What the "H" are the Jazz doing?

Post by **SpiffCoug** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 6:23 am

It's also not entirely fair to compare managing the team in the 80s to 10s. The NBA is very different from what it was. Free agency has changed everything. The Jazz were extremely fortunate to be able to draft Stockton and Malone and were very fortunate that the current NBA CBA wasn't in place or else the Jazz may have discovered 20 years earlier how difficult it is for a very small market team to hold on to their best players.

Brayden Green · Post by **Brayden Green** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 10:59 am

I see what you are saying Schmoe, but the Jazz haven't been serious contenders for years now, no matter how many times they have been making the playoffs.

I want my professional teams to win, and I want them to want to win. The Jazz clearly have wiped that agenda clean off their slate, and have for some time.

Larry and Jerry were great back in the day. But since the mid-90's the Jazz haven't been serious contenders for years and years. It seems they are content to be one and done's. Now they are going to be lucky if they even get back to that. Other organizations are widening the gap in the West, and the Jazz aren't going to be able to compete for a long time.

As teams like the Jazz and Suns fade into non-existence, teams like the Thunder and the Spurs are not only building for the future, but winning right now. (Seriously, can you find two better small market organizations than these two? What they are doing/have been doing, is scary-impressive.)

And as "small market" as you claim the Jazz to be, they are the only thing going on around here, so like I mentioned, they have year in and year out top 10 best attendance in the league. Top 5 some years... And if you take out Sunday games out of the equation, I would say they are some of the best attended and most loyal fans around.

stuckinbig10country · Post by **stuckinbig10country** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 3:18 pm

BlueIsBetter wrote:I see what you are saying Schmoe, but the Jazz haven't been serious contenders for years now, no matter how many times they have been making the playoffs.

I want my professional teams to win, and I want them to want to win. The Jazz clearly have wiped that agenda clean off their slate, and have for some time.

Larry and Jerry were great back in the day. But since the mid-90's the Jazz haven't been serious contenders for years and years. It seems they are content to be one and done's. Now they are going to be lucky if they even get back to that. Other organizations are widening the gap in the West, and the Jazz aren't going to be able to compete for a long time.

As teams like the Jazz and Suns fade into non-existence, teams like the Thunder and the Spurs are not only building for the future, but winning right now. (Seriously, can you find two better small market organizations than these two? What they are doing/have been doing, is scary-impressive.)

And as "small market" as you claim the Jazz to be, they are the only thing going on around here, so like I mentioned, they have year in and year out top 10 best attendance in the league. Top 5 some years... And if you take out Sunday games out of the equation, I would say they are some of the best attended and most loyal fans around.

And the key to these two franchises success (Spurs and Thunder) has been winning the lottery out of position. The Spurs were the last team to make it into the lottery the year that they got the number one pick and drafted Duncan. That is the reason why the NBA changed the lottery process from each team having balls in the hopper (one for the Spurs, two for the next team in line, etc.) to teams getting a group of numbers out of 1000 random numbers (I think it's 1000). The team with the worst record has 25% of those random numbers.

Well, lightning struck again when Seattle/OKC won the lottery. They weren't the team with the best record in the lottery, but they jumped from something like 9th to 2nd. Then they lucked out again when Portland (who also jumped that year) selected the often injured Oden with the first pick. Then they sucked for a year (a lot of that due to coaching) and picked up Westbrook. Then they lucked out again and Durrant decides to sign the max extension instead of doing a Lebron/Carmello/Bosh/Williams deal. We'll see if Westbrook does the same. Also, unlike the Jazz, they know how to draft complimentary players to surround the two superstars.

You know the similarity between the two clubs: the GM of the Thunder used to be in the Spurs organization.

Schmoe · Post by **Schmoe** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 3:56 pm

I don't see how the Spurs are "building for the future." They have a bunch of really old players, the difference is that the players are team guys who listen to their coach (the same coach they've had for quite awhile now).

Brayden Green · Post by **Brayden Green** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 6:28 pm

"spurs are a bunch of old guys"... - I'm not sure if you've watched much of the NBA this year, But those "old guys" only play half the game anymore. George Hill, Gary Neal, DeJuan Blair, James Anderson, and Thiago Splitter. Those 2nd teamers would beat the jazz current day roster 1st teamers. I can promise you that. And none of these guys were before the 25th pick. And the "superstar old guys" one was the 28th pick (parker) and one was the 57th pick (ginobili).

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Schmoe · Post by **Schmoe** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 7:02 pm

I hear what you're saying, but that team is a sub-.500 team without their big (old) three, and me (5'9") and four short friends could beat the jazz current day roster 1st teamers.

Post by **snoscythe** » Tue Apr 05, 2011 7:30 am

From 1983-1986, the Jazz made the following first round draft picks:

#7= Thurl Bailey
#16= John Stockton
#13= Karl Malone
#15= Dell Curry

Not too shabby to pick those four guys four years in a row.

Now let's review their first round draft history twenty years later, from 2003 to 2006:

#19 Aleksander Pavlovic
#14 Kris Humphries
#16 Kirk Snyder
#3 Derron Williams
#14 Ronnie Brewer

Given that the Jazz were drafting at about the same place in the draft, this is simply UGLY. The only pick that panned out for the Jazz came with Williams, when the Jazz were in a "hard-to-whiff" position in a year where they needed a PG and both Williams and Paul were available.

Small market teams need to build through the draft, and Jazz have pissed away their picks in the draft over the last 10+ years. You either draft the guys who are going to play for you, or you draft the guys you can develop into trade assets. The Jazz simply haven't done that, and they were fortunate to have been able to ride the D-Will train for as long as they have. Right now, their top player/trade-bait is a big guy who was only excited to be here because he wanted Sloan's structure and D-Will promised to make him an All-Star. Whoops.

Schmoe · Post by **Schmoe** » Tue Apr 05, 2011 11:10 am

Ronnie Brewer was a great get, he was the most consistent player on the Jazz and that's why he was paid more money elsewhere.

Post by **snoscythe** » Fri Apr 08, 2011 7:40 pm

Schmoe wrote:Ronnie Brewer was a great get, he was the most consistent player on the Jazz and that's why he was paid more money elsewhere.

Yeah, because when you are picking at #14 you are looking for a guy who can give you 20 quality minutes a game off the bench.....

Schmoe · Post by **Schmoe** » Fri Apr 08, 2011 10:48 pm

Except he averaged 31 minutes a game

CougarCorner

What the "H" are the Jazz doing?

Re: What the "H" are the Jazz doing?

Re: What the "H" are the Jazz doing?

Re: What the "H" are the Jazz doing?

Re: What the "H" are the Jazz doing?

Re: What the "H" are the Jazz doing?

Re: What the "H" are the Jazz doing?

Re: What the "H" are the Jazz doing?

Re: What the "H" are the Jazz doing?

Re: What the "H" are the Jazz doing?

Re: What the "H" are the Jazz doing?

		Apr. 2024
Su	Mo	Tu	We	Th	Fr	Sa
	1	2	3	4	5	6
7	8	9	10	11	12	13
14	15	16	17	18	19	20
21	22	23	24	25	26	27
28	29	30

Connect with your social network account