Corbin reveals his reasons for leaving Al Jefferson in on the final defensive possession last night

[billyshelby]

The argument of whether Ty should have subbed Favors for Al on the last possession, or which guys should have been on the floor down the stretch completely misses the big picture. We squandered a 5 point lead in the last 6 minutes for one simple reason, and it's the same problem we've had all year: We can't run a credible half court offense. The Clippers can. So while Paul takes over (ON Hayward, by the way), we struggle just to get hard shots.

With a broken offense, you either choose individual scoring (Al/Sap), defense (Favors/Kanter), but it's pick your poison either way.

 

[Sneakers]

You just totally changed what you guys were talking about. It was about who was better vs Griffin and now its about something completely else ?? confusing.

 

[billyshelby]

Not sure how it matters?!?

We are talking about who was more effective against Blake, right? You got involved in this conversation, right?

I'm confused.

He was 7 of 10. So he wasn't struggling to score on ANYBODY. More importantly, he was a non-factor offensively in crunch time when we should have allegedly been using our best defensive weapon against him. The better argument is rebounds, not who was defending him. The bigger point is this whole "Favors shut down Griffin" meme is a Locke myth, not reality.

 

[billyshelby]

You just totally changed what you guys were talking about. It was about who was better vs Griffin and now its about something completely else ?? confusing.

It's the same argument. Griffin accounted for the same points at the same efficiency no matter who was guarding him. And when you account for minutes (he was guarded more by the Al/Sap combo than Favors/Kanter), it's basically an even split.

 

[billyshelby]

You just totally changed what you guys were talking about. It was about who was better vs Griffin and now its about something completely else ?? confusing.

Oops, missed your point. I changed the argument slightly to go back to the OP. I'm far less concerned about a final sub or who should have guarded who when the glaring flaw to my mind is the half court offense battle. The Clips have one, we don't, and that's the real tale of the tape in a tight game.

 

[Sneakers]

Griffin accounted for the same points at the same efficiency no matter who was guarding him

Now I'm not saying you're wrong, but where is the evidence for this claim? And then the fact NAOS brought up - which you said didn't matter - not all of Griffin's points are in one on one situations.. fast breaks, double teams, mismatches - so gauging the respective defensive success of Millsap and Favors against Griffin based entirely on points scored by Griffin while on court at same time is not an honest way to go about this.

 

[Sneakers]

Either way I think its safe to say this is a sideshow discussion from why we lost the game, poor coaching, Jefferson-ball and pretty crummy reffing in general (I am not a blame the ref guy but this game was absurd). I think you're right in that who was on Griffin in the end did not decide the game.

 

[NAOS]

Who inside this thread said Favs "shut down" Griffin? This is about effectiveness in THIS game.

And, yes, it is a sidebar conversation about who was on the floor in crunch time... when, despite our well-documented offensive woes, we still had a chance to beat the league's hottest team.

Yeah, Locke sucks. This isnt about him.

 

[jope]

That has always seemed to be Jazz problem even with Malone and Stockton playing.
They would never seem to have enough scorers on the floor to win the big games when they needed to.
Corbin may still believe that.
The great teams always seemed to have a clutch scorer who could win a game at end.
Jordan, Olajuwon, Bryant, etc.
Malone and Stockton could be stopped from getting the big basket at times.
Jazz are still like that.

I think you're thinking backwards. The problem is that we have never had the personnel to stop a go-to scorer such as those mentioned..

 

[Cope]

The Clippers can. So while Paul takes over (ON Hayward, by the way), we struggle just to get hard shots.

With a broken offense, you either choose individual scoring (Al/Sap), defense (Favors/Kanter), but it's pick your poison either way.

You do realize that Paul was 1/6 in the 4th quarter with the majority of the time having Gordon guarding him right?

 

[Revolution 9]

This cost us the game. It was a ticky tack foul that shouldn't been called, but stupid Big Al did enough to get the call. Small Al should have never been in the game.
Good coaches pull the right strings, and use their talent to the fullest. I just don't don't think Ty will ever be a puppet master.

 

[Sneakers]

Who inside this thread said Favs "shut down" Griffin? This is about effectiveness in THIS game.

And, yes, it is a sidebar conversation about who was on the floor in crunch time... when, despite our well-documented offensive woes, we still had a chance to beat the league's hottest team.

Yeah, Locke sucks. This isnt about him.

No our debate was Favors and Millsap against Griffin, which didn't matter in the end. Of course Favors over Jefferson matters. Obviously that wasn't what I was saying.

 

[zman1527]

I'm far less concerned about a final sub

But that was the point of the entire thread: there was one specific sequence where our coach was presented with options. Did you agree with his choice?

 

[NAOS]

...look, billy just realized he's been arguing with Locke the whole time.

 

[Stifle Tower]

This cost us the game. It was a ticky tack foul that shouldn't been called, but stupid Big Al did enough to get the call. Small Al should have never been in the game.
Good coaches pull the right strings, and use their talent to the fullest. I just don't don't think Ty will ever be a puppet master.

We know we can't be a contender with this lineup. Ty is pulling the strings which will result in a lottery pick. Fire Ty now and the Jazz could be in the same situation as last season: vying for the last playoff spot and a first-round sweep.

 

[franklin]

You do realize that Paul was 1/6 in the 4th quarter with the majority of the time having Gordon guarding him right?

I'm guessing he realizes this since he already provided a detailed analysis of this. If you actually care then I'm sure I can find it for you.

 

[The Norm]

Oops, missed your point. I changed the argument slightly to go back to the OP. I'm far less concerned about a final sub or who should have guarded who when the glaring flaw to my mind is the half court offense battle. The Clips have one, we don't, and that's the real tale of the tape in a tight game.

I completely agree, but I also think you're missing my point about this particular game- I don't care about who plays better defense on Blake Griffin, I care about who plays better defense on the pick and roll. For the second game in a row the Clippers relied almost exclusively on putting Al Jefferson in the pick and roll down the stretch and burning him with it. They burned us with it again on their final play of the game. It should've been obvious that they were going to go to it, and if we'd have had Favors on the court instead of Jefferson, it would've had a substantially less chance to be successful.

 

[billyshelby]

But that was the point of the entire thread: there was one specific sequence where our coach was presented with options. Did you agree with his choice?

I was only clarifying that I think the discussion of whether Al was subbed for Favors was insignificant relative to the offensive problems. That cost us the game, not one play.

As to the OP, yes I think Ty should have subbed Favors. To go one step further, Favors is absolutely our best defensive player and I rarely if ever think it's a bad idea to sub him in. To play devil's advocate, a million things could have gone wrong with Favors defending a Chris Paul orchestrated PnR as well. But I think Ty got too cute in his decision making for sure.

 

[The Norm]

My point in making this thread actually wasn't even to debate Ty's decision, it was to point out how mind-numbingly stupid his reason for it was: For the ensuing offensive possession. Makes no sense no matter how you look at it. It's pretty horrifying that this guy is our head coach.

 

[billyshelby]

I completely agree, but I also think you're missing my point about this particular game- I don't care about who plays better defense on Blake Griffin, I care about who plays better defense on the pick and roll. For the second game in a row the Clippers relied almost exclusively on putting Al Jefferson in the pick and roll down the stretch and burning him with it. They burned us with it again on their final play of the game. It should've been obvious that they were going to go to it, and if we'd have had Favors on the court instead of Jefferson, it would've had a substantially less chance to be successful.

If you can rewatch the game on DVR, you should. Here's how they went after Tinsley threw away a pass that led to a break and the Clipper lead:

Clipper possession 1 (2:15): Only PnR was run at Sap/Griffin. Well defended possession all the way, Clips even get an extra possession and Paul misses a straight jumper (over Tinsley).

Clipper possession 2 (1:35): This was a PnR directed at Al, Paul splits it, Al reaches for a foul, and he and Hayward argue. There was obviously a disagreement as to how it was supposed to be defended. Al clearly thought Hayward messed up (maybe by going over the screen), Hayward didn't think he messed up, and Al was so vehement he pointed to the bench. Whatever the case, it's not like Paul was going sideways when he got fouled.

Clipper possession 3 (0:56): PnR directed at Al and defended perfectly by both he and Hayward. Ends with Paul missing a 3 after their offense couldn't produce a shot.

Clipper possession 4 (0:23): PnR directed at Al, but not really. It was actually a beautifully designed fake. Jordan came up like he was going to set a screen and dropped into the lane. Al reacted quickly and defended him. Hayward got faked out of his shorts when Paul stepped back for the dagger jumper. I really don't blame Hayward because it was a gorgeous move by Paul that nobody could defend.

Clipper possession 5 was the Al foul, ballgame.

From 7 minutes down when Paul came back in, ran 1 PnR against Al/Hayward that didn't work. The rest of his PnR's (and only like 2) were run at Sap/Griffin. He got Hayward on a reach, but otherwise they weren't very effective.