orangello
Well-Known Member
As would I. I'm just trying to be realistic.
Following potential 2015 draftees
- Thread starter Dr. Jones
- Start date
As would I. I'm just trying to be realistic.
Stifle Tower
Punch Bowl Re-Filler
Well said with a good example. Gobert can't make up entirely for a poor player on one end of the court. Look how much our defense improved by substitute Dante and Rudy for Trey and Enes. Put in a weak defender to gain shooting and our defensive ranking will fall drastically. A team is as good as their weakest link. If Utah has a poor perimeter defender, it puts everyone else in scramble mode trying to help/cover. And that is very easy to exploit. Rudy can be pulled away from the basket and largely negated.
Cappy_Smurf
Well-Known Member
Nice catch. I usually wait to see who the Lakers draft before I start hating players, but I'm going to start hating Winslow now. Hope he goes somewhere crappy.
Cappy_Smurf
Well-Known Member
Ok, I think I get what you are saying. We should trade our 1st round pick for Paul Millsap's little brother. Oh wait, we already have that guy. I guess we should try and draft a player just like Lilsap. Funny how some people want to try and make this out to be more complicated than it is. Utah's biggest need is shooting. That doesn't mean we need Steve Smurfing Novak, but we sure as hell shouldn't be targeting defensive specialists who are limited offensively.
Oh hey look, Oubre is back up to #10 on DX's mock.
Enjoy the argument with yourself because no on here is advocating for a defensive-only specialist.
My argument is a more nuanced about possible offensive-defensive tradeoffs: if all you get is shooting you risk undermining the goal to be an elite defensive team.
I know you are having trouble with the nuance, as indicated by your "it is all about the shooting, stupid" earlier post. Which is why I gave you the Novak example.
And why I am advocating for a top 20% shooter and average+ defender.
If you think that is too complicated, then..... well...... I'll say no more and say "good day to you, kind sir"
RandyForRubio
Well-Known Member
It's actually a pretty bad example. You'll notice Cappy said we don't need a great defender who is limited offensively, and he would be correct. You'll also notice he never said we can afford to get somebody who can't defend. So using somebody who is a good shooter but worthless defender is a bad example. Somebody like Robert Horry, or Frank Kaminsky, or even Ryan Anderson would be a better example.
Bingo. It is underappreciated what a weak defender can do to the team. You can be "team elite" with a few elite defenders and others who work hard but are average+.
Cappy_Smurf
Well-Known Member
My money is on Kaminsky or Booker if they are there, but there will plenty of options available if Utah wants a defender over a shooter. We'll know soon enough whether or not the FO agrees with me that shooting is our biggest need.
Cappy_Smurf
Well-Known Member
Right, but in order to make their point, they need to use the worst defender they can think of as an example.
Well, some of them(FO members) have repeatedly stated that in interviews prior to the combine and according to T Jones reports, the common thread among most players we interviewed at the combine was that they were shooters. I don't think you are making a bad assumption at all...
We need shooting for sure. The only question is the extent to which we might be willing to compromise defensive switching and rebounding in the process of getting it.
BTW Vezenkov with a good game in the Greek League playoffs - 15pts(6/11FG, 2/4 3PFG, 1/1FT), 5rbs, 1 ast, 1 bl, 3 stl for a win in the deciding 3d game of the series against AEK. They will play against Olympiakos in the semi-finals. Will be interesting to see him play in high importance games vs one of the best European teams.
mellow
Well-Known Member
DX would like to thank Oubre's agent for the generous donation.
Cappy_Smurf
Well-Known Member
Here are the original posts that started this, and I stick by everything I've said. I'm more than happy to wait and see which direction the FO goes. Like I said, we'll know soon enough whether or not they agree with me.
I've already outlined why I believe the way I do, but I'll try to summarize one. More. Time. Utah has two starters right now that are limited offensively. We also have potential spacing problems playing Gobert next to Favors. Now this might be fine playing against most teams, but when we go up against other teams with good/great defense, we are going to have problems scoring. Now, IMO Gobert and Exum are here to stay, so if we have those two guys playing significant minutes, we ABSOLUTELY need to improve our offense at other positions. The idea is to build the team for the playoffs, so you just can't ignore offense and assume you'll win with defense, because at some point, you have to figure out how to beat other teams that are strong defensively.
.
It should go without saying that you always want 2-way players when possible, but the question posed was whether or not we should be looking to continue building our defense, or look to improve our shooting, and as far as I'm concerned, if those are the two choices, the answer should be obvious.
NAOS
Well-Known Member
I haven't said much in this thread... but lemme just say here, for the record, that I'll happily take one of Kaminsky, Booker, or Johnson. I'd be surprised if one of them weren't available.
Kaminsky and Johnson have the best chance of succeeding next year (for us). Booker would have to fight hard just to find minutes (for us).
Kaminsky and Johnson have the best chance of succeeding next year (for us). Booker would have to fight hard just to find minutes (for us).
I don't know about that poor defender thing...
Most guys who are good shooters at a young age stay good shooter.
But it's very rare especially amongst American born players that they are interested defenders. Most teams have to roll a dice there or use their research/psychological assessments and decide if that player may be interested in becoming a solid defender.
I think shooting should be #1 priority for the Jazz. It's very expensive in today's NBA on the free agent market and if you can get someone as smart as Booker on your team or pay $7M a year for Green from the Spurs, Booker is the better option if he really blossoms as an NBA player.
Most guys who are good shooters at a young age stay good shooter.
But it's very rare especially amongst American born players that they are interested defenders. Most teams have to roll a dice there or use their research/psychological assessments and decide if that player may be interested in becoming a solid defender.
I think shooting should be #1 priority for the Jazz. It's very expensive in today's NBA on the free agent market and if you can get someone as smart as Booker on your team or pay $7M a year for Green from the Spurs, Booker is the better option if he really blossoms as an NBA player.