si article "Can Millsap play SF?"

[Deleted member 848]

Well, now Al's a Jazzman, and even though Big Al didn't go to college, it seems to me the he could handle the instruction of playing on both ends of the floor. Not too much to ask. And not too much to enforce, either.

Glad you're on board, sort of, but I'm not impressed that his defense went up only if his blocks went up.

I don't recall when the all-star break was, but Big Al's block total stayed about the same (2.1 BP30) between when Sloan was here and when he left (about February 24).

You never answered my question, aka the first sentence of the block of text you quoted from me. And I don't think you're getting my point; someone like Gordon Hayward, or Alec Burks are considered bad teams on their respective teams before they come to the nab BECAUSE they are either the first or second offensive option of their teams, and their teams really rely on the on the O end so naturally they will need to save up and relax on defense, and let the other 4 put in effort. And honestly, I think its painfully obvious to everyone that while in Minnesota, Al was probably instructed to focus mostly on filling his stat sheet with 20s and 10s, because his play on defense doesn't seem effortless; its more lack of coordination. It seriously seems like the guy never properly learned how to properly rotate, defend pick and rolls, etcetera. When it comes to stuff like defending his man, defending the post, things that are relatively easy to understand without proper instruction THEN we would expect him to be better, and quite frankly he is among the best in the league in those situations. Get what I'm trying to say?

 

[GVC]

You never answered my question, aka the first sentence of the block of text you quoted from me. And I don't think you're getting my point; someone like Gordon Hayward, or Alec Burks are considered bad teams on their respective teams before they come to the nab BECAUSE they are either the first or second offensive option of their teams, and their teams really rely on the on the O end so naturally they will need to save up and relax on defense, and let the other 4 put in effort. And honestly, I think its painfully obvious to everyone that while in Minnesota, Al was probably instructed to focus mostly on filling his stat sheet with 20s and 10s

This is all fine and dandy, but Al's offense isn't good enough to make up for his poor D. Hopefully that changes.

 

[BYE]

It seriously seems like the guy never properly learned how to properly rotate, defend pick and rolls, etcetera. When it comes to stuff like defending his man, defending the post, things that are relatively easy to understand without proper instruction THEN we would expect him to be better, and quite frankly he is among the best in the league in those situations. Get what I'm trying to say?

I have been wondering for quite some time about Al's defense after I saw an advanced statistics rating system on Al's defense that put him at second among the leagues big men. Al has an extremely good rating on synergy sports (they watch every single play), and you can watch every single defensive play that Al was a part of. He is sometimes slow and lazy but over all he is a very effective defender. One thing I noticed too with Al is that he is constantly helping his teammates on the defensive end. If you don't believe me, then go watch him on synergy. He needs to be a bit more active and close out harder sometimes, but compare his synergy ratings to other players and watch about thirty plays. When you watch him stuff Andrew Bynum twice within four plays, its kind of impressive. The common knock against him is his rotation. I admit that it is not perfect, but its not as horrible as people make it out to be. Watch his plays on synergy and think about the players around him. Most of them have horrible synergy rankings. Fesenko's is quite high on limited minutes. I'm not saying he is perfect, but where can I actually see the evidence for his poor defense. I don't buy the "watch some games" argument because as crime investigators and historians will tell you, the memory is horribly unreliable and highly prone to bias. In short, I don't think Al's a bad defensive player, and the only way to measure and assess this says he is a good defensive player. If anyone has other verifiable evidence that shows otherwise. Let me know. I'd be glad to change my mind.

 

[GVC]

If anyone has other verifiable evidence that shows otherwise. Let me know. I'd be glad to change my mind.

Although lots of people dismiss this evidence, his teams have consistently been better defensively with him off the court than on the court. The Synergy stats say nothing about his transition and team D, only his man D. Basketball is a team game, and especially now with the hand checking rules as they are, defense is a team effort. It's impossible to contain wing players on the perimeter, so bigs have to help. The same can be said about transition D: That's where easy buckets come from.

 

[BYE]

Although lots of people dismiss this evidence, his teams have consistently been better defensively with him off the court than on the court. The Synergy stats say nothing about his transition and team D, only his man D. Basketball is a team game, and especially now with the hand checking rules as they are, defense is a team effort. It's impossible to contain wing players on the perimeter, so bigs have to help. The same can be said about transition D: That's where easy buckets come from.

I understand the transition D thing. But is this Al? Does he not run, is he slow, or does he not understand where to go? Wouldn't this show up on Synergy since these points would count as spot up etc.? As I said, watch a bunch of him defending on Synergy, and you will notice that Al helps a lot. I don't know how to measure this any other way. Team D shows up a little bit in Synergy for instance when it shows him on the ball-handler in pick and rolls. Also, what's the stat that you are using to show that his teams are better defensively when he is off the floor? I don't know of one. All I know of is the +/-, which could be attributed to his less than perfectly efficient offense or skewed figures based off of rotation. Once again. He's not my dad, so I don't have any personal reason to say he's a solid defender--just trying to be objective with what I know and can prove. I also think he turns his effort on and off too much.

 

[GVC]

I understand the transition D thing. But is this Al? Does he not run, is he slow, or does he not understand where to go? Wouldn't this show up on Synergy since these points would count as spot up etc.? As I said, watch a bunch of him defending on Synergy, and you will notice that Al helps a lot. I don't know how to measure this any other way. Team D shows up a little bit in Synergy for instance when it shows him on the ball-handler in pick and rolls. Also, what's the stat that you are using to show that his teams are better defensively when he is off the floor? I don't know of one. All I know of is the +/-, which could be attributed to his less than perfectly efficient offense or skewed figures based off of rotation. Once again. He's not my dad, so I don't have any personal reason to say he's a solid defender--just trying to be objective with what I know and can prove. I also think he turns his effort on and off too much.

I don't have a problem with you having a different opinion, I just don't agree. To me, Al has a classic case of tunnel-vision on the basketball court. On offense he sees the ball and the basket, on defense he sees his man. There's a lot more going on out there that he needs to account for, and he's just not very good at that IMO, and that's a pretty big deal in a team sport like basketball.

 

[InGameStrategy]

You never answered my question, aka the first sentence of the block of text you quoted from me.

No I didn't; my evidence is just based on viewing experience here. Similarly, you didn't provide any evidence that your claim was true.

And you said it first.

And I don't think you're getting my point; someone like Gordon Hayward, or Alec Burks are considered bad teams on their respective teams before they come to the nab BECAUSE they are either the first or second offensive option of their teams, and their teams really rely on the on the O end so naturally they will need to save up and relax on defense, and let the other 4 put in effort.

Burks and Hayward don't play the "Jimmer" role anymore (being first choice on O, kicking back on D), but I simply don't subscribe to the philosophy that players should be allowed to take it easy on defense in order to have energy on offense--especially not to the extent that the likes of Boozer did. And the notion that the likes of Sloan would let players get away with such subpar effort continues to amaze me to this day. The latest "evidence" that such a strategy doesn't work is the 2010-2011 Jazz season.

And honestly, I think its painfully obvious to everyone that while in Minnesota, Al was probably instructed to focus mostly on filling his stat sheet with 20s and 10s, because his play on defense doesn't seem effortless; its more lack of coordination.

So what? What happens in Minneapolis stays in Minneapolis. And I don't know what to make of your double negative. Even I will acknowledge that AJ's D isn't nonexistent.

He's here now, and it takes about 5 minutes to tell a player to play D and for him to show whether he's putting forth the effort. It takes longer to learn to play effective D, but he's been here a year, and neither the effort nor the defensive skill advancement are convincing. Positive, but not convincing.

It seriously seems like the guy never properly learned how to properly rotate, defend pick and rolls, etcetera. When it comes to stuff like defending his man, defending the post, things that are relatively easy to understand without proper instruction THEN we would expect him to be better, and quite frankly he is among the best in the league in those situations. Get what I'm trying to say?

No I don't, because I question how much time is being spent with him in practice on it. As the season record showed, any strategy--conscious or unconscious--to merely improve his offense was not sufficient. Certainly other players were part of the problem (and potential solution), but the center especially needs to be the one who sets the defensive tone. AJ didn't, and there were backup options that did--for a few minutes at a time, which was all that would have been reasonably expected for them to play, in order to shore up the middle and to show Jefferson that his minutes weren't guaranteed if he was going to dog it. Not clear where Corbin sits on such a philosophy, but it wouldn't be hard to implement a more aggressive approach than Sloan paradoxically did in his last years.

 

[Deleted member 848]

No I didn't; my evidence is just based on viewing experience here. Similarly, you didn't provide any evidence that your claim was true.

And you said it first.

Burks and Hayward don't play the "Jimmer" role anymore (being first choice on O, kicking back on D), but I simply don't subscribe to the philosophy that players should be allowed to take it easy on defense in order to have energy on offense--especially not to the extent that the likes of Boozer did. And the notion that the likes of Sloan would let players get away with such subpar effort continues to amaze me to this day. The latest "evidence" that such a strategy doesn't work is the 2010-2011 Jazz season.

So what? What happens in Minneapolis stays in Minneapolis. And I don't know what to make of your double negative. Even I will acknowledge that AJ's D isn't nonexistent.

He's here now, and it takes about 5 minutes to tell a player to play D and for him to show whether he's putting forth the effort. It takes longer to learn to play effective D, but he's been here a year, and neither the effort nor the defensive skill advancement are convincing. Positive, but not convincing.

No I don't, because I question how much time is being spent with him in practice on it. As the season record showed, any strategy--conscious or unconscious--to merely improve his offense was not sufficient. Certainly other players were part of the problem (and potential solution), but the center especially needs to be the one who sets the defensive tone. AJ didn't, and there were backup options that did--for a few minutes at a time, which was all that would have been reasonably expected for them to play, in order to shore up the middle and to show Jefferson that his minutes weren't guaranteed if he was going to dog it. Not clear where Corbin sits on such a philosophy, but it wouldn't be hard to implement a more aggressive approach than Sloan paradoxically did in his last years.

So you restate several times that he has not shown improvement on defense, and when I ask you to prove it, you say that your evidence is "based on viewing evidence", because you have no facts to prove it.

Sorry pal, but no dice for you. You trying to prove Al never improved from what "you saw" is like trying to lay the foundations of a sky-riser using silly-putty. And really, your response to my point really seems to be directed more towards Sloans/ Minnesota's crappy coaching than to my super-awesomely-accurate explanations.

 

[NotDeadYet]

When a player is tasked by his coach to carry his team's offense like Al has been throughout his career, he needs to avoid fouls, which is gonna affect a players defense... I'm not gonna judge big Al's defense until the Jazz get their team a bit more stabilized offensively.

 

[Dr. Jones]

When a player is tasked by his coach to carry his team's offense like Al has been throughout his career, he needs to avoid fouls, which is gonna affect a players defense... I'm not gonna judge big Al's defense until the Jazz get their team a bit more stabilized offensively.

Sounds reasonable, but one should be able to rotate without fouling. Not bashing Al, just not letting him off the hook on certain (most) aspects of defense.

 

[Lakers_Slapper]

hayward can play 3 but why make him play 3 while he will have an obvious advantage against his opponents at 2? If he didnt have consistent shooting its ok but he has it so i dont see any reason why he shouldnt play 2.

I dont know anything about burks, i just saw some highlights and he didnt seem to have good defense i hope i am wrong, but i think he will not be worse than brewer overall, only thing is he should have a good personality and work ethic so he wont mess up the team chemistry if he cant find playing time

Please dont get me wrong, I think that Hayward is going to be a descent role player, but saying that hes proven himself as a consistant shooter after his first year? I hope for the best when it comes to the Jazz, but Hayward is still young and is going to make a lot of mistakes. There's nothing wrong with that, its part of the growing pains. And what obvious advantage does Hayward have at playing starting 2? This kid has played one year, everyone is set on him being the savior of basketball in Utah. I dont get it.
And you said you dont know anything about Burks, but hes a guy that wont mess up the chemistry with the team. If you dont know anything about him, now can you boldly state he wont mess up the chemistry? (Im not saying that I do know anything about him, but Im not going to start posting his wills and wonts on Jazzfanz). And if you ask me, our team chemistry is as messed up as it maybe has ever been. We have new coaches players from a blockbuster trade, potentially good draft picks.....etc......what team chemistry?
The Jazz will hopefully pull it together and make the season work, but I dont think Hayward is our secret weapon. I hope Im wrong.

 

[TheSilencer1313]

If Matt Harpring's body can play SF (and it could at one point), I see no reason Millsap's can't if given enough time.

Numberica has a perfect point there. Both have similar bodies, and Harpring did play the position pretty damn well when he was healthy.

Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk