected them to get the bulk of the PT, as their job was trying to win then and there. But as soon as it was clear they were not the future the focus should shift to the younger guys since they are supposed to be just that, the future.

To me, that's on the FO more than the coach.

I've asked one or two people before, but can anyone find an example of a coach who benched his productive, in-their-prime vets in favor of inexperienced young players? Teams generally trade or choose not to re-sign their vets when they have young players whose play demands a starting/leadership role. Given the need to build/establish a reputation and long-term relationships with players and agents, as well as build a positive, winning culture, that strategy seems to make some sense.

 

[Jazz4ever]

Since Burks mid range game is crap, he should just focus on what Harden does - taking a three or driving hard to the basket. Harden is equally as bad as Burks on mid range jumpers at 31%. It's pretty amazing he can get by with that actually, considering the advanced scouting in the NBA today. Nevertheless, he does make it work and so should Burks theoretically.

Harden's volume and FG% (rounded up)
At rim 291/447 (65%)
Jump shot 145/475 (31%)
3 PT shot 194/530 (37%)

Burk's volume and FG% (rounded up)
At rim 72/117 (62%)
Jump shot 58/179 (32%)
3 PT shot 33/92 (36%)

Strikingly similar percentages. The main difference here is Harden's mid range usage accounts for 33% of his shots, while Burks mid range usage accounts for 46%. If you were to factor in Harden's ability to get to the line and assume they happened on drives, that mid range usage of 33% would drop in the low 20% range. Now Burks isn't going to be able to get to the line at Harden's rate, but by redistributing his offense he will go a long way toward helping himself, and the team.

 

[franklin]

Is there an NBA law that for every extra 10 min of PT they lose the same or some other amount of practice and scrimmage? Can't they happen concurrently? Is there any proof that adding the extra 10 min of PT on top of the practice and scrimmage reduces their development?


Also, you completely avoided the original question while trying to hide it in a snide remark. Could it be there is no way to support your position?

I wasn't being snide, and you ask the forum to prove a negative. Your follow up question is also asking the forum to prove a negative.

To your second question: no, of course not. However, basic common sense crushes the notion that rough players that lack fundamentals will magically excel if just given a chance to do so when they have already failed to demonstrate the ability to do so in practice. I'm pretty sure everyone can agree on this, and I'm pretty sure everyone can agree that Kanter was damn raw the last two seasons.

Everyone wanted to see more Kanter. No reason to lynch the Jazz organization because we have no patience.

 

[jope]

I wasn't being snide, and you ask the forum to prove a negative. Your follow up question is also asking the forum to prove a negative.

To your second question: no, of course not. However, basic common sense crushes the notion that rough players that lack fundamentals will magically excel if just given a chance to do so when they have already failed to demonstrate the ability to do so in practice. I'm pretty sure everyone can agree on this, and I'm pretty sure everyone can agree that Kanter was damn raw the last two seasons.

Everyone wanted to see more Kanter. No reason to lynch the Jazz organization because we have no patience.

i dont think our 'raw' guy was as much of a liability as you think.. (#1 on team in FG%, TS%, eFG%)

i think its fair to say he was more than capable of competing (and by the numbers, wasn't any more raw than any of the other bigs who scored less efficiently)


I agree with you that he was raw and didnt know what the hell he was doing at times, but even so, he was more than capable of producing at a better clip than both of our bigs, offensively and defensively.

 

[phippsj]

I don't think anybody here has really doubted his athletic capabilities, I know I have not. His struggles have been mental. He has a great flash to his game... the drives, the steals, the dunks. Those cover up some pretty glaring weaknesses that most fans just don't see, but I would expect fans here to see. He has poor rotations on defense, lacks amid-range game, has shown less than desired court vision and overall poor decision making. The good news is that as the season went on, he improved in all of those areas. Most of that, honestly, is just being a young player. He has all the physical tools he needs, and if he puts in the work to develop the rest of the game (a lot of it the mental side of the game), then I think he is going to be great for us.

We need Hayward to pick up some of Burks aggressive attitude, and Burks to pick up some of Haywards 'game smarts'. Jordan and Kobe are talented, but they were also incredibly smart. Personally, I think Burks will do very well this year, and I am definitely pulling for him. Glad he is improving physically... I suspect that the mental aspects of his game will show accordingly.

 

[Doublea]

What it's the benefit of not playing the younger players? How does that help their development? Can you give me a couple of examples of some young guys that could have been all stars but their career was ruined by too much pt within their first 3 seasons?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I957 using JazzFanz mobile app

I don't see how you would give examples of something unknown with so many variables. If a player is going to be an Allstar they are going to be an all star, now maybe not playing them hinders their mental state and makes them not find their true potential? I think hindsight bias is playing here.

 

[LogGrad98]

What is the benefit of not playing the younger players? How does that help their development? Can you give me a couple of examples of some young guys that could have been all stars but their career was ruined by too much pt within their first 3 seasons?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I957 using JazzFanz mobile app

Right after anyone proves that ten minutes of game time is worth more than hours of practice and scrimmage. Kanter won't learn footwork in a game, and he won't get to start using his brain until the fundamentals are natural.

I wasn't being snide, and you ask the forum to prove a negative. Your follow up question is also asking the forum to prove a negative.

To your second question: no, of course not. However, basic common sense crushes the notion that rough players that lack fundamentals will magically excel if just given a chance to do so when they have already failed to demonstrate the ability to do so in practice. I'm pretty sure everyone can agree on this, and I'm pretty sure everyone can agree that Kanter was damn raw the last two seasons.

Everyone wanted to see more Kanter. No reason to lynch the Jazz organization because we have no patience.

Not snide, gotcha.

Also, all I did was ask a question. There was an assumption being asserted that the development of our younger players was handled correctly, and could be inferred, optimally. I simply asked what benefit to development there was by not playing younger players more in games. And if there was an example of said benefit, or the opposite, a player that obviously showed detriment to his development due to too much PT when he was young.

I think the best case scenario is that a young player gets lots of playing time AND lots of coaching, so he can take what he is learning in practice and scrimmage and apply it in a real-world scenario, and so that the coaching staff can see what the player will do in a real game with what he is learning in practice and adjust the practice/coaching accordingly. But it was being asserted that the way Corbin has handled there development was optimal. I disagree with that assessment and asked what the benefit is of limiting their PT in the first few years of their development, or if there were any examples of players that were hurt by being played "too much" since it was implied that limiting their PT early on is optimal. You responded by asking me to prove that 10 extra minutes of PT is better than practice, something I never asserted, which is more or less a straw man.

So back to the original question, taking your straw man out by invoking ceteris paribus, what is the benefit to development to get 10 fewer minutes of PT per game (your number).

 

[fishonjazz]

Not snide, gotcha.

Also, all I did was ask a question. There was an assumption being asserted that the development of our younger players was handled correctly, and could be inferred, optimally. I simply asked what benefit to development there was by not playing younger players more in games. And if there was an example of said benefit, or the opposite, a player that obviously showed detriment to his development due to too much PT when he was young.

I think the best case scenario is that a young player gets lots of playing time AND lots of coaching, so he can take what he is learning in practice and scrimmage and apply it in a real-world scenario, and so that the coaching staff can see what the player will do in a real game with what he is learning in practice and adjust the practice/coaching accordingly. But it was being asserted that the way Corbin has handled there development was optimal. I disagree with that assessment and asked what the benefit is of limiting their PT in the first few years of their development, or if there were any examples of players that were hurt by being played "too much" since it was implied that limiting their PT early on is optimal. You responded by asking me to prove that 10 extra minutes of PT is better than practice, something I never asserted, which is more or less a straw man.

So back to the original question, taking your straw man out by invoking ceteris paribus, what is the benefit to development to get 10 fewer minutes of PT per game (your number).

The answer: corbin don't make mistakes when it comes to young player development
Teh corbin knows best

 

[franklin]

Not snide, gotcha.

Also, all I did was ask a question. There was an assumption being asserted that the development of our younger players was handled correctly, and could be inferred, optimally. I simply asked what benefit to development there was by not playing younger players more in games. And if there was an example of said benefit, or the opposite, a player that obviously showed detriment to his development due to too much PT when he was young.

I think the best case scenario is that a young player gets lots of playing time AND lots of coaching, so he can take what he is learning in practice and scrimmage and apply it in a real-world scenario, and so that the coaching staff can see what the player will do in a real game with what he is learning in practice and adjust the practice/coaching accordingly. But it was being asserted that the way Corbin has handled there development was optimal. I disagree with that assessment and asked what the benefit is of limiting their PT in the first few years of their development, or if there were any examples of players that were hurt by being played "too much" since it was implied that limiting their PT early on is optimal. You responded by asking me to prove that 10 extra minutes of PT is better than practice, something I never asserted, which is more or less a straw man.

So back to the original question, taking your straw man out by invoking ceteris paribus, what is the benefit to development to get 10 fewer minutes of PT per game (your number).

TBH, I wrote a response to this two separate times previously but didn't really know how to put it right so I deleted it. We hashed this over so much in your absence and I didn't want to open that can of worms up and derail the thread, so I gave more of a blunt response instead. I apologize for misreading your question, which is more than clear now, and giving a contextual response when I shouldn't have.

Your questions are too general in nature in that they include multiple players where development is a person to person issue. Are you referring to a mishandling of one player in particular, or complaining that the FO didn't handle them appropriately as a group?

 

[franklin]

The answer: corbin don't make mistakes when it comes to young player development
Teh corbin knows best

Why must you troll me on here so damn hard?