What's new
By:
Filters

Is Donovan more likely to leave the Jazz than if he were on a bigger market team?

T

toddychurch

Well-Known Member
I’m confounded by the lack of press coverage and positive attention from the national media about Mitchell’s game. It was the definition of Jordanesque, even in losing the game (the Bulls lost that game where Jordan scored 63).

My son, who listens to a lot of the national sports podcasts, keeps commenting about how there is very little commentary about how great his game was and more about Luka’s game or debating whether Donovan is better than Murray.

This is what worries me with Donovan. I think he’s developing into a great player, like top 10 in the NBA caliber. However, he’s also got a brand and needs to make the most of it while he can and being in Utah may not allow for that just due to the lack of national media attention and “love” we receive compared to other markets.

I hope I’m wrong and he’s more like Duncan, Malone, Stockton, Lillard, Miller and others in their desire to stay with a single team (I know Malone was a Laker at the end) and help that franchise prosper. We can pay him the most, he’ll get millions from shoe deals, but will he get the recognition he deserves and would likely receive in a larger or more “talked about” market ie Philly, NY, LA, Boston, etc?

I think the small market exposure/visibility aspect affects the overall opinion of Stockton and Malone and their careers. If they had been in a larger market with more coverage I would be willing to bet that their “all-time rankings” which I know are subjective, would be higher on most lists.
What do you all think?
 
toddychurch said:
I’m confounded by the lack of press coverage and positive attention from the national media about Mitchell’s game. It was the definition of Jordanesque, even in losing the game (the Bulls lost that game where Jordan scored 63).

My son, who listens to a lot of the national sports podcasts, keeps commenting about how there is very little commentary about how great his game was and more about Luka’s game or debating whether Donovan is better than Murray.

This is what worries me with Donovan. I think he’s developing into a great player, like top 10 in the NBA caliber. However, he’s also got a brand and needs to make the most of it while he can and being in Utah may not allow for that just due to the lack of national media attention and “love” we receive compared to other markets.

I hope I’m wrong and he’s more like Duncan, Malone, Stockton, Lillard, Miller and others in their desire to stay with a single team (I know Malone was a Laker at the end) and help that franchise prosper. We can pay him the most, he’ll get millions from shoe deals, but will he get the recognition he deserves and would likely receive in a larger or more “talked about” market ie Philly, NY, LA, Boston, etc?

I think the small market exposure/visibility aspect affects the overall opinion of Stockton and Malone and their careers. If they had been in a larger market with more coverage I would be willing to bet that their “all-time rankings” which I know are subjective, would be higher on most lists.
What do you all think?
Click to expand...

I'm with you. Donovan doesn't get enough attention. It's ******** actually, but it is what it is.

MJ was coddled and pushed by the NBA because they were desperate for a star when Bird's back was failing and Magic got AIDS. Also add that Nike made thousands of a shoe called the Revolutions then broke copyright law using the Beatles song as an advertisement. Nike was left with thousands of awesome black and red sneakers that ended up going to a guy named Michael in Chicago. The marketing giant started there.

Don just needs to win games. When he beat OKC, he got attention then we lost to Harden. Last year, we lost to Harden again. This year, he'll be an afterthought if we lose to Denver. We gotta win. It's not about market as much as it's about winning AND games like yesterday. It took Dame a long while to get attention and he still doesn't get it as much as he should. Getting attention today is much harder than when the NBA pushed a player more than any other.
 
toddychurch said:
I think the small market exposure/visibility aspect affects the overall opinion of Stockton and Malone and their careers. If they had been in a larger market with more coverage I would be willing to bet that their “all-time rankings” which I know are subjective, would be higher on most lists.
What do you all think?
Click to expand...

Huh? Malone is in every single top 3 PF of all time list I've seen and Stockton is in every top 5-10 PG list I've seen. They had plenty of publicity in the 90's.

The reality is that if Stock/Malone won the chip in either 97 or 98, Malone would likely be the undisputed #1 PF of all time and Stock would solidify himself as a top 3 PG of all time. It's all about winning.
 
If we won the game it would have gotten more attention. Lots of points and a loss is not great news. Lucky his back court gaffe wasn't big news. I've yelled at him through the tv multiple times to get over the line. He has been very close to a violation multiple times.

You'd think a coach would generally want the ball pushed up as fast as possible to give more time for a good shot. With how the Jazz often get into short shot-clock scenarios, you think it would be more emphasized.
 
TheGoldStandard said:
If we won the game it would have gotten more attention. Lots of points and a loss is not great news. Lucky his back court gaffe wasn't big news. I've yelled at him through the tv multiple times to get over the line. He has been very close to a violation multiple times.

You'd think a coach would generally want the ball pushed up as fast as possible to give more time for a good shot. With how the Jazz often get into short shot-clock scenarios, you think it would be more emphasized.
Click to expand...

Not that I disagree in principle with you but .... Luka says "Hi" his team lost and he also had career highs, including for turnovers. However DAL and LA are bigger markets with bigger main stream names so that is a "sexier" match up and game to talk about. Luka vs Kawhi , or Luka vs PG13 and all that.
 
Wouldn't fault KAT for wanting to leave when they brought in Jimmy Butler. Same thing applies to DM when we brought in Conley. If we wanna build a team around DM or at least give him a sense of us wanting to build around him, you don't bring in a guy like Conley. You would wanna give DM the ball and have everyone else out of the way. Like what Dallas did to Luka by getting rid of DSJ. Luka would totally want out of Dallas if Cuban didn't get rid of DSJ. But for us, instead of getting rid of a ball hog who's gonna take the ball out of our superstar's hand, we got rid of half of the team in exchange FOR one.
 
//r00t 4 Jazz said:
Not that I disagree in principle with you but .... Luka says "Hi" his team lost and he also had career highs, including for turnovers. However DAL and LA are bigger markets with bigger main stream names so that is a "sexier" match up and game to talk about. Luka vs Kawhi , or Luka vs PG13 and all that.
Click to expand...

Don't disagree with that at all. But it would have been news if we won. The small market effect and all that.
 
l Abach l said:
Huh? Malone is in every single top 3 PF of all time list I've seen and Stockton is in every top 5-10 PG list I've seen. They had plenty of publicity in the 90's.

The reality is that if Stock/Malone won the chip in either 97 or 98, Malone would likely be the undisputed #1 PF of all time and Stock would solidify himself as a top 3 PG of all time. It's all about winning.
Click to expand...

I agree with you about winning. However, I believe Stockton and Malone’s names would come up more when all-time greats are mentioned if they had played in a market that received more exposure.

For example, I believe Donovan would have been ROY if he’d been in Philly and Simmons was in Utah with the same stats, winning, etc. Why? Because a bunch of the mainstream national NBA pundits are from, cheer for and always talk about Philly. Thus, the 76ers receive more media coverage/exposure from the national NBA audience. We just don’t have that like some of those other markets and I worry Donovan and those who may have the ability to influence him may point that out.

I also believe if Rudy was in amore exposed market he’d be the three time DPOY. Why? Because more people would be talking about how much he influences games, shots, etc.

With all that being said, I hope Donovan and Rudy win like crazy with the Jazz and the NBA and the national media “takes note” and gives them the exposure they deserve and may want/need.
 
jom2003 said:
Wouldn't fault KAT for wanting to leave when they brought in Jimmy Butler. Same thing applies to DM when we brought in Conley. If we wanna build a team around DM or at least give him a sense of us wanting to build around him, you don't bring in a guy like Conley. You would wanna give DM the ball and have everyone else out of the way. Like what Dallas did to Luka by getting rid of DSJ. Luka would totally want out of Dallas if Cuban didn't get rid of DSJ. But for us, instead of getting rid of a ball hog who's gonna take the ball out of our superstar's hand, we got rid of half of the team in exchange FOR one.
Click to expand...
I think a huge part of it is the Jazz didn't want to put too much on Donovan in his 3rd year. They wanted him to develop and learn under Mike for a couple years with the full intention of making him PG once Mike left, and that's still the plan.
 
I think DM might leave for greener pastures at some point but I dont think it will be because of exposure. With todays media I dont think small markets have issues with coverage other than the time zone issues of west coast and east coast which will always. be a problem. If you are winning and you play great you get all of the attention you need, regardless of market.

I do think some people will leave small markets because they like bigger cities, more advertising money, better change to win, etc. And DM might add to that list with his interest in surrounding himself with people who agree with his stand on social issues.
 
oneye said:
I think a huge part of it is the Jazz didn't want to put too much on Donovan in his 3rd year. They wanted him to develop and learn under Mike for a couple years with the full intention of making him PG once Mike left, and that's still the plan.
Click to expand...
well, Luka is only in his second year and Mavs took no time in making him the starting PG.
I think there's a fine line between "developing" and "holding him back". If you keep having someone else handling the ball on the court, how are we supposed to "develop" Mitchell's PG skill? I think at this point everyone have seen enough games of us performing with DM at the point and him playing better as a result(including the 57pt explosion last night). Not sure if there's any more "developing" needed before making "PG-Mitchell" a reality.
AND i'm pretty sure the plan was to "win now", especially with the warrior dynasty being over and championship is very much up for grabs. The challenge for title will only become tougher in the next few years, not easier.
 
Jazz haven't won anything. I don't think Donovan's situation is any different from Damian Lillard's. If Donovan plays like this more and the Jazz win, he's bound to get more recognition.
 
I say he leaves us and we don't supermax Gobert. Sadly we retool and it's for the better because we would have closed the chapter on Conley, rid ourselves of the offensively challenged Gobert and got a more complete player than Donovan. You may think I'm crazy but with the likes of Conley, Gobert and Mitchell we aren't winning anything. We swung for the fences but struck out with Conley, Green and Davis, we overpaid an aging Bojan. Conley will shackle us for many years to come. But let's make the most of this. Just my opinion, some may agree and some will disagree one thing is for certain , our team will not be taken seriously when we have the likes of Niang in our lineup
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top