What's new
By:

How are we going to score without Al?

I couldn't understand why Toronto didn't keep Val in and give him the ball in the post on every possession when Millsap was playing the 5 with 2 fouls in the 2nd. Wear out the frontline, force Millsap to the bench and Kanter to play even more minutes than he's accustomed to.
 
billyshelby said:
Al is perceived to be a black hole. A ball stopper. So when a game like Toronto happens, it only serves to reinforce that myth. The irony is this: the small lineups we played, even with all that ball sharing, would get us blown out of most games with credible opponents. But Toronto has no inside game, relies heavily on jumpshots, and plays no defense as evidenced by the fact they've given up 100 points or more in all but 4 of their games this season.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the response. Now, forget wins and losses for a moment .. do you think Al being in the game makes his teammates move less without the ball to get open? My specific curiosity is if the team plays better team ball w/o Al because they feel there's a better chance of being involved in the offense.

It sounds a little dumb to me, but I hear it ALL the time, so I don't just discount it as patently false.
 
billyshelby said:
Al is perceived to be a black hole. A ball stopper. So when a game like Toronto happens, it only serves to reinforce that myth. The irony is this: the small lineups we played, even with all that ball sharing, would get us blown out of most games with credible opponents. But Toronto has no inside game, relies heavily on jumpshots, and plays no defense as evidenced by the fact they've given up 100 points or more in all but 4 of their games this season.
Click to expand...

I could look this up, but the question seems worth the typing:

How many times have they given up 130 points?
 
billyshelby said:
Al is perceived to be a black hole. A ball stopper. So when a game like Toronto happens, it only serves to reinforce that myth.
Click to expand...
That you make such strong statements with nothing to back them up is a head-scratcher, especially considering your history (the CJ Miles jock riding in particular).
 
NAOS said:
I could look this up, but the question seems worth the typing:

How many times have they given up 130 points?
Click to expand...

Answer: zero times in regulation-length games.
The Jazz scored 140 on them in triple OT earlier this year.
 
PKM said:
Thanks for the response. Now, forget wins and losses for a moment .. do you think Al being in the game makes his teammates move less without the ball to get open? My specific curiosity is if the team plays better team ball w/o Al because they feel there's a better chance of being involved in the offense.

It sounds a little dumb to me, but I hear it ALL the time, so I don't just discount it as patently false.
Click to expand...

If players don't move, that's on Ty and the players. If they were constantly moving, cutting, and not getting the ball because Al was always in superstar mode, that would be different. But that's not what's happening.
 
GVC said:
That you make such strong statements with nothing to back them up is a head-scratcher, especially considering your history (the CJ Miles jock riding in particular).
Click to expand...

So I should be deferring to the genius of a WoW acolyte who thinks basketball is a logarithm that can be figured out on an abacus?
 
billyshelby said:
If players don't move, that's on Ty and the players. If they were constantly moving, cutting, and not getting the ball because Al was always in superstar mode, that would be different. But that's not what's happening.
Click to expand...

Cool. Nice to hear an opposing view to that of the masses.

I'll say I disagree with you but with the qualifier that I'm sure you breakdown the games far more than I do .. I watch them in more game-mode than analysis-mode.
 
PKM said:
Thanks for the response. Now, forget wins and losses for a moment .. do you think Al being in the game makes his teammates move less without the ball to get open? My specific curiosity is if the team plays better team ball w/o Al because they feel there's a better chance of being involved in the offense.

It sounds a little dumb to me, but I hear it ALL the time, so I don't just discount it as patently false.
Click to expand...

I actually expect this. It's play design. Give the ball to AJ and get the hell out of his way/prepare to defend his misses. The Jazz offense went stagnant quite a few times when Corbin ran this through Kanter. Millsap looked somewhat frustrated by it at one time (in the 3rd IIRC), although I don't care to buy much into his body language here.

The difference I see between fans and reality, and one reason I defend Jefferson so adamantly, is the Jazz are going to win far fewer games without Jefferson even though the games will be much more exciting to watch. They'll also be highly frustrating at times when the team has zero offensive cohesion and no go-to players to stop scoring droughts.
 
billyshelby said:
So I should be deferring to the genius of a WoW acolyte who thinks basketball is a logarithm that can be figured out on an abacus?
Click to expand...
Not sure who you're referring to, but no, you shouldn't defer to that guy. You might want to be critical of your own conclusions from time to time, and turn to whatever data is available to form your opinions. FWIW, my opinion about Al has changed quite a bit over the last year+, and you're one of the biggest reasons why (your understanding of the game exceeds mine by a fair bit).
 
franklin said:
The difference I see between fans and reality, and one reason I defend Jefferson so adamantly, is the Jazz are going to win far fewer games without Jefferson even though the games will be much more exciting to watch. They'll also be highly frustrating at times when the team has zero offensive cohesion and no go-to players to stop scoring droughts.
Click to expand...
Would you prefer to be a fan of a boring, perpetually mediocre team or an exciting team that may win the lottery at some point?
 
franklin said:
I actually expect this. It's play design. Give the ball to AJ and get the hell out of his way/prepare to defend his misses. The Jazz offense went stagnant quite a few times when Corbin ran this through Kanter. Millsap looked somewhat frustrated by it at one time (in the 3rd IIRC), although I don't care to buy much into his body language here.

The difference I see between fans and reality, and one reason I defend Jefferson so adamantly, is the Jazz are going to win far fewer games without Jefferson even though the games will be much more exciting to watch. They'll also be highly frustrating at times when the team has zero offensive cohesion and no go-to players to stop scoring droughts.
Click to expand...

GVC said:
Would you prefer to be a fan of a boring, perpetually mediocre team or an exciting team that may win the lottery at some point?
Click to expand...

This. There's no right way or wrong way .. but we know what we have with Al and he's not going to get better from here. I'd still rather watch more exciting basketball, watch the young guys progress ON the court, get another piece out of the lottery, let Al expire, add a piece from FA (maybe) and further pave the way to a perhaps vastly improved team. Again, I'd be willing to risk more losses to get there ... even if it meant that along with that risk means we never actually get any better.

That's only one point of view, but it is mine.
 
GVC said:
Not sure who you're referring to, but no, you shouldn't defer to that guy. You might want to be critical of your own conclusions from time to time, and turn to whatever data is available to form your opinions. FWIW, my opinion about Al has changed quite a bit over the last year+, and you're one of the biggest reasons why (your understanding of the game exceeds mine by a fair bit).
Click to expand...

I'm poking fun at your affinity for Berri, WoW obviously being his Wages of Wins. As for being critical of my own conclusions, I've done a public 180 on Carroll and I think I'm up to 3 nice posts in a row on Mo Williams. As far as Al goes, I've always said the same things about him -- good and bad -- and nothing he's done this season has really changed the assessment on who he is. It's just that who he is is frequently not appreciated, and the perceived benefits of his absence are greatly overstated.
 
franklin said:
The difference I see between fans and reality, and one reason I defend Jefferson so adamantly, is the Jazz are going to win far fewer games without Jefferson even though the games will be much more exciting to watch. They'll also be highly frustrating at times when the team has zero offensive cohesion and no go-to players to stop scoring droughts.
Click to expand...

I,d rather lose a few more games, wwatching al play no defense no hustle and being a blackhole Sucks.

I want husle defense and teamball
 
It's settled. I'm naming my junk Big Al.

It's big, great on offense, but doesn't defend well.
Rarely boxes out .. double dribbles, accused of palming .. hook shots with either hand.
Hard time penetrating, but once inside rarely passes out.
Loves a great double team.
 
This thread is almost complete. The only thing left is a little tank, girls.

beware,_killer_tank.gif


Hot-Girl-Tank-Top.jpeg
 
billyshelby said:
I'm poking fun at your affinity for Berri, WoW obviously being his Wages of Wins. As for being critical of my own conclusions, I've done a public 180 on Carroll and I think I'm up to 3 nice posts in a row on Mo Williams. As far as Al goes, I've always said the same things about him -- good and bad -- and nothing he's done this season has really changed the assessment on who he is. It's just that who he is is frequently not appreciated, and the perceived benefits of his absence are greatly overstated.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. I don't really have an affinity for Berri or WoW though; the only time I've mentioned either was the other day, quoting from the wikipedia entry on PER.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top