gregbroncs
Well-Known Member
From Locke. Yea that's asking a bit much. He changes his opinion as soon as the situation with the Organization changes.
Dante Exum - Jazz development plan
- Thread starter Litany
- Start date
orangello
Well-Known Member
I know. My expectations are low at this point.
All scouts were saying very similar things about Giannis Antetokounmpo - that he's too young, that he's raw, that he's a project with lots of potential, that he needs to be brought up slowly, but I believe the Bucks did well to throw him into battle from the very start and he averaged close to 25 minutes a game in his first season. I don't see why we can't give Exum around 25 minutes of play this season. Ease him into play from the bench and if he shows that he can handle the physicality of the game, he can even start in some games by the end of the season, but I definitely think Exum should play more than 20 minutes a game in his first season. This should also allow Burke not to lose his value and possibly be a valuable trading piece next summer if Exum pans out and the FO decides to give him the reins and unleash him in his second season.
Uhh, Locke's theory is a decent one. To some people **** on it is pretty dumb.
The question is how much you need to control minutes early. I doubt Exum is going to go out and get 35 mpg from Day 1.
The question is how much you need to control minutes early. I doubt Exum is going to go out and get 35 mpg from Day 1.
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
Locke compared Exum's development to dunking an Oreo cookie?
Really?
What next, Favors' offensive strategy to pouring chocolate syrup on ice cream?
How the hell some of these guys have jobs is beyond me.
You get better by playing in games. Why the hell not? And some of you who want him to come off the bench? Please make up your minds. For years you bitched because Corbin played the vets ahead of the youngins. At the detriment of their development. How much further along would we be had Favors, Gobert, Kanter, Hayward, Burks, etc played instead of Bell, Howard, Jeffersons, Millsap, and Williams?
Throw him (Exum) to the wolves.
The only sport where you want to be careful is the QB position in the NFL. Defenders in the NFL literally can severely damage or kill someone. If your QB is hesitant, physically lacking, or doesn't have an offensive line, then I can see you taking it slow with him.
Exum won't have anyone trying to physically kill him. If he can start without being a major liability, then do it immediately.
It's that simple.
Really?
What next, Favors' offensive strategy to pouring chocolate syrup on ice cream?
How the hell some of these guys have jobs is beyond me.
You get better by playing in games. Why the hell not? And some of you who want him to come off the bench? Please make up your minds. For years you bitched because Corbin played the vets ahead of the youngins. At the detriment of their development. How much further along would we be had Favors, Gobert, Kanter, Hayward, Burks, etc played instead of Bell, Howard, Jeffersons, Millsap, and Williams?
Throw him (Exum) to the wolves.
The only sport where you want to be careful is the QB position in the NFL. Defenders in the NFL literally can severely damage or kill someone. If your QB is hesitant, physically lacking, or doesn't have an offensive line, then I can see you taking it slow with him.
Exum won't have anyone trying to physically kill him. If he can start without being a major liability, then do it immediately.
It's that simple.
Coach Ellis
Well-Known Member
My guess is that they'll start out with Favors, Kanter, Hayward, Burks and Burke. Once Dante has gotten into better shape and the game starts slowing down for him, I fully expect him to supplant Burke in the starting lineup. Even though he's bound to make mistakes and struggle at times, I really think that game experience and getting good film of himself is going to be the best way to develop him. Plus, I think that Exum is just incredibly talented and I'd like to see how he handles the point with the rest of the starters. This is a good year to learn without any serious consequences or ramifications for trying. Stick him out there and let him learn. Also think that a trio of Rudy Gobert, Rodney Hood and Trey Burke would be quite good as a spark off the bench.
The thing i want to see with Dante, that will make him great, is a explosive game every second he is on the court. He won't be able to do that for high minutes so it will take some time. I'm sure the coaches will be able to find the balance over time and undoubtedly it will take a breakout game of significant minutes running the show for us to know he has arrived at the next stage of development. Patience and discipline will be the keys to not stunting his growth, not whether he starts on the bench or not.
It's obvious that won't be at the start of the year though, as there is a lot to work on - especially conditioning.
It's obvious that won't be at the start of the year though, as there is a lot to work on - especially conditioning.
Rotation guys can get 16-24 minutes a night, which is where I think Exum winds up. This would be consistent with the oreo theory.
If the Jazz say they are going to play him 30 minutes a night, then they would be going full milk dunk, but I'm sure everyone knows this would be a mistake.
You are a year or two ahead of yourself. I don't think this is at all realistic unless Trey blows a tire or his game falls off a cliff.
We all need to moderate our expectations of Dante. He is super duper super raw.
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
I want to see 3 players who were played big mins early which hurt their development and diminished their career. List 3, ready set go:
1.
2.
3.
1.
2.
3.
You can't really compare the two strategies unless you can an alternate universe. Also have to realize that you have 4 other players to develop on the court. Does having a player who might not be ready to play hurt the other player's development?
This isn't some theory Locke just made up. There are clearly people who feel the same way (Jerry Sloan) about not playing young guys too much. I agree with it, to an extent.
If Exum gets 25 mpg this year, is that "throwing him to the wolves"? It's all relative, but that could still be considered bringing him along slowly, depending on your perspective.
Personally, I feel like "throwing to the wolves" or not having much regard for the player's age, would be starting Exum and playing him 35 mpg. I doubt we would do that, and I think that would possibly hurt his growth, and would hurt the other player's development on the team.
My opinion is that a coach should play his best players the most minutes. Isn't winning the point of the game? I think playing him 25 minutes is certainly giving him a chance to develop and adjustments should be made depending how he is playing. The problem I had with Sloan and Ty is that many times they were willing to accept veteran mistakes but if a rookie made a mistake many times they found themselves on the bench or worse they suffered a few DNPs. Neither of those coaches were that deep into developing players. Hopefully with the new emphasis on development Quin will actually teach and coach his young players allowing them to play through some mistakes. If he sees then getting overwhelmed then he will make adjustments accordingly but in a teaching way instead of a punishment way.
I expect Exum to come off the bench but play between 20-25 minutes give a take a few minutes depending on his play. His progress will determine if he plays more or less which is the way it should be. Sitting him for no other reason except that he is young is a bunch of nonsense and can do more damage than letting him play. I think Dante is mentally mature beyond his years and I think he will be able to handle it for the most part. The biggest adjustment for young players are the number of games and the travel so there might be some nights where he has hit the wall and Quin will adjust accordingly. I am fine with that but I want to see the kid play. You drafted him 5th so obviously you think he can play. So play him and let him take a few lumps it builds character.
I expect Exum to come off the bench but play between 20-25 minutes give a take a few minutes depending on his play. His progress will determine if he plays more or less which is the way it should be. Sitting him for no other reason except that he is young is a bunch of nonsense and can do more damage than letting him play. I think Dante is mentally mature beyond his years and I think he will be able to handle it for the most part. The biggest adjustment for young players are the number of games and the travel so there might be some nights where he has hit the wall and Quin will adjust accordingly. I am fine with that but I want to see the kid play. You drafted him 5th so obviously you think he can play. So play him and let him take a few lumps it builds character.
Last edited:
Yep.
Ellipse
Well-Known Member
What makes this whole debate seem silly are those treating Trey as a "veteran." Trey average 32.3 mpg last year as a rookie, so let's stop with the double standard. Let Trey and Dante go into the preseason with starting and minutes up for grabs and may the best man win.
Jazz4ever
Well-Known Member
He's a veteran compared to Exum. Burke is almost 3 years older, has 2 years of college and 1 nba season under his belt. Exum has high school and U19. Trey will start, the only question at SG will it be Exum or Burks.
Ellipse
Well-Known Member
Sloan said that coaches who play rookies find themselves out of job. That was a perfectly good philosophy for a coach whose rookies were, at best, picked in the teens. It didn't work so well when he got a top 3 pick.
Ellipse
Well-Known Member
And Dante appears mature beyond his years. What I don't understand is why a 1-year vet gets preferential treatment to a 3-year vet like Burks? You are saying that Burke's seniority gives him the starting nod over Dante at PG, but Burks's doesn't at the SG? And everyone who watched SL knows that Dante's shot needs some work, so why would we start him at shooting guard when we have Burks and Hayward?