What's new
By:

Jazz vs Thunder | Monday November 15th @ 7:00pm

Tough loss but I think OKC deserved this one.
- Millsap - Jefferson duo's rebounding performance has been awful. They seem to have no idea about boxing out. Aside from AK, I just cannot see any wing or guard that tries hard to help the team get the rebounds.
- Jefferson's defense + the length/size/ advantage (plus the cowardness of our bigs which resulted in lots of fadeaways, contested jumpers from AJ and PM) upfront in favor of OKC were the biggest reasons why OKC got so many easy baskets and were able to dictate the tempo. I find the fact that Nazr Mohammed went 20/20 and freakin' Ibaka dominated our bigmen in both ends of floor super worrisome. We all say that Lakers are our ultimate opponent, obstacle to win the West. I, personally, think not having to watch Carlos taking 15-20 f jumpers all the time and getting blocked position after position is a positive but if our new frontcourt cannot even dominate the boards and dictate the offense, rule the painted area and get reliable production, we will have a rough rough time against them. Jefferson has to man up and be the player he has been known as, a post beast. If our duo will continue to take 10 jumpers combined each game, it means we are not watching Jazz basketball.
- Fesenko and Elson did pretty good job rotating and setting the tone inside. They deserved to stay more in the game. They, easily, would have done a much better job containing Ibaka than Millsap or BigAl. However, their offensive contribution is the reason why Jerry is hesitant to keep them in the game more than 5-6 mins, I guess.
- I would not say the offensive execution was much better but no inside-outside balance, floor spacing and lack of consistent outside scorers hurt the Jazz.
- 7 wins - 4 losses is a very good and pleasing record considering the process this team has gone through. Anyone of us would be pleasant, happy with such a record before the season started. The Jazz better forget about the dramatic comebacks against some of contenders in the NBA and focus on protecting the home court, which is essential for regular season success. 11 out of next 13 games are at home.
- FT disparity is not an excuse or a reason why the Jazz lost this one. Our bigs knuckled down, escaped from physical play against a lesser, less talented but more assertive frontcourt, Thunder expoited the PnR weakness of Jefferson on defense and inefficient PnR attempts of Deron/Big Al by putting pressure on passing lanes. and the Jazz made stupid mistakes, ill-advised shot-selections late in the fourt quarter.
 
Marty McFly said:
So it's okay to get Fesenko minutes for the past three years for the sake of development, even if it hurts the team, but getting Jefferson used to the system/team/learning to win is NOT okay, even if he hurts the team sometimes. I understand. You're definitely not a blind anti-Jefferson, anti-Sloan homer at all.
Click to expand...
Correct; I'm neither an anti-Jefferson homer nor an anti-Sloan homer. But nice try with the unsupported accusations. It would be much easier if Jefferson just did his full job on both ends of the court (box out, help defense), rendering my mantra of giving the centers more minutes less essential--and rendering me a pretty poor homer, given that it's results I care about, not who creates them, although if Sloan continues to use the 4/5 rotation poorly, then Fesenko (or Elson) still won't get the minutes to go from being a mere neutralizer in the playoffs last year to a momentum-changing force who might even put in some points (and FTs).

It's hilarious that you unleash this apologism when OKC was one of the clearest games yet when AJ's poor defense and Sloan's lack of enforcement of defensive effort (one of the things that he supposedly preaches) were primary factors in Utah losing the game.

I have cited repeatedly that Sloan could've gotten minutes for Fesenko in many games last season without risking wins. And even if it cost a game or two to make the team better in the long run, isn't it worth it? If Sloan had enforced his own philosophy and benched those who were "jackpotting" on the court (usually Okur) or who were ineffective against a taller lineup (Boozer + Millsap), isn't it better to do so if it means winning one or more additional games down the line in the same season?

Okur's & Boozer's defense were regularly deficient, so there were plenty of times that Sloan could've subbed in Fesenko to teach the starters a lesson, no matter whether Utah was ahead or behind. More often than not, Fes would've provided a net benefit, just like he did both last year (on average) and this year (in almost every game (saying "almost" just to be conservative; I'll let the Sloan / Boozer / Okur / Jefferson apologists point out an exception)). This year he (and AK and others) brought defensive intensity in at least one game that Jefferson picked up on and used toward putting forth more effort --> victory.

Just on principle, no player--even the starters--should be immune from being benched for at least until the next whistle, no matter who goes in the game instead. It's easy to see for non-apologists how doing so could pay off in spades in the very same game if the guilty player steps it up after he goes back in. It also provides a proving ground for whoever goes in to really show his stuff--not to mention cruicial development time, which Sloan made little to no effort to provide, even when he said that he would, only exacerbating his own hypocrisy, inattention to detail, and lack of leadership consistency. He might be a good motivator and have an effective (albeit complicated) offensive system, but he's a bad manager. He can become a good manager, but he has to decide to do so; he has shown it this year in one or more games (i.e., changing to the zone, which has actually backfired in the past). The other victories were won for primarily different reasons (including motivation).

No player on Gregg Popovich's team has a get-out-of-defense free card; he's benched the starters before, and Sloan did it a few times this year, too,and it has won the Jazz a game or two. Your timing, McFly, is really inopportune; the wisdom of the Coaching 101 strategy has never been more readily apparent.
 
Last edited:
One of the best parts of the game last night was when Brian David Mitchell was allowed to shoot for cash during a timeout. He only got $25.
 
Catchall said:
Probably because Sloan wanted Al Jefferson's offense over Fess's defense.
Click to expand...
Yes, and that is precisely the flawed coaching that has hurt the Jazz. In the OKC game, AJ delivered neither for part of the game. If Sloan enforced his own philosophy, players should be benched--until the next whistle, at least--for defense alone, no matter how well they are doing--at least in the first three quarters. But in this case, Sloan didn't even bench the player when he was a liability overall, and it was in the 4th quarter. That hurts the team.

The negative impact of dogging it on D is underrated because it both allows easy baskets for the other team and limits the team's ability to get easier shots on the other side. It also provides a precedent for lower intensity that spills over to the offensive end, especially in AJ's case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top