GVC
Well-Known Member
Popovich is a development-oriented coach? Seems to me he has a team full of veteran leaders and veteran role players. What mediocre talent has Popovich turned into a solid role player?
si article "Can Millsap play SF?"
- Thread starter Growlor
- Start date
InGameStrategy
Well-Known Member
If you're trying to suggest that Sloan was a better (or even close to similar) coach for development than Popovich, then you have a long walk on the River Walk. (See San Antonio.) While Sloan's development record is a fog, there's no summer John Deere tractor for Popp:
Here's your litany of a list of players that Popp has propped.
In their respective rookie seasons, Blair and Hill logged 18 and 16 minutes. Add to that the rookie seasons of Splitter and Gary Neal at 12 and 21 minutes last year, and you start seeing a pattern highly consistent with my mantra that 10 MPG minimum is necessary for development--or even maintainin'. Imagine that.
Maybe I would've even been better off citing Popovich's protegé, who clearly benefitted from Popp's preaching.
You really know how to pick your arguments, GVC.
Last edited:
InGameStrategy
Well-Known Member
Not in terms of skill, or even peak skill.
But in terms of the role of coaches in developing players (even though RJ was a vet when he was reinvented), and that some coaches are effective at it (and some are not), yes.
You're grasping for straws (which is reminiscent sometimes of Araujo grasping for rebounds ...).
GVC
Well-Known Member
I'd say comparing how one coach "develops" a well-rounded, productive veteran player to how another coach develops a fringe player is grasping for straws.
For every George Hill (First Round Pick) and DeJuan Blair (first round talent with injury concerns), you can find a young Jazz man who was drafted later yet given as much or more time (Millsap, Maynor, Collins, Matthews, etc.). You just choose to ignore the examples that don't agree with your world view.
The truth is, Sloan got a lot out of marginal talent during his time in Utah. He also, contrary to popular belief, gave rookies (and other young players) a decent amount of run when they proved they were worthy of it. There are probably good reasons why Jarron Collins, Paul Millsap and Wes Matthews were given more "development" time on the court than Fes ever was.
For every George Hill (First Round Pick) and DeJuan Blair (first round talent with injury concerns), you can find a young Jazz man who was drafted later yet given as much or more time (Millsap, Maynor, Collins, Matthews, etc.). You just choose to ignore the examples that don't agree with your world view.
The truth is, Sloan got a lot out of marginal talent during his time in Utah. He also, contrary to popular belief, gave rookies (and other young players) a decent amount of run when they proved they were worthy of it. There are probably good reasons why Jarron Collins, Paul Millsap and Wes Matthews were given more "development" time on the court than Fes ever was.
Of course he is, he gets maximum efficiency out of the players he got. Deron Williams wouldn't have been the guy he is now if he had worked with Popovich all those years instead. Millsap wouldn't improve himself to a 18 8 guy, he would be another Blair maybe. Even CJ miles wouldn't have improved as much as he did with Sloan (though we can argue still how close he is to his peak)
Only thing would be Koufos maybe, because i had hopes on him but he couldn't find enough playing time in his second year. He played more even in rookie year. So maybe i think it was the player not the coach. But in general i think Sloan is a very good trainer, but Popovich is a better in game coach. He is more flexible and he is a winner. Maybe he gets maximum efficiency out of players playing positions and rotations in the game, but Sloan is a much better player developer for sure
InGameStrategy
Well-Known Member
1. I'm not convinced that Sloan's sitting out rookie Deron in favor of Milt Palacio or whoever helped his development, even though DW claimed that it did. IMHO, it only slowed DW's development. Maybe it motivated Deron, but that motivation wouldve originated better from the performance-based playing time that I described. And as the Deron departure showed, the rookie strategy didn't fully reform D-Will's punkiness, and it didn't establish Sloan as the authority. I'm not sure that we know what all of Deron's grievances were, but Deron--for better or for worse--decided to start calling his own plays in defiance of Sloan.
https://www.aolnews.com/2011/02/10/as-jerry-sloan-exits-too-early-deron-williams-better-know-what/
But that was offense. The defense was ignored, because players usually don't like to play defense, and Sloan stopped enforcing it--that is, if he ever did.
2. Millsap is Millsap primarily due to his own motivation, partly with the support of the coaching staff.
3. CJ Miles? LOL. Same Sloan pattern (in stark contrast to Popovich's). A mere 200 minutes in his rookie year--but then again, sometimes CJ deserved to be benched when he wasn't. And CJ was young. But lo and behold, CJ started producing good percentages after he had logged about 600 minutes or so, which is right in line with what my strategy prescribes for a first-year player: 10 MPG for most games (i.e., >60). Just another data point that on-court experience and minimum minutes are essential, no matter whether the player's upside is journeyman or Jordan.
But CJ's Catch-'n'Jack erratic offense was only half the story; neither Sloan nor his successor has enforced defense in Miles. In another way, CJ is a classic example of a Jazzman who got away with not defending, even under Sloan, who didn't enforce defense very well back in the early 21st century but definitely didn't in the last 3 to 5 years or so.
4. "Couldn't find enough playing time" for Koufos? How hard is it when your regular starters at the 4/5 spot could be appropriately nicknamed "Matador" and "Torero", especially when their poor defense sometimes barely compensated for their scoring on the other end, and your first "big" man off the bench was a hard-working and usually effective but often undersized Paperboy?
Backups such as KK easily could accumulate their crucial development time of a minimum of 10 minutes per game, without negatively affecting the outcome of the game, just from the times when Boozer and/or Memo weren't getting it done on the court. You sit the regulars down down for 5 minutes (scheduled or unscheduled) a couple of times per game, and they just might learn to move their feet on D. Just maybe. And you might start getting more than maintenance production out of your backup bigs, which are real centers--not yelping Alaskans or PF Turks in center's clothing.
Promising production is what you got out of Fesenko and Koufos and Araujo alike, multiple times each. However, unlike any true coach, leader, investor, or teacher, the Jazz coaching staff ignored the benefit of developing and reinforcing such success, both physically and psychologically, which could have been done feasibly with carefully selected playing time on a regular basis.
As in 10+ minutes per game.
Last edited:
Paul Millsap is now the starting SF (I'm the PF) on "My Player Mode" on 2k12, it's not working out.
billyshelby
Well-Known Member
Don't know what's happening in your computer game, but in real life opposing teams will put any 3 they have who can drive against him.
As good as Millsap is as a PF , he sucks so bad as a SF, thats my opinion
I appreciate your effort and time for the post, but i disagree at some points. For example, i was also so high on Koufos and i know he deserved more playing time the sophomore year, but lets accept that he was making too many rookie mistakes even in that year. I don't know how he was in training, maybe he didn't show enough effort or didn't convince Sloan that he was ready.
As much as i appreciate Sloan in many sides, like he never blames on referees as Phil Jackson does, he never blames on anyone, he just keeps working, just deal with his own business, he is very determined person and he loves coaching, but he also had too many mistakes. He wasn't flexible first of all, why the hell would Korver guard Kobe in any time in any basketball game, just because he was 2 and kobe was 2 , he guarded. So he was kinda too straight headed. He has many other things you would blame on, plus i don't like how he treats rookies, he is double times more strict against them than all other coaches. But i would never criticize him being a good trainer and player developer. If any player, works hard enough and accomplish his duties with him, he would improve as much as possible near Sloan.
Thats my opinion, you think different and i respect that. But also i dont agree about Deron thing, Deron is the best pg in the game right now. If his weird personality and leadership wouldn't mess things up, he would have taken utah to much farther only by himself.
If you watch some turkish league games right now, you would understand how good he is when he is calm and not frustrated and how much Sloan contributed to his game. He has like an eagle vision, he sees all the holes in defense and give the best pass possible, he makes all other players around him play with much improved performance.
So i am not sure if he would be that good working with Popovich all these years instead.
InGameStrategy
Well-Known Member
Thank you also for your thoughtful post.
As for Koufos making rookie mistakes in his second year, at least part of the reason is that Sloan cut off his minutes almost completely, for no apparent reason, in about February of his first year, even though he was making progress and doing well. Koufos was a young player, being drafted after only one year of college, so it is reasonable to infer that such an abrupt cutoff hurt his progress and possibly made him regress. Koufos is possibly one of the most blatant examples of Sloan's mismanagement of on-court player development because Kouf was improving, was contributing to the team somewhat, and was working hard in practice (even though I have stated repeatedly that on-court performance should be a far more significant indicator than off-court activities anyway).
From the Desperate News:
That was Corbin (pre-head coach) with the quote. Fesenko had gotten a meager 400+ minutes vs. Koufos's nearly insignificant 172 that year. In other words, Sloan gave Fesenko and Kouf less than a COMBINED 600 minutes. That's not development; that's short-sighted ignorance on the part of the coaches.
Meanwhile, Okur logged nearly 30 MPG, despite a paltry 13.5 points, 7.1 RPG, and a slightly negative overall +/-. In other words, there was room to give Kouf (or Fesenko) a little more playing time without hurting the team outcome, and there was potential that if they started to be in the groove, that they would help big time, especially given the so-so play of Matador and Torero as starters. That was proven further when Fesenko held his own vs. the Lakers in the playoffs, but would have likely been far more effective if he had gotten more meaningful minutes.
As in more than 8 MPG over 52 games.
From a Nuggets writer:
Evidently KK's work ethic hasn't diminished; the weak argument that some have used against not playing players who don't put forth effort in practice doesn't work for KoKo, who did work hard and still didn't get playing time, thus underscoring the inconsistent strategy that Sloan used for developing players and allocating minutes.
I mostly agree with you here (until the part about him being a good trainer and developer). Exhibit A: Sloan didn't reward Koufos with minutes, even when he did well. Why should a player work hard in practice if he's not even gonna see the floor much? Koufos probably didn't stop working hard, but it could've affected him subconsciously, helping to explain his erratic performance when he finally got in the game.
Unlike Fes, Kouf didn't goof off. Unlike Araujo, Kouf didn't have T-Rex arms. Instead, the Jazz coaching staff handed the defense-deficient Boozer and Okur 30+ MPG without any enforcement of performance. And both the 82 games stats and a regular view of the games showed that CB's and MO's poor D sometimes barely justified their offensive production.
But Sloan did nothing about it. So much for his "hard-nosed" reputation, not even enforcing defense.
With all due respect to the Turkish league, I don't think that whether Deron Williams is doing well in Turkey has much to do with his development in the NBA, which is by far the most rigorous league in the world.
And it is a stretch to suggest that DW's excellence in Turkey--during the times when he is not frustrated, at least :|--had something extraordinary to do with Sloan. Of course ol' Jer helped him, but so would've other coaches (as well as DW's own chip-on-the-shoulder motivation), and the start and end of the relationship betwen DW and JS show that Sloan's contribution to Deron's development might have been mixed.
Last edited:
I m trying to focus, he is such a good player that he can adopt in any league and be a certain commander in his team. It is especially difficult for point guards in completely different systems. For example Derrick Rose sucked in the world championship last year, and Jennings literally played nothing in his year with Lottomatica Roma.
Anyway, i still give credit to Sloan, maybe he was wrong about Koufos, i also like him and i think he can still make his mark in nba, but just because of 1-2 mistakes i can't deny his great effect in developing many players.
Lakers_Slapper
Well-Known Member
*Quoting InGameStrategy* The frequency of success stories of big-man development by the Jazz, besides self-motivated players such as Malone and MIllsap who were the primary drivers of their own success, are fairly thin, and this problem is exacerbated by the Jazz not insisting on putting forth the effort defensively
By you saying this. Tell me one story of a team that has developed a big man, that was not self motivated. I want to hear of the guy that didnt want to work, was lazy, and horrible at every aspect of the game, but became great because this wonderus team that "motivated him" (because he could'nt do it for himself) and made him into a outstanding NBA player. I want to hear an example. Your basically saying that Aruajo and Fesenko sucked, and its Jerry Sloans fault because of his under-development, he couldnt make them into All Stars like they should be. They had a good game against Duncan and if it wasnt for that damn Jerry Sloan, they would be super heros flying around in little capes and masks like you do for Halloween? Trick or Treat you idiotic waste of human flesh, that couldve been used for one of my very nice lamp shades.
By you saying this. Tell me one story of a team that has developed a big man, that was not self motivated. I want to hear of the guy that didnt want to work, was lazy, and horrible at every aspect of the game, but became great because this wonderus team that "motivated him" (because he could'nt do it for himself) and made him into a outstanding NBA player. I want to hear an example. Your basically saying that Aruajo and Fesenko sucked, and its Jerry Sloans fault because of his under-development, he couldnt make them into All Stars like they should be. They had a good game against Duncan and if it wasnt for that damn Jerry Sloan, they would be super heros flying around in little capes and masks like you do for Halloween? Trick or Treat you idiotic waste of human flesh, that couldve been used for one of my very nice lamp shades.
InGameStrategy
Well-Known Member
I am not aware of an example of someone who was completely inept and unmotivated, but it doesn't matter, because Koufos, Fesenko, and Araujo don't fit that description either, so your feeble challenge is irrelevant.
No; I'm saying they had shown that they were valuable in specific situtations, and that they were underutilized, and that the coaches are the ones that decide playing time.
Nobody said that these players had All-Star upside; I clearly said that they would never reach that level.
Merely an example of poor player development & player motivation by Sloan, and a waste of an opportunity to develop players in a position that was sorely needed: (backup) center.They had a good game against Duncan and if it wasnt for that damn Jerry Sloan, they would be super heros flying around in little capes and masks like you do for Halloween? Trick or Treat you idiotic waste of human flesh, that couldve been used for one of my very nice lamp shades.
Your hyperbole is showing.
You are confusing correlation with causation, and quite probably reversing them. The more likely scenarior is the really talented youngsters getting "development time" by virtue of their being talented and earning that time. It is much less likely that the coaching staff are denying "development time" to players that have earned it, causiong players to not improve. However, it is also possible (and seems accurate) that development in various areas is not connected to playing time at all.
Your coaching suggestions are naive and ill-informed, and your analysis highly typical of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
Very glad to see that your obvious competence hasn't led you down the path of such heightened self-awareness as to reach illusory inferiority.
Well played, ha.
repped, btw