What's new
By:

How do the Jazz get this thing back on track?

Grandpa Jazz said:
Let me see if i understand so many people's desire to lose, lose, lose. We do this thing (at great risk to our young players) on purpose, in hopes of landing a superstar player in the draft. While at the same time moaning that no superstar player would actually come to Utah and if they did we could not keep him. Variously, due to his own desire to be elsewhere or we can't afford to keep them. Does this about sum up the plans of so many of you brilliant strategist.

Let me ask a few simple questions. Was Karl Malone a superstar? Was John Stockton a superstar? Did they stay in Utah long enough to please everyone? How did we acquire them? Can you say second leading scorer in history, and how about all-time assist leader by a mile. Just in case you are goofy enough to argue they were not "really" superstar players.

Collectively we do a lot of talk about "developing" our young players, and then a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth if they actually seem to be improving, resulting in wins. Causing the situation where anyone who plays too good should immediately be traded. Can anyone say "conflicted". Leaving us with one very high draft pick and nothing else.

I am not personally on your spaceship to "tankland". Go Jazz!! Build this team using all available avenues not sacrificing everything for one big long shot. I realize not many here will agree with this post.
Click to expand...
I agree. I said before the season that we are really in a no lose situation. Either we suck and get a great draft pick. Or our young guys show that they are really good and one or 2 of them show signs that they could be that superstar. I still believe this. I think we are winning because Burke, Burks and Favors are playing really well. I think Hayward has shown that he can contribute even while struggling with his shot. I expected our bench to cost us a lot of games regardless of how good our young guys played. But did not figure on Marvin or Jefferson being as good as they have been. I'm starting to wonder if Marvin should be a part of our future depending on his price tag. I also did not envision Evans playing as well as he has.
.
I still want a good draft pick though. I also think this team is going to get no more than 25 wins and have a top 5 pick. So I still think we are headed for a decent pick while watching our young players carry this team.
.
Does anybody still believe that this team was better last year with the vets starting? Because If this team had last years bench we would be better than last year.
 
Grandpa, while you did not address me, i'll offer my two cents. Also, even though i disagree with your post, i'm going to rep you for reasonable dialog. Thanks.

The business of basketball has evolved...

Grandpa Jazz said:
NUMBERICA. Thanks for responding, read with rapt attention. Glad you don't actually believe the Jazz can't get or keep a superstar. And i find little wrong with your reasoning on all else you wrote with the exception of the above quote. What about tanking (purposeful tanking) is consistent with what you wrote. Tanking to one of the worst or worst three teams in the league will not fill any draft choice with anything but trepidation about coming here, and quality players with a future will also be looking for greener pastures. That Trey Burke is now being put forward as legitimate ROY while being a number 9 choice is exactly my point.
Click to expand...
The Utah Jazz may not be a desired destination for new draft picks but 'trepidation' is essentially irrelevant because they don't have a choice to be here: they'd be drafted. Then, because of the structure of the latest CBA, we can have a pick for up to 8 years without them having a choice in it (match RFA offers after rookie contract.) Also, it is just as reasonable that a player who has a negative opinion of Utah before coming, could find it appealing after arriving. (often the case) And finally, if the tank process worked, and the jazz have a cornerstone player, then Jazz are all the more attractive.


Grandpa Jazz said:
What about the 6-7 players chosen before him who are not fulfilling their destiny. This is the scenario on almost all drafts. The failures outnumber the great players produced at about a 2-1 clip (among top 10 picks). So then how is the draft our best shot at improving?
Click to expand...
Draft picks are not sure things. however, the quality of a draft is a bit more predictable. And as NUMB offered earlier, the odds are in your favor when you have a good pick in the RIGHT draft. There is a universally held opinion that this years draft will have a VERY GOOD chance at multiple franchise players.

Grandpa Jazz said:
It is a shot and can work, i do not deny that. What is wrong with many of the best pieces we currently have being retained and the rest jettisoned for what we can get and then adding whatever draft choice(s) we end up with. Obviously it will be a higher pick than the Jazz have historically been able to get. We just have to choose the right player. Easier said than done but no harder than trying to guess which of the top three most sexy choices at years end will turn out as great players. If i convince almost no body that tanking (purposely) is a bad idea. Then i feel good about my opinion anyway. Building a contending team is not easy, if it were everyone would be doing it. Can you see a season where 4 teams try to win games and 26 teams try to lose as much as possible. Not a good scenario for any basketball fan. Again thanks for answering me and reading my response.
Click to expand...

At some other point (post) you noted that is a problem with tanking because of the fear of the team members to have a losing attitude. I think this is another example of how the times have changed. Tanking has been real for a while and players have moved through it just fine (OKC) - when the organization is 'reasonably trustworthy.' By that i mean a perennial loser organization is not really, 'tanking' but rather they are sucking. Jazz do not have a bad org, and even moreso, i think they have a good org. Additionally, if you look that the "problem" we are debating today, it is that our tank is in jeopardy - we are too good for real tanking. Why is that, because the jazz org has done pretty good at drafting and now have a core 4/5 that are good enough that without a superstar will be a decent playoff team in 1, 2 years. Tanking for one year will not have any adverse effect on a team that already understands that.
 
I like Jefferson and Burks to Milwaukee for the right to swap picks.
I like Marvin/Jefferson to Cleveland for CJ Miles.

I'd also consider sending over some assets to teams in the late lottery who may be willing to risk the right to swap picks (things like Williams packaged with a second rounder take back garbage contract).

I think if we could cut at least 3 deals for the right to swap picks then that'd be huge.

I also like ideas to tank the **** out of Golden State and get us a few more combinations when those ping pong balls fall.

If any PG goes down with an injury -- or a headache or priapism or whatever -- I want a 20 game Stephon Marbury experiment.
 
infection said:
I like Jefferson and Burks to Milwaukee for the right to swap picks.
I like Marvin/Jefferson to Cleveland for CJ Miles.

I'd also consider sending over some assets to teams in the late lottery who may be willing to risk the right to swap picks (things like Williams packaged with a second rounder take back garbage contract).

I think if we could cut at least 3 deals for the right to swap picks then that'd be huge.

I also like ideas to tank the **** out of Golden State and get us a few more combinations when those ping pong balls fall.

If any PG goes down with an injury -- or a headache or priapism or whatever -- I want a 20 game Stephon Marbury experiment.
Click to expand...

There are some nitpicky things to be addressed in some of that (Marvin would have to go to Milwaukee instead of Jefferson, you'd have to take in more salary from Cleveland), but interesting nonetheless. The right to swap picks with Milwaukee is really interesting and worth a lot, even if the Jazz somehow finished with the worse record of the two.
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
Did you see the way Popovich coached games the year he was positioning the team to grab Duncan? That's what we need.
Click to expand...

He had Robinson and Rodman on the bench, with injuries (among others?). He was also a first-year coach, wasn't he? That's different from trying to lose.
 
One Brow said:
He had Robinson and Rodman on the bench, with injuries (among others?). He was also a first-year coach. That's different from trying to lose.
Click to expand...
Robinson was cleared to play (as well as Sean Elliott) later in the season, but they got put on the shelf for the rest of the season.
 
NUMBERICA said:
Robinson was cleared to play (as well as Sean Elliott) later in the season, but they got put on the shelf for the rest of the season.
Click to expand...

Later in the season being after they basically had little/no hope of making the playoffs, wasn't it?
 
One Brow said:
Later in the season being after they basically had little/no hope of making the playoffs, wasn't it?
Click to expand...

Probably. But isn't it the sacred duty of every team ever to use all possible resources to win every game?

And in such a case, why doesn't every team just bench their star players down the stretch if they're not going to make the playoffs? That's a trick question; many do, and that's usually called tanking.
 
Throwing out another:

Emeka "my neck dun got breaked" Okey we'll take him for any vet you chose



+


Bledsoe for Hayward.
 
NUMBERICA said:
I've actually thought a little bit about this: how weird would it be if Ty was let go and the Dennis Lindsey becomes the coach?
Click to expand...

That is not true at all. Pop fired the coach after the Spurs started off badly and Robinson got hurt. Popvich LEAD the tank, as GM and Coach, drafted Duncan and the rest is history. They sat Robinson out the whole year, and limited Elliot, Del Negro and Person.

Duncan's first year was Pop's second season as coach.

Pop was the original tank commander.
 
One Brow said:
He had Robinson and Rodman on the bench, with injuries (among others?). He was also a first-year coach, wasn't he? That's different from trying to lose.
Click to expand...

He had already traded Rodman away, and Robinson was hurt. Pop fired Hill and took over the coaching job 20 or so games into the year.
 
green said:
That is not true at all. Pop fired the coach after the Spurs started off badly and Robinson got hurt. Popvich LEAD the tank, as GM and Coach, drafted Duncan and the rest is history. They sat Robinson out the whole year, and limited Elliot, Del Negro and Person.

Duncan's first year was Pop's second season as coach.

Pop was the original tank commander.
Click to expand...


Wow. I had no idea pop was the gm before becoming coach
 
Pho king Horny ain't got no tank in him (TM YB85 you pho king genius). They don't want to pay Bledsoe as a two, we don't want to pay Hayward as a Batum atrocity. I'll even consider giving them both GSW picks with this season's top something protected if they take Jefferson and Will.I.Am.


One unprotected first in 2017, Hayward, a top 9-ish protected first this year, Wet B Kenobie's valueable contract... 4 Bledsoe................................................



I will throw Burk, Evans, and another protected first into this I think. Burke-Bledsoe-Burks@3ersomethin.....
 
green said:
That is not true at all. Pop fired the coach after the Spurs started off badly and Robinson got hurt. Popvich LEAD the tank, as GM and Coach, drafted Duncan and the rest is history. They sat Robinson out the whole year, and limited Elliot, Del Negro and Person.

Duncan's first year was Pop's second season as coach.

Pop was the original tank commander.
Click to expand...

That was actually me that posted that and I thought it was later in the season once most everything had been decided record wise so I looked it up and it was about this time of the season Popp fired the HC and took over.
 
//r00t 4 Jazz said:
That was actually me that posted that and I thought it was later in the season once most everything had been decided record wise so I looked it up and it was about this time of the season Popp fired the HC and took over.
Click to expand...

The Spurs started 3-15, Pop fired Hill, sat all his good players and finished with 20 wins that year (17-47 was Pop's record).

Pop is the original tank commander.
 
green said:
The Spurs started 3-15, Pop fired Hill, sat all his good players and finished with 20 wins that year (17-47 was Pop's record).

Pop is the original tank commander.
Click to expand...

That's what I said when I was correcting myself minus the original tank commander, saying he took over about this time in the season (December about 18 games into the season).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top