ESPN "Insider's" suggested Celtics/Jazz trade.......

[countrybama24]

But you are making the assumption you can do better without knowing how you could use those resources.

Well I rule at everything I do, so I think it's a pretty safe assumption.

However my point wasn't to debate about my qualifications, it was to disparage the opinion that our GM is a superhuman basketball genius immune to mistakes, criticism and in general, human fallibility. He's just some dude who has been around basketball a long time, not a magician. No different than any of us. Sure, is he better than 95% of the general population? Undoubtedly. Is one allowed to believe they are in that 5% who might do better? Absolutely. Authority figures are no different than regular people. That's all I'm trying to say.

[Neon Black]

But you are making the assumption you can do better without knowing how you could use those resources.

Well I rule at everything I do, so I think it's a pretty safe assumption.

However my point wasn't to debate about my qualifications, it was to disparage the opinion that our GM is a superhuman basketball genius immune to mistakes, criticism and in general, human fallibility. He's just some dude who has been around basketball a long time, not a magician. No different than any of us. Sure, is he better than 95% of the general population? Undoubtedly. Is one allowed to believe they are in that 5% who might do better? Absolutely. Authority figures are no different than regular people. That's all I'm trying to say.

Talk about putting words in my mouth. You ignored the brunt of my argument by creating some ridiculous hyperbole and attributing it to me. That's the definition of a straw man argument.

I am really tired of making this argument to people who have already made their minds up. From a purely statistical standpoint, the Jazz have been one of the best drafting, best managed organizations in league history. We can't buy entire teams like L.A. We have to build through patience. I'm not putting anyone on a pedestal. I'm simply saying look at their track record. It's not only better than your made-up stats of 95% of the population, but it's a hell of a lot better than a large majority of other league front offices.

We have a whole slew of young guys that we shouldn't have on this roster. Amazing assets and a bright future. One or both of Millsap+Jefferson will be traded or expire, and they'll get their time to shine. Stop being so fickle and hard to please. Building the best possible team is infinitely more complicated than having a few phone numbers and making a few trades.

Now if you want to talk about why the hell Gordon isn't getting more of Foye's minutes, I'm all ears.

[StocktonShorts]

. From a purely statistical standpoint, the Jazz have been one of the best drafting, best managed organizations in league history.

I'm very interested to see the stats you're using to make this assertion.

[Neon Black]

http://www.82games.com/bestdraftingteams.htm

Not a perfect system but one of the few analyses that exist in the first place. Jazz are top 1/3 in the league, and that's rewarding teams that acquired picks via trade. Teams that have higher picks and used them to get stars also are typically ranked higher; the system used adjusts a little for that based on "expectation" but not wholly.

Now, take into account that Utah had more success from '89-'08 than SIX of the teams ahead of them on that list.

http://aol.sportingnews.com/nba/story/2012-06-27/nba-draft-2012-new-analysis-breakdown-best-worst-picks

Touches on how great of a pick Millsap really was. We all know that yet still take it for granted. Then there's Mo Williams, one of only 2 second-round picks to reach the all-star game in the last decade (the fact that it was w/ the Cavs is a moot point, it doesn't detract from the value of the original pick).

Not all of it is statistical, maybe a made a mistake in using that term, but it's logical. There are two factors that converge to make it very difficult for Utah to remain competitive year after year:

1. We're a small, unnatractive market. We've never been able to easily buy players like the Lakers or Celtics.
2. We've been too good to get high draft picks

So we can't just get whoever in free agency, and we can't lean on the draft. Yet still, we make the playoffs most years, as well as the WCF's and even the finals twice. We do so not only by making the most out of our draft picks and making rare but smart moves in free agency, but by trying to acquire players that will actually stay here. Stockton and Malone. Hopefully Hayward and Favors.

Maybe I'm in the minority for thinking the Deron trade was absolutely genius and a gutsy move. There have definitely been mistakes...but most NBA teams have equal or worse blemishes on their records. It's mostly a crapshoot.

I don't know how much a factor Dennis Lindsey was in determining what the Spurs did, but you can't really call into question their methods or results, either.

[red4hf]

http://www.82games.com/bestdraftingteams.htm

Not a perfect system but one of the few analyses that exist in the first place. Jazz are top 1/3 in the league, and that's rewarding teams that acquired picks via trade. Teams that have higher picks and used them to get stars also are typically ranked higher; the system used adjusts a little for that based on "expectation" but not wholly.

Now, take into account that Utah had more success from '89-'08 than SIX of the teams ahead of them on that list.

http://aol.sportingnews.com/nba/story/2012-06-27/nba-draft-2012-new-analysis-breakdown-best-worst-picks

Touches on how great of a pick Millsap really was. We all know that yet still take it for granted. Then there's Mo Williams, one of only 2 second-round picks to reach the all-star game in the last decade (the fact that it was w/ the Cavs is a moot point, it doesn't detract from the value of the original pick).

Not all of it is statistical, maybe a made a mistake in using that term, but it's logical. There are two factors that converge to make it very difficult for Utah to remain competitive year after year:

1. We're a small, unnatractive market. We've never been able to easily buy players like the Lakers or Celtics.
2. We've been too good to get high draft picks

So we can't just get whoever in free agency, and we can't lean on the draft. Yet still, we make the playoffs most years, as well as the WCF's and even the finals twice. We do so not only by making the most out of our draft picks and making rare but smart moves in free agency, but by trying to acquire players that will actually stay here. Stockton and Malone. Hopefully Hayward and Favors.

Maybe I'm in the minority for thinking the Deron trade was absolutely genius and a gutsy move. There have definitely been mistakes...but most NBA teams have equal or worse blemishes on their records. It's mostly a crapshoot.

I don't know how much a factor Dennis Lindsey was in determining what the Spurs did, but you can't really call into question their methods or results, either.

With all due respect, the fact that the Jazz let Mo Williams walk on a ridiculously low contract, 2 year $3.4 million, should be considered against the Jazz management just as much as drafting him in the first place should be considered in favor.......

P.S. I loved the Deron pick.......

[countrybama24]

Talk about putting words in my mouth. You ignored the brunt of my argument by creating some ridiculous hyperbole and attributing it to me. That's the definition of a straw man argument.

I am really tired of making this argument to people who have already made their minds up. From a purely statistical standpoint, the Jazz have been one of the best drafting, best managed organizations in league history. We can't buy entire teams like L.A. We have to build through patience. I'm not putting anyone on a pedestal. I'm simply saying look at their track record. It's not only better than your made-up stats of 95% of the population, but it's a hell of a lot better than a large majority of other league front offices.

We have a whole slew of young guys that we shouldn't have on this roster. Amazing assets and a bright future. One or both of Millsap+Jefferson will be traded or expire, and they'll get their time to shine. Stop being so fickle and hard to please. Building the best possible team is infinitely more complicated than having a few phone numbers and making a few trades.

Now if you want to talk about why the hell Gordon isn't getting more of Foye's minutes, I'm all ears.

KOCs great. I'd be better. The problem is ownership, not KOC. Are we good now?

[erudite23]

All that does is cancel out the stroke of genius that was our drafting him in the first place. As far as I'm concerned, Milwaukee gets credit for Mo Williams, not the Jazz.


Still, the Jazz have been as good as any team in the league at turning low value picks/moves to find or develop very good players. But at the end of the day, that ability is only important if you have a championship core to build around. Otherwise it just takes you from mediocre to good instead of from good to great.

Unless and until we get a core that includes at least one legitimately great player, we are just one of the also-rans. But that's fine by ownership, because at least that will pay the bills. The risk involved in getting bad enough to get one of those players is not worth it to our FO and our ownership group. So, instead we fight for the 8th seed and hope that Favors develops a jumpshot and any type of post move, or that Kanter learns to stop moving on screens and stop shuffling his feet, but we don't give them the repetitions to create that growth.

So, yeah, good talk. Welcome to 2013.

[Neon Black]

Talk about putting words in my mouth. You ignored the brunt of my argument by creating some ridiculous hyperbole and attributing it to me. That's the definition of a straw man argument.

I am really tired of making this argument to people who have already made their minds up. From a purely statistical standpoint, the Jazz have been one of the best drafting, best managed organizations in league history. We can't buy entire teams like L.A. We have to build through patience. I'm not putting anyone on a pedestal. I'm simply saying look at their track record. It's not only better than your made-up stats of 95% of the population, but it's a hell of a lot better than a large majority of other league front offices.

We have a whole slew of young guys that we shouldn't have on this roster. Amazing assets and a bright future. One or both of Millsap+Jefferson will be traded or expire, and they'll get their time to shine. Stop being so fickle and hard to please. Building the best possible team is infinitely more complicated than having a few phone numbers and making a few trades.

Now if you want to talk about why the hell Gordon isn't getting more of Foye's minutes, I'm all ears.

KOCs great. I'd be better. The problem is ownership, not KOC. Are we good now?

I'm not a Greg Miller fan at all...although I don't think he interferes much with the Jazz. He's nothing like Larry was.

[red4hf]

All that does is cancel out the stroke of genius that was our drafting him in the first place. As far as I'm concerned, Milwaukee gets credit for Mo Williams, not the Jazz.


Still, the Jazz have been as good as any team in the league at turning low value picks/moves to find or develop very good players. But at the end of the day, that ability is only important if you have a championship core to build around. Otherwise it just takes you from mediocre to good instead of from good to great.

Unless and until we get a core that includes at least one legitimately great player, we are just one of the also-rans. But that's fine by ownership, because at least that will pay the bills. The risk involved in getting bad enough to get one of those players is not worth it to our FO and our ownership group. So, instead we fight for the 8th seed and hope that Favors develops a jumpshot and any type of post move, or that Kanter learns to stop moving on screens and stop shuffling his feet, but we don't give them the repetitions to create that growth.

So, yeah, good talk. Welcome to 2013.

I think with 35 minutes a game Favors would be that guy...... He's averaging 15 and 10 with 2.5 blocks right now per 36 minutes...... And that's playing with a poor second unit and few touches on offense......

[Neon Black]

You know what would help? A point guard that could get Favors the ball. Where do you buy one of those?

[Ruckusmh]

I think Favors would look much better just playing more minutes with Mo or Tinsley. I don't really even think we need a GREAT pg for Favors to be pretty good, just replacing Earl with someone mediocre would make the whole second unit look 100x better.

[UrbanLegend]

Why would Utah want Pierce at this stage in his career? Makes zero sense.

Stop putting them on a pedestal just because of their job title. I am smarter than both of them, and I would get the Jazz closer to a championship. But that's not their mandate, which is just to make money. What the Millers don't realize is the difference in profitability isn't THAT much if you took two years off to build a real championship core over the long term, but hey, hope that extra $5M over a 10 year period is worth depriving your fan base of a genuine contender. Screw the real fans, let them watch this sham of a team.

I hope you're being sarcastic, some Jazz fans thought that they should have drafted that byu guy... now those armchair GM's were pretty smart, eh? Hilarious.

[countrybama24]

I hope you're being sarcastic, some Jazz fans thought that they should have drafted that byu guy... now those armchair GM's were pretty smart, eh? Hilarious.

And they would have been awful GMs. I could not have been more against drafting Jimmer, because I wouldn't draft players who can't guard anyone. That philosophy, combined with my inherent genius, would make me a fantastic GM.

You know what would help? A point guard that could get Favors the ball. Where do you buy one of those?

They raffle them off actually. Seems like lottery teams have a better shot than 8th seeds.