That San Antonio differential is crazy. Historic, perhaps... I wonder what the all time record is?
We passed Dallas last night. We just need to get healthy now and get those into the win column!
The Jazz have the 5th best point differential in the west
- Thread starter Doublea
- Start date
Doublea
Well-Known Member
I believe I read that if they finished the season today that would be the new record and Golden State's would be 4th.
People aren't seeing how good San Antonio is because of Golden State. San Antonio is probably going to win a championship, imho.
NAOS
Well-Known Member
cool?
I'm looking at the Ws and Ls and I've got a few hypotheses. I'm not celebrating the offense, if that's okay with you.
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
What are your hypotheses, and can you back em up with numbers other than the W-L column? I haven't been able to watch many of these close ones-- and it doesn't do much to dismiss the stats of others when you don't bring forth any of your own.
Clippers are top of tier 2
Warriors are on top of tier 1.
Big gap between tier 1 and 2 that I think will expand over the second half
NAOS
Well-Known Member
The offense (in general, but specifically down the stretch of a close game) is very predictable and has very few moving parts. 2 to 4 of the defenders basically get to take the play off (Rudy and Booker are especially easy to defend when we go one-on-one like we have). Winning basketball pulls the last strands of energy from the opponent by making them defend. We're not doing that, and opposing offenses have a little extra in the tank.
And, while we are making some great clutch shots, most of them are of the high-degree-of-difficulty variety. In other words, not the kind you want to bet on making on a consistent basis. And consistency in these situations is precisely the goal. In other words, this offensive efficiency that Locke's stats are showing is fool's gold. IMO.
Your hypotheses don't line up with reality. This isn't even subjective. Our offensive efficiency is currently 9th in the NBA. Defensive efficiency is below league average.
https://www.nbastuffer.com/2015-2016_NBA_Regular_Season_Advanced_Stats.html
You can point out whatever flaws in the offense you want, and they do exist, but our offense, on a per-possession basis, is top 10 in the NBA. It's been even better in clutch situations. It's not the reason we're losing games.
Jazz4ever
Well-Known Member
I only have their raw on courts from NBA.com. Burke + 0.3 Neto +0.1
Advanced stats like defensive RPM paint a different picture. -3.96 for Burke (3rd worst defensive PG). -0.32 for Neto (pretty respectable)
NAOS
Well-Known Member
You can't cutely separate the offense from the defense, then quote a stat, and then expect my eyes to all boggly. The offensive and defensive sides of the game are knit together.
Stockton used to talk about how, when his teams got down by 18 or 20 points early in the game, he looked forward to exploiting the fatigue that would settle upon his opponents, due to their having spent their energetic loads too early. In other words, a large deficit became the sign he needed for how to pull out a game down the stretch, for how and when to attack. Close games are won in the waning moments of physical limits, and its right then that it's important to push your opponent over the edge.
The jazz's offense down the stretch of close games allows PLENTY of ball watching by the off-ball defenders, who are able to catch a breath and put more nuts out there when they need buckets. Your (nvm Locke's) stats don't disprove this hypothesis (or any that resemble it), but it's cute that you think they automatically do.
Last edited:
NAOS
Well-Known Member
I'd prepared myself not to reply to whatever lamely large statistical generalization you would come back with, but I though I'd chime in to say that I've noted how you've acknowledged that the jazz are at least a "marginal" disadvantage due to the offense. "Marginal" might be enough; we're talking about just a couple of buckets deciding these games.
Here's a bit more, though:
None of your stats address the predictability of the offense in these late-close-game moments, and the high degree of difficulty of most buckets. I claim that our "success" has been fools' gold -- a second point I'll continue to make in the face of any of those general statistics.
I'm not saying I can't be convinced otherwise. But you're not close.