What's new
By:

Hardy isn’t the guy for this job. It isn’t working

Will seems to be doing fine. The personnel decisions are coming from the front office. Adding some quality, supportive vets creates the right environment for the young guys to start playing a leading role without being completely on their own. Keyonte and Flip are developing pretty well. Walt has had a few good games too. Walker looked like he took a step before his injury. I think that's the main story this season, along with positioning ourselves for the draft lottery.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
Of course, but Harkless is probably a tank buster so they dont want to play him at this point. I'm guessing (hoping) he will get more minutes when the vets start sitting and they can balance out Harkless's positive play with Cody's negative play.
Click to expand...
We can't have Harkless out there flipping games like he did in Boston. Bring him in next year.
 
Tanktastic said:
Hardy isn't a good coach. His defensive scheme, whatever the hell it's supposed to be, hasn't made an appearance yet and it's year 4.

But "just play all the young guys all the minutes and *develop* them and they'll be great" is just fantasy.

Young guys on teams like OKC end up being the best version of themselves, because they can learn from great players, they're in a good situation, the expectations are realistic and they have to be at they're best in practice and in games to get any minutes.

Young guys on teams like the Jazz end up being crap, because they have none of the above. Not that the material has been given has been all that great to start with it. No-one's developing Cody into anything useful at the NBA level.
Click to expand...
I mean, that is what OKC did though in rebuilding their team. In 2022, not a single player over 24 years old played over 1300 minutes (that's 15 mpg average over 82 games). They played all their young guys and let them figure it out.

Also, all of these critiques are Hardy are also resting on the fact that the Jazz are sitting in the one place they can't sit. Not in the playoffs and not keeping their draft pick. Something has to change. I wouldn't be critical of playing veterans if the Jazz were going to make the playoffs, or if the veterans were helping them tank into a top 5 pick again.
 
He's a great coach. I wonder if some of the choices he makes on playing time are correct though. I think there may be some personality clashes that he could work on. He's also young and developing. Overall its tough to argue he isn't a good coach.

As it relates to being the guy for this job... I think he's very competitive. I think this tanking thing has not been the best for him. I am not sure its great for any good coach tbh. I don't think we can fully judge him based on his last three years but I do have some confidence that the defense will be better once we are out of tank mode.
 
I've seen some discussions on draft twitter about the extent to which a team can affect development and it convinced me that it's much less than we seem to think. What really matters is 1) identifying talent and 2) acquiring talent. I used to believe that a player's situation was crucial to a players development....you know the idea that Kawhi would not become Kawhi unless he went to the Spurs. While I still believe some truth to that, I've started to side with the idea that talent is talent and that will shine through regardless. The special sauce isn't development, it's identifying and acquiring the talent. There are exceptions, of course, but this true in most cases.

So wherever you lie on the "play the young guys" spectrum, I think the effect is fairly muted. If there are gains from more opportunity, it's probably not a ton. And same goes for the possible negative effects. The real development plan for a player like Cody is to just draft someone good like Matas instead. Our current level has less to do with Hardy's development skill/minutes choices and more to do with the the quality of prospect we're giving him.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
I just want him to start getting NBA reps with the ball to see what he can do.
Click to expand...
Honestly he deserves it... so for a guy who hasn't had a real NBA contract I think I'm cool with him showing he belongs and making a living.
 
KqWIN said:
I've seen some discussions on draft twitter about the extent to which a team can affect development and it convinced me that it's much less than we seem to think. What really matters is 1) identifying talent and 2) acquiring talent. I used to believe that a player's situation was crucial to a players development....you know the idea that Kawhi would not become Kawhi unless he went to the Spurs. While I still believe some truth to that, I've started to side with the idea that talent is talent and that will shine through regardless. The special sauce isn't development, it's identifying and acquiring the talent. There are exceptions, of course, but this true in most cases.

So wherever you lie on the "play the young guys" spectrum, I think the effect is fairly muted. If there are gains from more opportunity, it's probably not a ton. And same goes for the possible negative effects. The real development plan for a player like Cody is to just draft someone good like Matas instead. Our current level has less to do with Hardy's development skill/minutes choices and more to do with the the quality of prospect we're giving him.
Click to expand...
I think there is a lot of truth here but also do think NBA reps are important to sifting the wheat from the chaff. Everyone says they see these guys in practice... everyone also says practices are different than games. So I just think they need real NBA minutes and a role.

Like our guy Keon Ellis is getting like 5 minutes a night. He already has proved to be an NBA player. His coach is motivated to win... yet he sits. Like coaches aren't perfect at it. Folks have been shocked with NAW's rise but it started here. Yet his role was inconsistent, and we were playing guys like THT more than him.

So I think the NBA minutes are necessary to see what if any talent is really there. Either way it has tremendous value for us to find out. With a guy like Cody its pretty clear but giving the FO a bigger sample proves it out.

IDK its an imperfect science obviously.
 
Roy_McAvoy said:
I mean, that is what OKC did though in rebuilding their team. In 2022, not a single player over 24 years old played over 1300 minutes (that's 15 mpg average over 82 games). They played all their young guys and let them figure it out.
Click to expand...
Except those guys didn't figure it out. Bunch of them are playing in Serbia, China, in the G etc.

Of course SGA had a stress-free runway to become an MVP level superstar without much pressure.

They hit on a risky pick in Chet (longevity TBD) and made nice acquisitions (Caruso, Hart) and didn't flinch about making someone an extreme role player (Dort).

If the Jazz had anyone who had a chance to be a future Jalen Williams and Hardy was sitting them, I'd be angry. But there isn't one. There's only the Pokusevskis and Bazleys.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
I think there is a lot of truth here but also do think NBA reps are important to sifting the wheat from the chaff. Everyone says they see these guys in practice... everyone also says practices are different than games. So I just think they need real NBA minutes and a role.

Like our guy Keon Ellis is getting like 5 minutes a night. He already has proved to be an NBA player. His coach is motivated to win... yet he sits. Like coaches aren't perfect at it. Folks have been shocked with NAW's rise but it started here. Yet his role was inconsistent, and we were playing guys like THT more than him.

So I think the NBA minutes are necessary to see what if any talent is really there. Either way it has tremendous value for us to find out. With a guy like Cody its pretty clear but giving the FO a bigger sample proves it out.

IDK its an imperfect science obviously.
Click to expand...

I think you're right about minutes being needed to reveal what you have. I'd just say that fits into the talent identification piece and not the player development piece. A good example would be someone like NAW. Do I really think that NAW suddenly developed once he went to another team? Not really, he was probably good/on his way to being good. Our failure wasn't bad development, it's bad talent recognition and the more we played him the more obvious it would have been that he had some talent. It is an art not science and it’s the art of recognizing that a NAW or Ellis is actually good.

Opportunity, accountability, winning culture, losing culture...I am not saying these things don't have an impact. But what makes a good home grown team is finding the good players. And like you said, sometimes you need to give guys PT to determine if they're good or not. More minutes does not necessarily mean more development, but I think it does provide a larger sample size that results in a more informed opinion.

Sometimes the minutes will reveal you have a Poku, sometimes it will reveal you have a Dort or Aaron Wiggins.
 
Last edited:
KqWIN said:
I've seen some discussions on draft twitter about the extent to which a team can affect development and it convinced me that it's much less than we seem to think. What really matters is 1) identifying talent and 2) acquiring talent. I used to believe that a player's situation was crucial to a players development....you know the idea that Kawhi would not become Kawhi unless he went to the Spurs. While I still believe some truth to that, I've started to side with the idea that talent is talent and that will shine through regardless. The special sauce isn't development, it's identifying and acquiring the talent. There are exceptions, of course, but this true in most cases.

So wherever you lie on the "play the young guys" spectrum, I think the effect is fairly muted. If there are gains from more opportunity, it's probably not a ton. And same goes for the possible negative effects. The real development plan for a player like Cody is to just draft someone good like Matas instead. Our current level has less to do with Hardy's development skill/minutes choices and more to do with the the quality of prospect we're giving him.
Click to expand...
Ya I basically made the point the other day that good players are good and players that suck, suck.
Winning culture or losing culture or whatever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top