Matt Thomas - Matty Ice

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

Based on highlights he plays aggressive. It's going to be interesting to see how much playing time he receives.

When the Jazz make a trade for someone, they usually have a plan to play them. Jazz didn't have to bring this guy in. I think the Jazz want to play like it's a video game where they just shoot a 3 every time.

Against the Nets, 60% of the Jazz's shots were 3s.

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

The Jazz FO has become emboldened because they have made Niang a good defender.

He's a moderately mobile, pudgy, obstacle-type defender, but yeah.

 

[jom2003]

More than half of those were not really on him as a primary defender. Broken plays and missed assignments elsewhere left him in no-man's land a few times as well. Not really an indictment. Whoever made that video does not understand defensive sets in the NBA.

I am not arguing that this guy is going to be a good defender, advance stats say no. Just that this video shows few good examples of it.

Great team defense would solve a lot of it. We made Niang a decent defender. No reason we can't fix Matt Thomas.

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

Great team defense would solve a lot of it. We made Niang a decent defender. No reason we can't fix Matt Thomas.

Kyle Korver actually became a passable defender for a while in his career.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

He's a moderately mobile, pudgy, obstacle-type defender, but yeah.

High IQ as well... knows where to be is a big part of the battle.

 

[rjfan]

Looks more of a depth pick other than anything. Forrest may even have a better chance to actually make It into the league, but right now he can't shoot, so we can't ask him to stand in the corner to shoot, and we're resting Conley on b2b, while Oni shot even If it's at good percentages, It ain't respected, and he's still some goods steps behind in terms of whenever he has to dribble and reset the play. When we take Ingles to eat PG/SG minutes he's fine, but the wing rotation suffers.

Still doubt he makes much rotational minutes, but maybe at least he helps our garbage time to be able to knock down some shots

 

[idiot]

Not enough of an Xs & Os guy to answer this myself, but can someone please help me figure out why the Jazz seem to have been legitimately interested in Redick (who probably would have been only with us for this season) and then ended up with the poor-man's version in Thomas (who they seem intent to keep around for next year)?

With both Redick and Thomas, the Jazz know as well as anyone that they'll be relentlessly targeted defensively in most playoff matchups. And, as with almost any realistic addition, it's hard even to see where either Redick or Thomas would/will find playing regular rotation playing time.

I thought the Jazz would have simply waited on the buyout market if they couldn't get a wing defender they liked at the trade deadline. And if they struck out in the buyout market, I thought they would have been OK rolling with the Oni, Brantley, Morgan trio as sufficient depth, depending on the matchup need (or maybe these guys are why they felt comfortable going out and getting another shooter first?).

But the Jazz must have something scheme-wise that allows them to figure that a Redick/Thomas type is worth more offensively in the Jazz's system than they would give up defensively. I suspect it has to do with what they think elite off-ball movement shooting (even beyond perhaps what everyone's favorite passed-on rookie, Desmond Bane, could have provided) opens up for them -- something that they currently don't possess. Or maybe it has to do with potential fit with Donovan when Mike sits? Or maybe they think Redick/Thomas can function well enough in their defensive scheme? I don't know.

Can anyone help me figure out what the Jazz are thinking?

(Just to dispense with issues that I don't care to get into: I'm not trying to bash (or praise) the move and I'm not trying to re-litigate past moves. I'm just trying to better understand what the Jazz might be seeing in valuing this type of player.)

EDIT: I do see that the +/- for the Mitchell/Clarkson duo is at -10 for the season. This is the worst on the team for any duo with more than 100 minutes together and one of only two negative duos (the other is Favors/Ingles, interestingly enough, at -4).

 

[TheGoldStandard]

Kyle Korver actually became a passable defender for a while in his career.

Korver was a decent defender until he starting aging and generally hovered around league average for defensive rating, and was a net positive even last year. He had good height at 6'7" and a 6'9" wingspan. His height also contributed to his better shooting to better get off contested shots. Korver had decent lateral quickness and played with fundamentals. A bad comparison really.

Thomas is 6'3. His defen"sieve" stats are horrendous (opponents averaged 12.4% better against him last year). Small wingspan, slow, zone didn't even work to hide him.

At best, you can hope to make him an average defender, when our perimeter is sorely lacking lock down defenders (as are most teams in the current offense friendly NBA). If he plays, it will exacerbate our lack of length and perimeter defense. Hopefully he can stop looking lost on defense and be a net positive. Not a lot of risk for a 2nd round pick, but maybe a bit more risky when you take into account the anemic number of picks we have left to trade.

 

[TheGoldStandard]

Not enough of an Xs & Os guy to answer this myself, but can someone please help me figure out why the Jazz seem to have been legitimately interested in Redick (who probably would have been only with us for this season) and then ended up with the poor-man's version in Thomas (who they seem intent to keep around for next year)?

With both Redick and Thomas, the Jazz know as well as anyone that they'll be relentlessly targeted defensively in most playoff matchups. And, as with almost any realistic addition, it's hard even to see where either Redick or Thomas would/will find playing regular rotation playing time.

I thought the Jazz would have simply waited on the buyout market if they couldn't get a wing defender they liked at the trade deadline. And if they struck out in the buyout market, I thought they would have been OK rolling with the Oni, Brantley, Morgan trio as sufficient depth, depending on the matchup need (or maybe these guys are why they felt comfortable going out and getting another shooter first?).

But the Jazz must have something scheme-wise that allows them to figure that a Redick/Thomas type is worth more offensively in the Jazz's system than they would give up defensively. I suspect it has to do with what they think elite off-ball movement shooting (even beyond perhaps what everyone's favorite passed-on rookie, Desmond Bane, could have provided) opens up for them -- something that they currently don't possess. Or maybe it has to do with potential fit with Donovan when Mike sits? Or maybe they think Redick/Thomas can function well enough in their defensive scheme? I don't know.

Can anyone help me figure out what the Jazz are thinking?

(Just to dispense with issues that I don't care to get into: I'm not trying to bash (or praise) the move and I'm not trying to re-litigate past moves. I'm just trying to better understand what the Jazz might be seeing in valuing this type of player.)

Redick has a slightly better than average defensive rating (defends 3s pretty good actually). Thomas is definitely a poor mans version.

 

[infection]

Not enough of an Xs & Os guy to answer this myself, but can someone please help me figure out why the Jazz seem to have been legitimately interested in Redick (who probably would have been only with us for this season) and then ended up with the poor-man's version in Thomas (who they seem intent to keep around for next year)?

With both Redick and Thomas, the Jazz know as well as anyone that they'll be relentlessly targeted defensively in most playoff matchups. And, as with almost any realistic addition, it's hard even to see where either Redick or Thomas would/will find playing regular rotation playing time.

I thought the Jazz would have simply waited on the buyout market if they couldn't get a wing defender they liked at the trade deadline. And if they struck out in the buyout market, I thought they would have been OK rolling with the Oni, Brantley, Morgan trio as sufficient depth, depending on the matchup need (or maybe these guys are why they felt comfortable going out and getting another shooter first?).

But the Jazz must have something scheme-wise that allows them to figure that a Redick/Thomas type is worth more offensively in the Jazz's system than they would give up defensively. I suspect it has to do with what they think elite off-ball movement shooting (even beyond perhaps what everyone's favorite passed-on rookie, Desmond Bane, could have provided) opens up for them -- something that they currently don't possess. Or maybe it has to do with potential fit with Donovan when Mike sits? Or maybe they think Redick/Thomas can function well enough in their defensive scheme? I don't know.

Can anyone help me figure out what the Jazz are thinking?

(Just to dispense with issues that I don't care to get into: I'm not trying to bash (or praise) the move and I'm not trying to re-litigate past moves. I'm just trying to better understand what the Jazz might be seeing in valuing this type of player.)

I think despite having a historic three point season, we don't really have a true sharp shooter. We've previously talked about Bojan being that, but he's not a guy that's taking a lot of quick threes or throwing up a lot of contested ones. It's one reason I've supported even bringing Korver in this year, because the defensive attention he gets is pretty incredible. He can wear out a defender without even touching the ball. We'd find minutes for Redick and there'd definitely be a role. Maybe not more than 15 minutes, but he'd definitely see the floor and I think his presence would make the defense have to adjust, so even if you throw that wrench into the game for a few minutes it provides value. And us looking at Redick was in the context of a buyout. If there's a guy of his caliber available that you can add as your 15th spot, you have to take it unless there's opportunity cost out there with someone else. I think grabbing a Thomas is an easy way to see if you can throw someone on the Ingles / O'Neale / Niang conveyor belt and have them be an elite specialist at something.

 

[idiot]

Redick has a slightly better than average defensive rating (defends 3s pretty good actually). Thomas is definitely a poor mans version.

Not that I doubt your comparison here (Redick, after all, has forged a long, successful career; Thomas seems fortunate the Jazz threw him a lifeline), but what defensive rating metric(s) are you using here? B-Ref? Is the 3-defense an eye-test evaluation?

 

[TheGoldStandard]

Not that I doubt your comparison here (Redick, after all, has forged a long, successful career; Thomas seems fortunate the Jazz threw him a lifeline), but what defensive rating metric(s) are you using here? B-Ref? Is the 3-defense an eye-test evaluation?

Defensive rating per NBA.com under advanced metrics.

Essentially as good as Gobert is defensively, Thomas is offsettingly worse defensively so far in his career. It is the reason he couldn't get playing time.

I hope the Jazz can correct his flaws.

 

[mongoose01]

I can optimistically see Thomas as kind of a Clarkson insurance in future years. I think Thomas can give you similar things Clarkson can with high efficiency shooting and keeping the foot on the peddle. Obviously he doesn’t have the ball handling and offensive skill that Clarkson has but he can put pressure on with his shot. I don’t see a lot of people complaining about Clarksons deficiencies on defense. If Thomas can develop into half what Clarkson is on offense he’d be a force to be reckoned with off the bench.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I can optimistically see Thomas as kind of a Clarkson insurance in future years. I think Thomas can give you similar things Clarkson can with high efficiency shooting and keeping the foot on the peddle. Obviously he doesn’t have the ball handling and offensive skill that Clarkson has but he can put pressure on with his shot. I don’t see a lot of people complaining about Clarksons deficiencies on defense. If Thomas can develop into half what Clarkson is on offense he’d be a force to be reckoned with off the bench.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think this may be the thinking behind the acquisition... but I also think they may have just liked him and they'll figure out how or if they use him later.

 

[Eminence]

Dude's 26, not a lot of development is likely.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Dude's 26, not a lot of development is likely.

Joe Ingles first started playing basketball at 27.

 

[whatthe]

Dude's 26, not a lot of development is likely.

Peak for guards is age 28. So...they would have to act fast in the next couple years. It doesn't look promising.

 

[mongoose01]

Dude's 26, not a lot of development is likely.

He can benefit a lot just by understanding the offense. Look at Conleys old ***.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Isaiah 1:13]

I can optimistically see Thomas as kind of a Clarkson insurance in future years. I think Thomas can give you similar things Clarkson can with high efficiency shooting and keeping the foot on the peddle. Obviously he doesn’t have the ball handling and offensive skill that Clarkson has but he can put pressure on with his shot. I don’t see a lot of people complaining about Clarksons deficiencies on defense. If Thomas can develop into half what Clarkson is on offense he’d be a force to be reckoned with off the bench.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, I think a lot of folks on this board are selling the kid on the low side just like they were Clarkson when he first came in. Will be become another Clarkson? Not likely, Clarkson's story is the ultimate Cinderella story in the NBA. He was the invisible man on Cleveland's bench before we picked him up for scraps. But Clarkson never stopped believing in himself and neither did Thomas IMO. They both have excellent mechanics, actually I might have to give the nod to Thomas in this category. I do think that Clarkson is a little more athletic, but not alot, better hops at least. But what they both have is the ability to create and a certain swag on court- but not conceited off from it. He's a hired gun, he's made a living being a hired gun in Europe, never had to play D over there, doesn't mean he can't move. He does seem to have a few very ardent fans on Youtube that believe he is better than advertised:

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Yeah, I think a lot of folks on this board are selling the kid on the low side just like they were Clarkson when he first came in. Will be become another Clarkson? Not likely, Clarkson's story is the ultimate Cinderella story in the NBA. He was the invisible man on Cleveland's bench before we picked him up for scraps. But Clarkson never stopped believing in himself and neither did Thomas IMO. They both have excellent mechanics, actually I might have to give the nod to Thomas in this category. I do think that Clarkson is a little more athletic, but not alot, better hops at least. But what they both have is the ability to create and a certain swag on court- but not conceited off from it. He's a hired gun, he's made a living being a hired gun in Europe, never had to play D over there, doesn't mean he can't move. He does seem to have a few very ardent fans on Youtube that believe he is better than advertised:

Tony Jones talked about this a bit on his pod. Mentioned this is really about next year... I think we are setting up contingencies for when we make some budget cuts next year and he's a guy they like.