What's new
By:

Ty Corbin's quote on playing Jefferson over Burks in the 4th.

Sexual Favors said:
And you know this how? This is all based on what you know about these players playing in different lineups. Every lineup changes how players play. Remember Hayward last year? He shot 45% from 3 post December. Now, he can't shoot at all. If Burks was cutting and curling and doing more of the driving to the basket, maybe Hayward could chill on the perimiter for open looks again and regain that.

As is, R.J. shoots 35% from 3. Burks is shooting 32.4% --not a huge difference in terms of this spacing you think R.J. brings. If Hayward could regain his 3 pt shot from last year by having another competent ball handler out there (thus his useage rate and attention on him could conceivably go down), he could get better looks from 3 and fall into the rhythm that he used to have out there.

Just saying... you are spitting on something before it's been proven.
Click to expand...

Imagine if Kanter developed that 3-point shot. He could open up the offense so much for Burks and Favors down in the paint.
 
green said:
The response was simple: When Jefferson came into the game and Burks left, the Jazz made a run to get to within 5.
Click to expand...

But you said that the burke, burks, Hayward, favors, kanter lineup would suck and he said that statistics show that it is our best lineup that has been used this season.

This has nothing to do with the Jefferson instead of burks decision from last night btw
 
1 - where are his stats

2 - according to his quote, "He had a # of games to try it, when he finally did it worked really well against a great defense." he used it once and it worked?

huh.
 
giphy.gif
 
fishonjazz said:
In this thread I think
https://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php?22344-Burke-Burks-Hayward-Favors-Kanter
Click to expand...

OK. So, he was talking about the Pacers game. I went and looked at how our lineup did in this game.

The lineup first came together with 4:18 left in the first quarter. The score was 9-17, Utah leading. Our starting lineup of Favors, Kanter, JEFFERSON, Hayward and Burke built that lead. The Pacers had George, Hill, Scola, Hibbert and Stephenson on the court (4 starters). This lineup ended with 2:17 left in the first. The score was 13-19. So, our young 5 vs 4 of their starters lost that round 4-2.

The second time the lineup came together was 6:26 left in the second quarter. The score was 29-32. The Pacers had West, Stephenson and three bench players on the court. No Hill, George or Hibbert. This lasted until 4:48 in the second. At that time the score was 31-42, Utah. So, against three bench players, our young 5 our scored the Pacers 2-10. With 4:48 left in the second Q, Hibbert, Hill, and George came back in the game. From that point forward, the score was 2-2.

The last time the lineup was together was with 4:26 left in the game. The score was 84-76. The Pacers had their starting five in the game. When the game ended, the final score was 95-84. So, against their starters, the score was 11-8.

So, against the Pacers starters, the young 5 lost 17-12. Our young five against three bench players, no George or Hibbert won 10-2.

So, this lineup is FANTASTIC...if we only play their bench players. I would be curious to see what the score was with Burke, Hayward, Jefferson, Kanter, Favors vs Stephenson, George, Hill, West and Hibbert.
 
So, I looked at the lineup of Burke, Jefferson, Hayward, Favors and Kanter vs the Pacers.

This was the starting lineup. It was changed with 4:24 in the first Q. The score was 9-17 Utah.

With 3:51 left in the second Q, it put back on the floor and the Jazz were out scored 10-2.

Then it was on the floor to start the second half. The Jazz and Pacer were tied during this stretch, 14-14.

So, the overall scoring of that lineup was 33-33 and that lineup was always against the starting five.

So, Jefferson against the Pacer's starters: 33-33.

Burks against the Pacer's starters: 17-12 Pacers.

Jefferson, as limited/old/sucky as he is, is better than Burks with our real "core 4".
 
Which further supports me when I say that Burks is a really, really nice bench player. When Burks was playing against Pacer scrubs, Burks helped the Jazz go 10-2.
 
green said:
Which further supports me when I say that Burks is a really, really nice bench player. When Burks was playing against Pacer scrubs, Burks helped the Jazz go 10-2.
Click to expand...

That's the first time I have heard you call him a very very nice bench player
 
green said:
Which further supports me when I say that Burks is a really, really nice bench player. When Burks was playing against Pacer scrubs, Burks helped the Jazz go 10-2.
Click to expand...

Wrong again -- Jefferson has no future with the Jazz. The role of Corbin is to develop the young players and build for the future. Playing Jefferson over Burks under any circumstances, but especially when the guy is having one of the best games of his career (this is disrespecting the player, as well, and not a confidence builder), does not contribute to that goal.
 
For what it's worth, I was listening to Locke's podcast, and according to him, the +/- with the Core 4 on the floor during the game was not very good (I don't remember), plus Jefferson had 9 4th quarter points and was playing well. I personally also thought Jefferson played well in the 4th. I don't have any problem leaving Jefferson in the game--if the objective was to win and Corbin made a coaching decision that Jefferson in that particular situation gave the Jazz a better shot at winning. But if the objective is to give the youth experience and develop them as the future, then getting end of game experience is, I think crucial, and in this case I question Corbin's decision.

What I don't know is what kind of messages management is giving Corbin. Is it develop youth above all else, or is it develop youth but win? I infer from Corbin's behavior that he thinks he needs to win to keep his job, which suggests that either it's the second of the above two messages, or the message he's getting is mixed/unclear. (BTW, according to Locke, the Jazz's best +/- includes all situation in which Marvin Williams is on the floor.)
 
jimmy eat jazz said:
For what it's worth, I was listening to Locke's podcast, and according to him, the +/- with the Core 4 on the floor during the game was not very good (I don't remember), plus Jefferson had 9 4th quarter points and was playing well. I personally also thought Jefferson played well in the 4th. I don't have any problem leaving Jefferson in the game--if the objective was to win and Corbin made a coaching decision that Jefferson in that particular situation gave the Jazz a better shot at winning. But if the objective is to give the youth experience and develop them as the future, then getting end of game experience is, I think crucial, and in this case I question Corbin's decision.

What I don't know is what kind of messages management is giving Corbin. Is it develop youth above all else, or is it develop youth but win? I infer from Corbin's behavior that he thinks he needs to win to keep his job, which suggests that either it's the second of the above two messages, or the message he's getting is mixed/unclear. (BTW, according to Locke, the Jazz's best +/- includes all situation in which Marvin Williams is on the floor.)
Click to expand...

We can infer from the totality of Corbin's tenure that winning is his priority. His decisions that always favored vets, however, have not always been the best. One of the biggest problems most of us have had is that the Jazz as constituted need to develop their young players to ever have a chance of becoming an elite team. This is why Jeffy and Sap, and company were let go. Corbin has never put much emphasis on player development, and even now he sticks to winning games as his priority. Because of this I don't think he is listening or attuned to the FO's message -- he is that dumb -- which is even more reason to send him packing.
 
Eenie-Meenie said:
Wrong again -- Jefferson has no future with the Jazz. The role of Corbin is to develop the young players and build for the future. Playing Jefferson over Burks under any circumstances, but especially when the guy is having one of the best games of his career (this is disrespecting the player, as well, and not a confidence builder), does not contribute to that goal.
Click to expand...

Come on now. So, it is more important to develop Burks than it is to develop Hayward and Burke?

Disrespecting the player. Come on now. Both Burke and Burks need the ball to be effective. Burke is better than Burks and has a higher ceiling. I'd rather have Burke in the game developing than Burks.
 
fishonjazz said:
That's the first time I have heard you call him a very very nice bench player
Click to expand...

I have always said that I feel that Burks is a good bench player. In fact, I've said before that I think he could be sixth man of the year. I just don't talk about all-star games, starting, playing pg or any of the other silliness when it comes to Burks, so that must mean I hate him.

I don't. He is a good bench player. His game is fantastic against other scrubs. He isn't good enough to carry a team, and since he plays Alfense, he isn't good enough to start. BUT, he is good enough to carry a second unit, as shown by the stats against the Pacers.
 
green said:
I have always said that I feel that Burks is a good bench player. In fact, I've said before that I think he could be sixth man of the year. I just don't talk about all-star games, starting, playing pg or any of the other silliness when it comes to Burks, so that must mean I hate him.

I don't. He is a good bench player. His game is fantastic against other scrubs. He isn't good enough to carry a team, and since he plays Alfense, he isn't good enough to start. BUT, he is good enough to carry a second unit, as shown by the stats against the Pacers.
Click to expand...

When burks plays with the starters (or other decent nba players) he is not ball dominant and is not a ball hog or alfense or whatever...... he passes and plays team ball when playing with the starting caliber players (and plays more efficiently and has less turnovers/erratic play)

When he is in with the scrubs is when he starts shooting a lot more (which I would bet he is instructed to do)
 
green said:
Come on now. So, it is more important to develop Burks than it is to develop Hayward and Burke?

Disrespecting the player. Come on now. Both Burke and Burks need the ball to be effective. Burke is better than Burks and has a higher ceiling. I'd rather have Burke in the game developing than Burks.
Click to expand...

I hate to correct you again, but at this stage of the game, Burke IS EMPHATICALLY NOT better than Burks. But of course he needs to play to develop his potential, same as for Burks.
 
fishonjazz said:
When burks plays with the starters (or other decent nba players) he is not ball dominant and is not a ball hog or alfense or whatever...... he passes and plays team ball when playing with the starting caliber players (and plays more efficiently and has less turnovers/erratic play)

When he is in with the scrubs is when he starts shooting a lot more (which I would bet he is instructed to do)
Click to expand...

Against Portland, when Jefferson played with the starters, the score was 50-50.

When Burks played with the starters, the score was 31-16 Portland.

When Burks played with the bench players, the score was 24-16 Utah.

So, even when Burks plays the game of his career, he was on the floor when we dug our big hole. Not only was he on the floor, but he was on the floor with our starters. BUT, when he was on the floor with our bench players and against their bench players, we outscored Portland.

We actually made our run with Jefferson and a mix of bench and starters.

We lost that game when Burks was being developed with the real core of this team. We were brought back into the game when Jefferson was on the floor.

Burks is a very nice bench player.

He isn't a starter. He shouldn't be playing with our starters, because his game doesn't mesh with them. You can't develop Hayward, Burke, Favors at the same time as Burks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top