si article "Can Millsap play SF?"

[GVC]

Here we go again....

Ya well, stats be damned. Millsap was statistically more efficient than Big Al in virtually all scoring situations last season. People see the moves, and forget about the rate of finishing and ability to draw fouls. Big Al is a lot more style than substance, and a whole lotta people here are fooled.

With that said, perhaps if he's really committed himself to getting in shape and playing to contact this summer, and comes back with a chip on his shoulder, he can use those post moves to be a smarter, more efficient offensive player. He certainly has the tools to be better than Millsap scoring the basketball. Hopefully the players and owners reach an agreement (in principle) today.

 

[NotDeadYet]

Big Al was actually quite productive later in the season. Given the unique system he had to learn and new teammates to interact on the court with, perfectly understandable it took him some time to fit in. The next season will tell us where Big Al is a lot more clearly. Millsap, OTOH, isn't ever gonna be a consistant quality starter in the NBA. He could be one of the best 6th men if he committed to that role.

 

[billyshelby]

Big Al was actually quite productive later in the season. Given the unique system he had to learn and new teammates to interact on the court with, perfectly understandable it took him some time to fit in. The next season will tell us where Big Al is a lot more clearly. Millsap, OTOH, isn't ever gonna be a consistant quality starter in the NBA. He could be one of the best 6th men if he committed to that role.

How good was Al in the second half? I forget.

 

[Dr. Jones]

Not calling anyone out, specifically, but most fans are just stat watchers. I mean no offense, but they don't understand the game well enough to see the rest of the picture. I'm 39 years old and have been trying to argue this point(s) for 20+ years to no avail. I'll say it again, though ... there's more (much more) to a player than a boxscore.

 

[InGameStrategy]

Big Al was actually quite productive later in the season on one side of the floor--and that side does not start with "d".

Fixed.

Given the unique system he had to learn and new teammates to interact on the court with, perfectly understandable it took him some time to fit in. The next season will tell us where Big Al is a lot more clearly.

Meanwhile, a team that just added Brendan Haywood and Tyson Chandler last year somehow managed to "learn" quickly enough to log a title. Last time I checked, it takes about 5 minutes to "learn" to move your feet on defense; the details can be filled in with the coaches enforcing the effort and refining things in practice.

 

[Deleted member 848]

Fixed.

Meanwhile, a team that just added Brendan Haywood and Tyson Chandler last year somehow managed to "learn" quickly enough to log a title. Last time I checked, it takes about 5 minutes to "learn" to move your feet on defense; the details can be filled in with the coaches enforcing the effort and refining things in practice.

Care to show some evidence regarding whether Al played good D after the all-star break or not? I honestly have no idea personally, but you could be speaking out of your *** here. And I sort of agree with you, however there are things to keep in mind: first and foremost, I feel like Al has always been told to focus most of his efforts on O(due to him being the sole offensive weapon in his below-mediocre Wolves and Celtics teams), and this was probably one of the first seasons where (potentially) the staff might have let him know that he's been dogging it. Examples of this are the Miami Heat game, a Lakers game, and a few others. I think where the "let him gel for more than a year to become familiar" comments stemmed from is his OFFENSE, because there was obviously a huge shift in offensive systems from a awfully organized triangle to the Jazz Flex-Offense. That is where I give him lee-way. Now, I agree with you in the policy when it comes to benching players who show no effort. How ever, we saw Als blocking go up which I would say is a sign of defensive effort for sure. Rotating in pick and roll situations? Sort of thing that you have to get better with through experience. I think it just comes down to the coaching, and how serious he is about defense. If Corbin takes it seriously, so will Al. If not, then I fear our future.

 

[NotDeadYet]

Exactly, dalamon. I see Al as a guy who does take his coach seriously and will do what's asked of him. After DWill left, anytime Millsap encountered a severe mismatch at PF big Al was our offense. I could be wrong, but I think he will respond to coach Ty's edicts. I think coach used last year to assess what he had and see what worked and didn't work. It'll be interesting to see what changes will be forthcoming for the following years.

 

[billyshelby]

I honestly have no idea what the defensive abilities of our players really are. We had the worst defensive scheme of any team I saw. And that's assuming we had a scheme which I didn't see any evidence of. Jerry's big weakness over the years was that defense to him was fundamental -- keep your man in front of you, sag on every driver from the wing, fight over every screen (even when you shouldn't), the 3 point shot is a low percentage shot. That "scheme", or whatever it was, never changed for any opponent.

What I saw last year was a team that could play about 10 seconds of solid D for every clock. But guys didn't know when to switch, rotations were always poor (constant sag + giving up the 3 will do that), there was never any thought to forcing opposing players into their weaknesses (hey, how bout forcing Zach to go right hand? How bout letting Derek Fisher go one on one if he wants to drive?), the list goes on.

We fell into the old trap. Teams would discombobulate us early in the clock, a few guys would be out of position, and then everybody takes turns looking bad. The good news is we don't have a Boozer who doesn't care. Everybody cares. And Thibodeau has proved definitively there are ways to make even a Boozer work in the top defense in the NBA. We can do that, too, but it has to come from up top. When that happens, I'll be able to say this guy or that guy is a bad defender.

 

[sepanol]

I honestly have no idea what the defensive abilities of our players really are. We had the worst defensive scheme of any team I saw. And that's assuming we had a scheme which I didn't see any evidence of. Jerry's big weakness over the years was that defense to him was fundamental -- keep your man in front of you, sag on every driver from the wing, fight over every screen (even when you shouldn't), the 3 point shot is a low percentage shot. That "scheme", or whatever it was, never changed for any opponent.

What I saw last year was a team that could play about 10 seconds of solid D for every clock. But guys didn't know when to switch, rotations were always poor (constant sag + giving up the 3 will do that), there was never any thought to forcing opposing players into their weaknesses (hey, how bout forcing Zach to go right hand? How bout letting Derek Fisher go one on one if he wants to drive?), the list goes on.

We fell into the old trap. Teams would discombobulate us early in the clock, a few guys would be out of position, and then everybody takes turns looking bad. The good news is we don't have a Boozer who doesn't care. Everybody cares. And Thibodeau has proved definitively there are ways to make even a Boozer work in the top defense in the NBA. We can do that, too, but it has to come from up top. When that happens, I'll be able to say this guy or that guy is a bad defender.

Even thibodeau couldnt make Boozer better defensively by the way, so we must be really lucky that we get rid of him

 

[InGameStrategy]

Care to show some evidence regarding whether Al played good D after the all-star break or not?
I honestly have no idea personally, but you could be speaking out of your *** here. And I sort of agree with you, however there are things to keep in mind: first and foremost, I feel like Al has always been told to focus most of his efforts on O(due to him being the sole offensive weapon in his below-mediocre Wolves and Celtics teams), and this was probably one of the first seasons where (potentially) the staff might have let him know that he's been dogging it.

Well, now Al's a Jazzman, and even though Big Al didn't go to college, it seems to me the he could handle the instruction of playing on both ends of the floor. Not too much to ask. And not too much to enforce, either.

Examples of this are the Miami Heat game, a Lakers game, and a few others. I think where the "let him gel for more than a year to become familiar" comments stemmed from is his OFFENSE, because there was obviously a huge shift in offensive systems from a awfully organized triangle to the Jazz Flex-Offense. That is where I give him lee-way. Now, I agree with you in the policy when it comes to benching players who show no effort. How ever, we saw Als blocking go up which I would say is a sign of defensive effort for sure. Rotating in pick and roll situations? Sort of thing that you have to get better with through experience. I think it just comes down to the coaching, and how serious he is about defense. If Corbin takes it seriously, so will Al. If not, then I fear our future.

Glad you're on board, sort of, but I'm not impressed that his defense went up only if his blocks went up.

I don't recall when the all-star break was, but Big Al's block total stayed about the same (2.1 BP30) between when Sloan was here and when he left (about February 24).

 

[vj_74]

Sloan had nothing much to do with Jazz's defensive struggles. This team just had a bunch of mediocre defenders some of whom lacked in lateral quickness and some of whom were young and clueless. On top of that there was a star player-coach feud going on behind the scenes for the whole season. If your star player doesnt want to run the offense, you can forget him running your defense. It is not going to happen. (Not that Deron was a great defensive player otherwise.He had his own limitations.)

And BTW, Thibodeau has not transformed Boozer into a defense-first player or anything.Their defense is good despite Boozer not because of him. Fortunately they have other options like Noah,Gibson to turn to without losing a lot on offense.

 

[InGameStrategy]

Sloan had nothing much to do with Jazz's defensive struggles. This team just had a bunch of mediocre defenders some of whom lacked in lateral quickness and some of whom were young and clueless. On top of that there was a star player-coach feud going on behind the scenes for the whole season. If your star player doesnt want to run the offense, you can forget him running your defense. It is not going to happen. (Not that Deron was a great defensive player otherwise.He had his own limitations.)

I simply disagree that Sloan is (or any coach) is blameless here, because Boozer himself proved occasionally that he could play some semblance of defense. Although Boozer didn't have good lateral footwork, he could've played better defense most of the time just by putting forth the effort. And I bet you dollars to doughnuts that better footwork wasn't even suggested in practice, much less implemented; and I'd be interested to know how much time they even spent on team defense. But the #1 thing would've to enforce it; namely, bench a player who isn't defending. This could have been done without sacrificing wins, especially in the long run (i.e., across an entire season).

The concept that a coach isn't partially responsible for a team's subpar performance--any more than a manager isn't partially responsible for a department's subpar performance--is puzzling. To do so, you have to prove that the coach did everything reasonable that he could to maximize the team's effort and skill. Only then can you put it on the players for falling short. Not surprisingly, I flatly disagree that Sloan did do all he could--which was poetic irony, given that he was known during his playing career as a tough-nosed defender (and during most of his coaching career as a tough-nosed coach).

And BTW, Thibodeau has not transformed Boozer into a defense-first player or anything.Their defense is good despite Boozer not because of him. Fortunately they have other options like Noah,Gibson to turn to without losing a lot on offense.

Nobody's asking for "defense first." And the fact that Thibodeau was willing to bench Boozer is exactly the strategy that I am recommending for the Jazz. You simply don't keep a player on the court if his defense is being a net liability at a given moment. If he continues to refuse to play defense (or not to be able to be better defense, which I do not think is the case with Boozer or Jefferson), then you evaluate their value against other options. Despite Boozer's scoring prowess, there were times that he was better to be off the floor. Evidently Thibodeau thought the same, even though he probably wasn't successful (yet) in making Boozer a passable defender.

Same goes for Jefferson--especially now, where last year the alternatives might have been better, it's gonna be even more likely this year and next as Kanter and Favors continue to improve that his minutes should not be taken for granted.

 

[Deleted member 848]

Well, now Al's a Jazzman, and even though Big Al didn't go to college, it seems to me the he could handle the instruction of playing on both ends of the floor. Not too much to ask. And not too much to enforce, either.

Glad you're on board, sort of, but I'm not impressed that his defense went up only if his blocks went up.

I don't recall when the all-star break was, but Big Al's block total stayed about the same (2.1 BP30) between when Sloan was here and when he left (about February 24).

You never answered my question, aka the first sentence of the block of text you quoted from me. And I don't think you're getting my point; someone like Gordon Hayward, or Alec Burks are considered bad teams on their respective teams before they come to the nab BECAUSE they are either the first or second offensive option of their teams, and their teams really rely on the on the O end so naturally they will need to save up and relax on defense, and let the other 4 put in effort. And honestly, I think its painfully obvious to everyone that while in Minnesota, Al was probably instructed to focus mostly on filling his stat sheet with 20s and 10s, because his play on defense doesn't seem effortless; its more lack of coordination. It seriously seems like the guy never properly learned how to properly rotate, defend pick and rolls, etcetera. When it comes to stuff like defending his man, defending the post, things that are relatively easy to understand without proper instruction THEN we would expect him to be better, and quite frankly he is among the best in the league in those situations. Get what I'm trying to say?

 

[GVC]

You never answered my question, aka the first sentence of the block of text you quoted from me. And I don't think you're getting my point; someone like Gordon Hayward, or Alec Burks are considered bad teams on their respective teams before they come to the nab BECAUSE they are either the first or second offensive option of their teams, and their teams really rely on the on the O end so naturally they will need to save up and relax on defense, and let the other 4 put in effort. And honestly, I think its painfully obvious to everyone that while in Minnesota, Al was probably instructed to focus mostly on filling his stat sheet with 20s and 10s

This is all fine and dandy, but Al's offense isn't good enough to make up for his poor D. Hopefully that changes.

 

[BYE]

It seriously seems like the guy never properly learned how to properly rotate, defend pick and rolls, etcetera. When it comes to stuff like defending his man, defending the post, things that are relatively easy to understand without proper instruction THEN we would expect him to be better, and quite frankly he is among the best in the league in those situations. Get what I'm trying to say?

I have been wondering for quite some time about Al's defense after I saw an advanced statistics rating system on Al's defense that put him at second among the leagues big men. Al has an extremely good rating on synergy sports (they watch every single play), and you can watch every single defensive play that Al was a part of. He is sometimes slow and lazy but over all he is a very effective defender. One thing I noticed too with Al is that he is constantly helping his teammates on the defensive end. If you don't believe me, then go watch him on synergy. He needs to be a bit more active and close out harder sometimes, but compare his synergy ratings to other players and watch about thirty plays. When you watch him stuff Andrew Bynum twice within four plays, its kind of impressive. The common knock against him is his rotation. I admit that it is not perfect, but its not as horrible as people make it out to be. Watch his plays on synergy and think about the players around him. Most of them have horrible synergy rankings. Fesenko's is quite high on limited minutes. I'm not saying he is perfect, but where can I actually see the evidence for his poor defense. I don't buy the "watch some games" argument because as crime investigators and historians will tell you, the memory is horribly unreliable and highly prone to bias. In short, I don't think Al's a bad defensive player, and the only way to measure and assess this says he is a good defensive player. If anyone has other verifiable evidence that shows otherwise. Let me know. I'd be glad to change my mind.

 

[GVC]

If anyone has other verifiable evidence that shows otherwise. Let me know. I'd be glad to change my mind.

Although lots of people dismiss this evidence, his teams have consistently been better defensively with him off the court than on the court. The Synergy stats say nothing about his transition and team D, only his man D. Basketball is a team game, and especially now with the hand checking rules as they are, defense is a team effort. It's impossible to contain wing players on the perimeter, so bigs have to help. The same can be said about transition D: That's where easy buckets come from.

 

[BYE]

Although lots of people dismiss this evidence, his teams have consistently been better defensively with him off the court than on the court. The Synergy stats say nothing about his transition and team D, only his man D. Basketball is a team game, and especially now with the hand checking rules as they are, defense is a team effort. It's impossible to contain wing players on the perimeter, so bigs have to help. The same can be said about transition D: That's where easy buckets come from.

I understand the transition D thing. But is this Al? Does he not run, is he slow, or does he not understand where to go? Wouldn't this show up on Synergy since these points would count as spot up etc.? As I said, watch a bunch of him defending on Synergy, and you will notice that Al helps a lot. I don't know how to measure this any other way. Team D shows up a little bit in Synergy for instance when it shows him on the ball-handler in pick and rolls. Also, what's the stat that you are using to show that his teams are better defensively when he is off the floor? I don't know of one. All I know of is the +/-, which could be attributed to his less than perfectly efficient offense or skewed figures based off of rotation. Once again. He's not my dad, so I don't have any personal reason to say he's a solid defender--just trying to be objective with what I know and can prove. I also think he turns his effort on and off too much.

 

[GVC]

I understand the transition D thing. But is this Al? Does he not run, is he slow, or does he not understand where to go? Wouldn't this show up on Synergy since these points would count as spot up etc.? As I said, watch a bunch of him defending on Synergy, and you will notice that Al helps a lot. I don't know how to measure this any other way. Team D shows up a little bit in Synergy for instance when it shows him on the ball-handler in pick and rolls. Also, what's the stat that you are using to show that his teams are better defensively when he is off the floor? I don't know of one. All I know of is the +/-, which could be attributed to his less than perfectly efficient offense or skewed figures based off of rotation. Once again. He's not my dad, so I don't have any personal reason to say he's a solid defender--just trying to be objective with what I know and can prove. I also think he turns his effort on and off too much.

I don't have a problem with you having a different opinion, I just don't agree. To me, Al has a classic case of tunnel-vision on the basketball court. On offense he sees the ball and the basket, on defense he sees his man. There's a lot more going on out there that he needs to account for, and he's just not very good at that IMO, and that's a pretty big deal in a team sport like basketball.

 

[InGameStrategy]

You never answered my question, aka the first sentence of the block of text you quoted from me.

No I didn't; my evidence is just based on viewing experience here. Similarly, you didn't provide any evidence that your claim was true.

And you said it first.

And I don't think you're getting my point; someone like Gordon Hayward, or Alec Burks are considered bad teams on their respective teams before they come to the nab BECAUSE they are either the first or second offensive option of their teams, and their teams really rely on the on the O end so naturally they will need to save up and relax on defense, and let the other 4 put in effort.

Burks and Hayward don't play the "Jimmer" role anymore (being first choice on O, kicking back on D), but I simply don't subscribe to the philosophy that players should be allowed to take it easy on defense in order to have energy on offense--especially not to the extent that the likes of Boozer did. And the notion that the likes of Sloan would let players get away with such subpar effort continues to amaze me to this day. The latest "evidence" that such a strategy doesn't work is the 2010-2011 Jazz season.

And honestly, I think its painfully obvious to everyone that while in Minnesota, Al was probably instructed to focus mostly on filling his stat sheet with 20s and 10s, because his play on defense doesn't seem effortless; its more lack of coordination.

So what? What happens in Minneapolis stays in Minneapolis. And I don't know what to make of your double negative. Even I will acknowledge that AJ's D isn't nonexistent.

He's here now, and it takes about 5 minutes to tell a player to play D and for him to show whether he's putting forth the effort. It takes longer to learn to play effective D, but he's been here a year, and neither the effort nor the defensive skill advancement are convincing. Positive, but not convincing.

It seriously seems like the guy never properly learned how to properly rotate, defend pick and rolls, etcetera. When it comes to stuff like defending his man, defending the post, things that are relatively easy to understand without proper instruction THEN we would expect him to be better, and quite frankly he is among the best in the league in those situations. Get what I'm trying to say?

No I don't, because I question how much time is being spent with him in practice on it. As the season record showed, any strategy--conscious or unconscious--to merely improve his offense was not sufficient. Certainly other players were part of the problem (and potential solution), but the center especially needs to be the one who sets the defensive tone. AJ didn't, and there were backup options that did--for a few minutes at a time, which was all that would have been reasonably expected for them to play, in order to shore up the middle and to show Jefferson that his minutes weren't guaranteed if he was going to dog it. Not clear where Corbin sits on such a philosophy, but it wouldn't be hard to implement a more aggressive approach than Sloan paradoxically did in his last years.

 

[Deleted member 848]

No I didn't; my evidence is just based on viewing experience here. Similarly, you didn't provide any evidence that your claim was true.

And you said it first.

Burks and Hayward don't play the "Jimmer" role anymore (being first choice on O, kicking back on D), but I simply don't subscribe to the philosophy that players should be allowed to take it easy on defense in order to have energy on offense--especially not to the extent that the likes of Boozer did. And the notion that the likes of Sloan would let players get away with such subpar effort continues to amaze me to this day. The latest "evidence" that such a strategy doesn't work is the 2010-2011 Jazz season.

So what? What happens in Minneapolis stays in Minneapolis. And I don't know what to make of your double negative. Even I will acknowledge that AJ's D isn't nonexistent.

He's here now, and it takes about 5 minutes to tell a player to play D and for him to show whether he's putting forth the effort. It takes longer to learn to play effective D, but he's been here a year, and neither the effort nor the defensive skill advancement are convincing. Positive, but not convincing.

No I don't, because I question how much time is being spent with him in practice on it. As the season record showed, any strategy--conscious or unconscious--to merely improve his offense was not sufficient. Certainly other players were part of the problem (and potential solution), but the center especially needs to be the one who sets the defensive tone. AJ didn't, and there were backup options that did--for a few minutes at a time, which was all that would have been reasonably expected for them to play, in order to shore up the middle and to show Jefferson that his minutes weren't guaranteed if he was going to dog it. Not clear where Corbin sits on such a philosophy, but it wouldn't be hard to implement a more aggressive approach than Sloan paradoxically did in his last years.

So you restate several times that he has not shown improvement on defense, and when I ask you to prove it, you say that your evidence is "based on viewing evidence", because you have no facts to prove it.

Sorry pal, but no dice for you. You trying to prove Al never improved from what "you saw" is like trying to lay the foundations of a sky-riser using silly-putty. And really, your response to my point really seems to be directed more towards Sloans/ Minnesota's crappy coaching than to my super-awesomely-accurate explanations.