Could you win with Lauri and Key being your closers?

[HermanG]

Yeah I'm truly surprised is mistook this thread for being about clutch play and the ability to close games when the entirety of the thread and discussion is about clutch stats and performance.

My thoughts on clutch stats are that they don't have much predictive power in terms of winning playoff games or even winning future clutch games, but I'll save those thoughts for an actual thread about clutch play I guess.

HH, Cy, Numberica, Fergie etc just answered the question. Some threw Jokic, Joe Johnson, AJ and other stuff around. Only few posts about stats and performance, most of which were from you.

So no the entire thread and discussion is not about "clutch stats and performance". Its much more about whether people believe in Key+Lauri combo which was the goal and the question. Only you missed the memo smart guy.

 

[Tanktastic]

Jalen Brunson won last year's Clutch Award, most points and 51 % FG. This season he's 46th in clutch points, shooting 41 %.

Steph Curry won the year before that, #2 in points and 50 % FG. He's been good last season and this, but not at the top.

De'Aaron Fox won the inaugural trophy, #1 in points and 52 % FG. This year he's 15th in points, shooting 41 %.

Guys like Steph, Jokic, Ant are always going to be at the top or close to that of these stats. Other than that: pretty much meaningless.

 

[NAOS_pt2]

Sure, but not predicated on getting a specific guy. Its about adding talent one way, but how much talent you get to add is in the hands of lord almighty (who may also be known as Adam Silver if you prefer to buy the conspiracies).

If you have a strategy for getting player X in free agency, and you are the Utah Jazz, then what is your success rate at getting that player? It's probably in the same range as tanking and hoping you end up with a pick that will get player Y. Neither are great.

Also, plenty of teams have tanked while dreaming of a specific guy. Take a walk in San Antonio, for one of many examples.

 

[NAOS_pt2]

HH, Cy, Numberica, Fergie etc just answered the question. Some threw Jokic, Joe Johnson, AJ and other stuff around. Only few posts about stats and performance, most of which were from you.

So no the entire thread and discussion is not about "clutch stats and performance". Its much more about whether people believe in Key+Lauri combo which was the goal and the question. Only you missed the memo smart guy.

this dude only bends the knee for HH (since he desperately craves to be acknowledged by him). Everybody else gets le douche.

 

[KqWIN]

this dude only bends the knee for HH (since he desperately craves to be acknowledged by him). Everybody else gets le douche.

You gossip about users more than you talk about basketball. Why are you writing fan fic.

 

[HermanG]

If you have a strategy for getting player X in free agency, and you are the Utah Jazz, then what is your success rate at getting that player? It's probably in the same range as tanking and hoping you end up with a pick that will get player Y. Neither are great.

Also, plenty of teams have tanked while dreaming of a specific guy. Take a walk in San Antonio, for one of many examples.

I think in the free agent/trade market is much more about opportunism and putting correct values on guys than it is about getting a specific guy. They are looking at everyone who is possibly available and creating shortlists on their targets but even then there is a limit to what they would pay for each of them.

With draft they use a similar logic. They scout X amount of players more closely than other because they assume those are the guys who are in play for their pick, and then they prioritize those guys. Few years ago Cam Whitmore fell and I read a few stories about teams in the 12-19 range who hadnt even properly scouted him because he was supposed to be off the boards at that point. None of them pulled the trigger until the table turned back to Houston who had scouted him properly because they also had a high pick in that same draft.

The lesson there is at least those teams who said "we will pass on him because we didnt scout him" are teams who trusted what they knew and opted not to take a shot in the dark even if the guy who fell was higher on their initial boards than the guy who they picked. Just "going for a guy" in draft when you know lottery oods work against you goes against that idea.

 

[Miggs]

Of course. The question is how much? 40 games? 50? 60?????

 

[JazzFever]

All clutch stats (however you define clutch) are pretty much variance and noise. One year's clutch leaders has almost no correlation to the next.

"Clutch" does exist. One team is trying to slow it down, the other to speed it up. Lots of fouling, both teams possibly in the penalty etc.

Evaluating those moments by points scored or percentages just tells you 1) which team has been in most game situations defined as clutch 2) whose usage rates are the highest.

Trying to give Lauri the ball in static situations is a bad play, pretty much always. He's not that type of "clutch", at all. Giving him the ball on the move or catch & shoots when down or tied is a wonderful play and he's extremely "clutch" then. The team just need to recognize those situations better - and possibly get some plays that work for Lauri even when Keyonte has just dribbled the shot clock down to <10 sec. And if Hardy solves that, then Keyonte will be clutch as well, because he can drive and c&s pretty clutch also.

And then we just need some much more reliable corner 3 shooters.

I think you definitely have players that AREN’T clutch like Mitchell, and some that consistently are, like Jokic, but there is going to be large variability with the mass of players. It will be interesting to see if Keyonte can be one of the reliable ones over the course of multiple seasons.

 

[LogGrad98]

I think you definitely have players that AREN’T clutch like Mitchell, and some that consistently are, like Jokic, but there is going to be large variability with the mass of players. It will be interesting to see if Keyonte can be one of the reliable ones over the course of multiple seasons.

To me the defining trait of a clutch closer is their ability to remain cool and just play their game in the heat of the moment. Players like Mitchell I think key themselves up and push themselves to "be the man", while a guy like Jokic realizes he has been here before and he has confidence in his game in general so he knows he will make the right play at the right time, so he plays within the concept that brought him success again and again. I know in my playing days I tended to be a good "last shot" guy because I had a great coach that taught us that it is just another shot, no different in mechanics and execution than a practice shot and just to realize we are running drills out there. None of this "it's your shot, Jimmy, it's all on you" and then Jimmy with "I'll make it" crap. Just go out, run the drill, take the shot. Mitchell tries to be Jimmy, set your jaw, take the shot of your life. Jokic just tries to be Jokic, set the play, run the drill, take the shot, just like in practice, just like he has done a thousand times at the end of a shot clock or a quarter, no different. I think that is a big part of what separates clutch players from the rest.