What's new
By:

2025 Playoffs Chat & Chill Thread

Coach Ellis said:
It’s kind of fascinating to see two teams in the East that are likely going to make the finals that are unconventional teams built through unconventional means. It’s way harder in the West, but the Jazz should be paying close attention to how these teams go about their business.
Click to expand...
What, you mean that tanking isn't the only way to build a competitive team in the NBA and that it may not be prima facie evidence of genius-level strategizing by FO galaxy brains? Don't say this too loudly; it's bound to get you shouted down by the pro-tanking zealots and the tanking industrial complex.

Sarcasm aside, I've been listening to commentary on the lottery, and it appears that there's a definite undercurrent of glee among several NBA executives that the Jazz and Wizards got shafted in the lottery. If it weren't my Jazz that got screwed, I'd be gleefully basking in the schadenfreude. Tanking, at least the intentional tear down and purposive sucking version of it, needs to die a swift but painful death. Sadly, it is likely to survive Jason Voorhees style for a while longer, continuing to tempt feckless FOs who don't have any other plan and who worry about job security and peddling hope more than actually doing the hard work of team building.
 
Schrödinger's Gerbil said:
What, you mean that tanking isn't the only way to build a competitive team in the NBA and that it may not be prima facie evidence of genius-level strategizing by FO galaxy brains? Don't say this too loudly; it's bound to get you shouted down by the pro-tanking zealots and the tanking industrial complex.

Sarcasm aside, I've been listening to commentary on the lottery, and it appears that there's a definite undercurrent of glee among several NBA executives that the Jazz and Wizards got shafted in the lottery. If it weren't my Jazz that got screwed, I'd be gleefully basking in the schadenfreude. Tanking, at least the intentional tear down and purposive sucking version of it, needs to die a swift but painful death. Sadly, it is likely to survive Jason Voorhees style for a while longer, continuing to tempt feckless FOs who don't have any other plan and who worry about job security and peddling hope more than actually doing the hard work of team building.
Click to expand...
IMG_4355.jpeg
 
Schrödinger's Gerbil said:
What, you mean that tanking isn't the only way to build a competitive team in the NBA and that it may not be prima facie evidence of genius-level strategizing by FO galaxy brains? Don't say this too loudly; it's bound to get you shouted down by the pro-tanking zealots and the tanking industrial complex.

Sarcasm aside, I've been listening to commentary on the lottery, and it appears that there's a definite undercurrent of glee among several NBA executives that the Jazz and Wizards got shafted in the lottery. If it weren't my Jazz that got screwed, I'd be gleefully basking in the schadenfreude. Tanking, at least the intentional tear down and purposive sucking version of it, needs to die a swift but painful death. Sadly, it is likely to survive Jason Voorhees style for a while longer, continuing to tempt feckless FOs who don't have any other plan and who worry about job security and peddling hope more than actually doing the hard work of team building.
Click to expand...
Yeah, the Wizards got jobbed.

Personally, I’m pro-tanking - but only for a limited time while a franchise accumulates assets. I wanted a complete tear down in 2022, but having the All-Star game in Utah and the emergence of Lauri and Kessler kept that from becoming a reality.

That’s really what the Jazz should do now though. Lauri is more of a #2 guy and I don’t see a realistic pathway for the Jazz to get a #1 guy that helps them compete. They should pivot to 2027, get as much out of their vets now, force the young guys to sink or swim and see if anyone levels up. If not, you make your top 5 pick next year and then try to consolidate assets in the 2027 offseason and trade deadline. Protect your picks so you don’t have to tank anymore and can take advantage of the unprotected picks you have from other teams if one moves up high in the draft at some point.

Start accumulating pick swaps and/or super-swaps to get favorable picks moving forward. Hope somebody blows up into a legitimate franchise player between now and then.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
Also I think the Celtics comeback and win the series.
Click to expand...
Not without Tatum. Unless he was secretly weighing them down and now players like Brown, White and Pritchard can shine. So I guess it is possible, but I just don't see them getting past this one without Tatum.
 
LogGrad98 said:
Not without Tatum. Unless he was secretly weighing them down and now players like Brown, White and Pritchard can shine. So I guess it is possible, but I just don't see them getting past this one without Tatum.
Click to expand...
dont think he was weighing them down at all, but Boston is just really ****ing good, even without Tatum.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
dont think he was weighing them down at all, but Boston is just really ****ing good, even without Tatum.
Click to expand...
I think it's entirely in the cards the Boston still wins this series and possibly even makes the finals. There's still a lot of talent on that team. The FO has done a very good job constructing a complementary roster around its stars. Though, I think NY making the finals would be a great story, and I'd like to see it; however, I'd see them getting crushed by OKC, who I think will win the West.
 
Schrödinger's Gerbil said:
I think it's entirely in the cards the Boston still wins this series and possibly even makes the finals. There's still a lot of talent on that team. The FO has done a very good job constructing a complementary roster around its stars. Though, I think NY making the finals would be a great story, and I'd like to see it; however, I'd see them getting crushed by OKC, who I think will win the West.
Click to expand...
If NYK chokes game 6 I dont see them winning G7 on the road
 
Coach Ellis said:
This I agree with. I just don’t see them choking. I think they close it out. I’d definitely rather be in their spot than Boston’s right now.
Click to expand...
After Tatum injury Knicks got all the pressure in the world and Celtics can play like true underdogs.

Besides, the Celtics 3P barrage style of basketball is something that can give them the W even if they get outplayed (... and it can lose them games they should win as well).
 
Coach Ellis said:
This I agree with. I just don’t see them choking. I think they close it out. I’d definitely rather be in their spot than Boston’s right now.
Click to expand...
I agree.
I think the Knicks win game 6 because the knicks are really good. Regardless of the tatum injury.
 
The Midnight said:
Strawter coming up huge for Denver.
Click to expand...
Strawter, and even Braun, are good examples of the need to build a supporting cast of not great but serviceable rotation players around a core of focal points. Part of the problem of judging our youth has been that they've been thrust into roles beyond their ability (at present at least) to thrive in them, i.e., starter or high-minute central focus. By way of analogy, when I started skiing in high school, my ski friends were all high-level skiers, who routinely took me on runs that were far beyond my ability to ski. Consequently, for years I never developed good skiing form, habits, or skills because I was always over my skis, so to speak. However, once I began to focus on skiing runs commensurate with my growing ability, I was able to develop the form, habits, and skills that have since allowed me to become an advanced skier.

How many games do you think an NBA team highlighting Braun, Stawther, Jaylen Wells, Cason Wallace, Aaron Wiggins, Lou Dort, etc. would win? Probably in the 20s, give or take, but they all play key roles on winning and playoff teams. It makes me wonder whether player development such as what the Jazz have done the last few years, i.e., throwing rookies and youngsters in the deep end in central roles without sufficient seasoning, is really the best way to develop young players. It's a great way to tank to increase lottery odds (how'd that turn out?), but perhaps not the best way to develop talent and evaluate whether the youngsters have a role and what that role is, whether central or supporting. I can't believe I'm saying this, but it's kind of along the same lines of Locke's "over dipped Oreo cookie" theory.

Anyway, I'm not sure this is anything new or profound, but it's a slow morning, and I'm putting off doing something I need to do but don't really want to. (Posting on boards is an effective procrastination method.)
 
Schrödinger's Gerbil said:
Strawter, and even Braun, are good examples of the need to build a supporting cast of not great but serviceable rotation players around a core of focal points. Part of the problem of judging our youth has been that they've been thrust into roles beyond their ability (at present at least) to thrive in them, i.e., starter or high-minute central focus. By way of analogy, when I started skiing in high school, my ski friends were all high-level skiers, who routinely took me on runs that were far beyond my ability to ski. Consequently, for years I never developed good skiing form, habits, or skills because I was always over my skis, so to speak. However, once I began to focus on skiing runs commensurate with my growing ability, I was able to develop the form, habits, and skills that have since allowed me to become an advanced skier.

How many games do you think an NBA team highlighting Braun, Stawther, Jaylen Wells, Cason Wallace, Aaron Wiggins, Lou Dort, etc. would win? Probably in the 20s, give or take, but they all play key roles on winning and playoff teams. It makes me wonder whether player development such as what the Jazz have done the last few years, i.e., throwing rookies and youngsters in the deep end in central roles without sufficient seasoning, is really the best way to develop young players. It's a great way to tank to increase lottery odds (how'd that turn out?), but perhaps not the best way to develop talent and evaluate whether the youngsters have a role and what that role is, whether central or supporting. I can't believe I'm saying this, but it's kind of along the same lines of Locke's "over dipped Oreo cookie" theory.

Anyway, I'm not sure this is anything new or profound, but it's a slow morning, and I'm putting off doing something I need to do but don't really want to. (Posting on boards is an effective procrastination method.)
Click to expand...
It would have been great to have gotten either Flagg or Harper this year so all our young guys can fit in place.. we had a 50/50 chance …

Oh well..
 
Schrödinger's Gerbil said:
Strawter, and even Braun, are good examples of the need to build a supporting cast of not great but serviceable rotation players around a core of focal points. Part of the problem of judging our youth has been that they've been thrust into roles beyond their ability (at present at least) to thrive in them, i.e., starter or high-minute central focus. By way of analogy, when I started skiing in high school, my ski friends were all high-level skiers, who routinely took me on runs that were far beyond my ability to ski. Consequently, for years I never developed good skiing form, habits, or skills because I was always over my skis, so to speak. However, once I began to focus on skiing runs commensurate with my growing ability, I was able to develop the form, habits, and skills that have since allowed me to become an advanced skier.

How many games do you think an NBA team highlighting Braun, Stawther, Jaylen Wells, Cason Wallace, Aaron Wiggins, Lou Dort, etc. would win? Probably in the 20s, give or take, but they all play key roles on winning and playoff teams. It makes me wonder whether player development such as what the Jazz have done the last few years, i.e., throwing rookies and youngsters in the deep end in central roles without sufficient seasoning, is really the best way to develop young players. It's a great way to tank to increase lottery odds (how'd that turn out?), but perhaps not the best way to develop talent and evaluate whether the youngsters have a role and what that role is, whether central or supporting. I can't believe I'm saying this, but it's kind of along the same lines of Locke's "over dipped Oreo cookie" theory.

Anyway, I'm not sure this is anything new or profound, but it's a slow morning, and I'm putting off doing something I need to do but don't really want to. (Posting on boards is an effective procrastination method.)
Click to expand...
We arent in the business of developing quality role players right now. We push a lot on their plates in hopes someone develops into something more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top