Playoffs?

[theNBAnerd]

glass, i'm all for "addition-by-subtraction" if we have something decent to play all those extra minutes that CJ, watson and others are leaving on the table. the problem with injuries isn't always that so-and-so doesn't play, it's that you don't have someone else to play there. in the jazz's case, they are now left with a backup PG who can't stay in front of ANYBODY in this league on defense, and we're exactly 2 players deep on the wing.

yes, paul will play some 3. yes, carroll might occasionally give us a spurt like last night. but for this to work, it's going to mean a very tight rotation, and hayward and burks are going to have to majorly step up. as in, no more off-nights like both have had recently. (burks has actually had quite a few.)

 

[Sean]

I held hope until the Kings debacle a couple weeks ago. The Jazz are just too inconsistent to win the games needed to secure the 8th seed.

I'll only believe again when Utah actually moves into that 8th spot.

 

[Kenwood]

fair point, except that i think the SCHEDULE will also help. i don't see a game in the next 9 that i can't imagine the jazz winning. in reverse order of difficulty, here's why i think all the remaining games are winnable:

* sas (4/9): calling this the hardest, but obviously not so if the big 3 don't play. even if they do, sweeping a home-and-home set is extremely hard to do.
* @hou (4/11): this will be playoff atmosphere as a TON rides on this one game.
* @mem (4/14): we're 2-0 against them this year, but they're healthy now and quietly playing some of the best basketball in the L.
* dal (4/16): depending on if they're in rest-the-vets mode or furiously-work-to-stay-in-6th mode.
* orl (4/21): depending on if dwight a) plays and b) cares.
* @por (4/18): listing it ahead of phx just because it's a road game -- and because sweeping a team of similar talent level is always unlikely.
* phx (4/24): would rank it as tougher except that i think by then phx will be eliminated from the hunt. (before us, they have 8 gms in 13 days, all decent teams)
* @ noh (4/13): again, it's a road game.
* por (4/26): should win this one.

i'm absolutely NOT saying they go 9-0... just that all those games are winnable. so the difference between 3-6 and 6-3 has as much to do with the sked as it does with the team magically becoming a better club.

I hear you about winnable games, but the Jazz are not playing at such a level that winnable = wins. Look at the last 5 games. What would we have said on March 30?
* SAC (3/30): definitely winnable
* lac (3/31): if the Memphis game is winnable, this one was as well. I'd argue that both were far more likely losses.
* port (4/2): definitely winnable
* PHX (4/4): definitely winnable
* GS (4/6): definitely winnable

So if I would have done this same exercise on 3/30, I would have said 4 were very winnable and the Clips game was winnable in that it wasn't an automatic loss...and the Jazz got two of them.

 

[theNBAnerd]

yeah i see your point. i guess the consolation is that we're fighting for position with two other teams who are also basically .500 teams, so it's not like we have to go 9-0 to make it.

but like devin said, all this "who plays who" and these standings watch exercises only matter if the jazz win.

 

[freakazoid]

not some far off notion of how losing now will lead to maybe wins later on if the stars line up right and we get a pick and then the stars line up right again and that pick actually pans out.

Upgrading the roster is FAR more likely to improve the team than extending our losses by 4 games. The far off notion is believing that getting abused in the first round would improve the team more than acquiring better players. Whether that's by drafting a player, or using the pick in trade to add another vet, this team needs more talent a lot more than they need 4 or 5 more games.

 

[Scorpjazz]

Upgrading the roster is FAR more likely to improve the team than extending our losses by 4 games. The far off notion is believing that getting abused in the first round would improve the team more than acquiring better players. Whether that's by drafting a player, or using the pick in trade to add another vet, this team needs more talent a lot more than they need 4 or 5 more games.

I agree sort of with the first part. THAT is the far off notion I mean.
I have no doubt that getting to the playoffs adds confidence and experience to our young guys, no doubt at all. It is a fact.
I do have serious doubts that any pick will actually make a diference and upgrade the roster however. That is a total hit or miss, no matter where you pick. IMO, and I realise it is a minority opinion, is that I will take the sure things of confidence, experience, and yes FUN, that comes from going to playoffs.
You seem to assume that automatically the team gets better players by failing and getting the pick. That isnt the case, and stats bear it out to actually be less likely than likely even with the pick. Obviously, there is NO chance they get a better player without the pick. Im just saying Ill take the sure things I talked about over a possibility.
I believe we already have an extremely solid group and can get better without the need to fail.

 

[addictionary]

they're the main factors to make a team avoid feeling about a whole season has gone complete waste.