bjwsan
Well-Known Member
Seems to be a theme w/ Jazz management... more options for trade or dump, if he doesn't work out... but either way, big man on the cheap... may be a great value
Seems to be a theme w/ Jazz management... more options for trade or dump, if he doesn't work out... but either way, big man on the cheap... may be a great value
A write up on bballbreakdown on the Jazz and Pleiss:
https://bballbreakdown.com/2015/08/16/the-jazz-commit-to-a-big-philosophy-and-add-tibor-pleiss/
https://bballbreakdown.com/2015/08/16/the-jazz-commit-to-a-big-philosophy-and-add-tibor-pleiss/
Stifle Tower
Punch Bowl Re-Filler
I disagree with the statement, "While their lack of lineup flexibility may hurt them in a playoff series, this style of play can (and has) worked during the regular season."
Most of the Jazz players can play multiple positions. You play according to your strengths. Why go with Favors at the 5 and Hayward at PF, for example, when the Jazz are clearly better with Gobert at center. Golden State has a great team, but I still think had Cleveland been healthy, the Cavs would have prevailed. And then there would be articles explaining why GS' small ball failed and how they need to get bigger to match up in the playoffs. Let's get to the playoffs before guessing that Utah might have problems.
We lack an upper tier wing defender and don't have a stretch 4.
Stifle Tower
Punch Bowl Re-Filler
Don't forget an NBA-level PG.
Everything is a trade-off, though. Say we get a strecth-4. Does that send Favors to the bench and weaken our interior defense? Why do we need to follow the crowd? Utah has their own special thing developing. So Favors can't step out and hit the 3? Big deal. Utah has the best interior defense in the NBA. And Derrick is strong in the P&R and has a pretty decent mid-range game.
And to support that defense we need wings who can score, even if they're a bit weaker on the defensive end. Not sure who we bring in - short of a superstar - who is going to be a net upgrade over the rotation of Hayward, Hood and Burks. Of course, I may be higher on Hood and Burks than you are. I value their offense more than I would a defender who is a poor shooter.
But that's more style of play than roster flexibility. I still maintain Jazz can go big OR small with the personnel they have. And going back to the stretch-4, if Quin's philosophy was to have a PF stand in the corner and shoot 3's, he could do that with Booker, who hit 35% of his attempts. Instead the team has been built around a front court that relentlessly defends the paint.
Everything is a trade-off, though. Say we get a strecth-4. Does that send Favors to the bench and weaken our interior defense? Why do we need to follow the crowd? Utah has their own special thing developing. So Favors can't step out and hit the 3? Big deal. Utah has the best interior defense in the NBA. And Derrick is strong in the P&R and has a pretty decent mid-range game.
And to support that defense we need wings who can score, even if they're a bit weaker on the defensive end. Not sure who we bring in - short of a superstar - who is going to be a net upgrade over the rotation of Hayward, Hood and Burks. Of course, I may be higher on Hood and Burks than you are. I value their offense more than I would a defender who is a poor shooter.
But that's more style of play than roster flexibility. I still maintain Jazz can go big OR small with the personnel they have. And going back to the stretch-4, if Quin's philosophy was to have a PF stand in the corner and shoot 3's, he could do that with Booker, who hit 35% of his attempts. Instead the team has been built around a front court that relentlessly defends the paint.
No it just means we lack some flexibility.
Booker's also 6'7"* and the defense could easily swap out. When I get some time, I'm needing to go back and reply to my stretch 4 thread from a month ago because of all the misunderstandings in it and correcting the erroneous belief that having a big guy who can stretch the defense is somehow a threat to Gobert and Favors' minutes/starting role and somehow cripples our defense.
*Edit: I guess he is 6'8". In any case, Cy is right. Being a stretch 4 isn't about having a guy who slips in to being a "PF" and happens to hit a decent percentage on paper, it's about having a guy with enough size that he has to be guarded by one of the opposition's big guys who hits outside shots in enough volume to pull that defender away from the basket. Whether or not they're actually getting any shots up per game is irrelevant as their purpose is still served and doesn't show up in the box score. Of course, this works if it compliments the team's needs. Our team could certainly use that. Unfortunately, when I say that everyone gets hyper defensive about Favors and Gobert rather than focusing on the gaping hole behind them on the bench.
bjwsan
Well-Known Member
Stitches, thanks for the link. Enjoyed reading half of this, but I found myself wondering who this writer is... Joshua Riddell who? Anyone know of anything about him?
I trust Quinn and Alex to figure out what to do and how to use Pleiss... so don't need to listen to some lower tier writer go on and on about how we should not use him...