Oh so many things I could respond to, GVC.
OK...It would have been nice if you responded to the two non-rhetorical questions I asked.
But in your love for Corbin (are you and franklin the same person?)
1. It seems you've caught what write4u has. I wasn't aware that paranoid schizophrenia is communicable, let alone over the internet.
2. I was never a big Corbin fan, and had absolutely no problem with him being let go.
3. This black-and-white, lover/hater ******** is a scourge.
You are part of the problem.
you ignored the most relevant and took some of my statements completely out of context. Until injuries to Favors and then late in the season, Corbin did NOT start Burke and Kanter together. My statement directly related to the the early games and I showed you exactly when Kanter was benched and Trey took over as the starter.
Uh...I quoted your whole damn post. I literally left in all the context. It's good practice to both be precise in one's arguments/statements and to take things at face value; it leads to fewer misunderstandings/misinterpretations.
Scapegoating is precisely making a lineup change and benching certain players.
1. So...you're answering my direct question about every lineup change representing a scapegoating of a player in the affirmative?
2. In my understanding, scapegoating requires intent. Do you actually think Corbin moved Kanter to the bench to focus blame on him for the poor start? Is that more reasonable than concluding that Corbin decided to make a single lineup change that he thought might work, and then stick with it when it seemed to be working? Before making the lineup change, Ty talked about spacing, and the need to give both bigs an opportunity to attack, while also providing players and the team an opportunity to win/succeed:
LINK.
Keep in mind, Kanter and Favors were playing with the same teammates before the lineup change was made, and the team was far better when the two played apart than when they played together.
On-court per48 team stats through 23 November 2013 last season:
With Kanter and Favors: 306 minutes, 85.2-104.3 (-19.1)
With Favors on and Kanter off: 174 minutes, 91.0-95.4 (-4.4)
With Kanter on and Favors off: 150 minutes, 92.8-106.2 (-13.4)
And instead of isolating one problem (the terrible PG's), Corbin changed both the PG's AND Kanter. There is NO WAY to isolate a problem when you change two variables. Although I use the term "decent" PG lossely when it comes to Burke, we never had the chance to see Kanter start with Trey until either Favors was hurt or late in the season when the "core5" finally had some time to play together. Many of those 23 starts are irrelevant because they came with Favors out of the lineup. That changes the dynamics of the starting group.
Are you advocating for a lame-duck coach trying multiple lineup permutations to better isolate the "problem" with his team? Seriously? Ty wasn't trying to isolate a problem, he was trying to put his players in a position to succeed and win games. Ty had observed Marvin and Trey off the bench with different lineups for 8 and 2 games respectively, and thought it was time for a change after a 1-12 start. He made a change that made sense given the team's struggles, it seemed to work, so he stuck with it. I see no reason to inject a conspiratorial Ty-as-villain element into an incredibly simple story. You've yet to provide any reasonable justification for doing so. A single link to anything at all would be a good start.
I only brought up the media statements because Corbin did nothing to stick up for his player. Ty could have easily said something about missing Favors, or that most of those games were early in the season when the whole team was playing poorly.
Once again, what did Ty say when asked about Kanter by reporters last season? This reeks of you creating "facts" to support your preferred narrative. One link, that's all.
You and franklin have often stated your belief in Ty as a great player development coach. What I saw from Kanter was a guy whose confidence was completely destroyed. And at this level, the game is as much mental as physical.
1. I don't think I've ever stated that. You have quite the talent for creating self-serving narratives.
2. In this very thread you've suggested that Kanter should be moved to the bench. Several posters on this site have suggested the same thing throughout the season. Would this change represent a scapegoating of Kanter by Quin? Maybe Ty was just ahead of the curve.
3. Related to the above, several posters have advocated moving Alec to the bench to balance the lineup as well.
4. Pace, defense and Enes's role/minutes were 3 of the biggest complaints Jazz fans had about Ty last season (along with what some perceived as a non-existent offensive system):
In 2013/14, the Jazz finished 29th in points allowed per possession and 26th in pace. Enes averaged 26.7 minutes per game. So far in 2014/15, the Jazz are 29th in points allowed per possession and 28th in pace. Enes has averaged 25.2 minutes per game.
Trey, Gordo, Alec, Favs and Kanter have an additional year of experience under their belts. The Jazz also have better depth, especially defensively, swapping Garrett/JLIII/Tinsley, RJ, Marvin and Evans for Exum, Hood, Ingles, Booker and Gobert.
5. Given 2-4, maybe people will start recognizing that Ty wasn't all that bad or that Quin (so far) hasn't been much better.
Ty simply ran out of excuses and was wisely dismissed by Lindsey.
You really are a hateful half-wit.
