ESPN predictions.

[Jazzfan12]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/preview20 ... s1011-Jazz


None higher than 4, only one lower than 6. Kind of surprised with all of the analysts picking the Lakers to get the #1 seed considering how hurt they are. The Lakers are still the favorites to the win the title this year probably, and their bench is better, but I can't see Kobe or Bynum playing that well in this regular season and that probably leaves them around the 2 or 3 seed.

[DelaneyRudd]

I feel my quiet confidence is justified this year. Lets just play the games already!!!

[Paper Face]

An average of 3rd in the NW division, and 5th/6th in the West.

Safe to say that the boys at ESPN are sleeping on the Jazz. Hopefully the rest of the League follows suit.

[Ziploc]

Kobe is Kobe, there is no denying what he can do and I hate him more than any other player in the NBA so we can't just discredit him. Lakers are still going to kill everyone because they are so deep even with injuries.

These ESPN predictions are kinda crazy IMO. I have great confidence in us, I know I shouldn't because when ever you get your hopes up about the Jazz you get your hear broken.

[HammerDunk]

I'm not surprised and feel those predictions are quite warranted. We have a pretty new team that hasn't proven a thing together. I would likely rate them similarly if I wasn't a fan.

Let's remember, this team hasn't proven anything yet. Preseason means nothing.

[UTJazzFan_Echo1]

Ya, figured we would get scrubbed going into this year. 3rd in the NW? Seriously? Whateve, let's just play already.

[outerspacefella]

Well... it's not THAT crazy to think the Jazz could finish third. OKC is in the raising, the Blazers are a very good team, Nuggets still have Anthony... and the Jazz still have to prove themselves into the real thing....
I think we can win NW and compete against any team in a seven game series, but I'm not ready yet to decalre this roster going to WCF,....

[erudite23]

Yeah, these predictions are fairly reasonable...except when you consider that the two teams that they are putting in front of us--OKC and POR--haven't proven anything, either. Neither has won a postseason series at any point in the current regime (let alone last year) and both have significant red flags (OKC missed just 4 games due to injury last year--which is good, but that's such an extreme number that its bound to correct itself this year and if it does it could easily result in a worse season than last year--while Portland has a roster loaded with extreme health issues) without having shown anything in the past to prove they are a notch above.

Utah, though its true that Al is new and there will be an adjustment, has won a playoff series 3 out of the last 4 years and has won more games than Portland in 3 of those seasons and more games than OKC in all 4. All of that is with mostly the same guys in place. We lost Matthews (a rookie who played about 25mpg last year...ONE season on the team, its not like we won't be able to adjust to losing the guy since he barely had a cup of coffee here), Kyle Korver (20mpg and a specialist who took as much off the table as he put on it), and Boozer. The first two aren't that big a deal and have been ably replaced. So it comes down to Boozer versus Jefferson. Sure, its a question mark, but given that we played 50 win basketball WITHOUT Boozer for long stretches of time during his stay here, I just don't see it. Utah is the most proven commodity in the division, regardless of the changes. We still have our best player and even without adding Al I think we still win 50 games (provided that Memo gets healthy relatively early in the season).

Remember that while Oden played GREAT basketball before getting injured last year, from an individual perspective, the team was struggling to properly integrate him. They were only 12-8, and went 38-24 after he went out. That's actually an IMPROVEMENT. With Brandon Roy relying heavily on isolation basketball and getting to the bucket to produce at his apex, the presence of Oden at and around the hoop congested things for him and significantly reduced Roy's effectiveness. Oden went down and Roy's game took off. Also part of that issue was the addition of Andre Miller, who can't space the floor and is only effective with the ball in his hands going to the hoop (or posting up). Forcing him to play off ball was a terrible fit next to Roy. Portland had Steve Blake to fall back on, who had played very well at times in the past and was fine with spotting up away from the action and moving the ball around the perimeter or hitting a slasher going through the lane. He's gone and Miller is still there. Joel Pryzbilla, Oden's backup, is also out with injury to start the season, leaving 48 year old Marcus Camby as the ONLY healthy 5 on the roster. What if his game falls off the map? Just a ton of questions there. All this, and I still haven't even brought up the weird **** that's going on in their FO with management and ownership doing queer things and their HC passing on an extension during the off season. I think they have the ability to put together a 55+ win season and have a great year, but it could very easily blow up in their face. More questions there than with us, imo.

OKC is different. They have a rock solid program, with ownership and management on the same page. As good a run franchise as there is in the league, imo. But there are a couple problems. Like, for example, the fact that they don't have a starting caliber NBA big man on the team. At all. Combine that with the unbelievable health that they enjoyed last year--on a team that is very thin from top to bottom--and you can see how things might not be as great as everyone expects. Durant was already a monster last year. How much better can he get? Mostly it should just be details from here on out. I don't think he gets much better. Westbrook might take another leap, granted, but all I can see him doing is taking touches away from KD since he ain't gonna be spacing the floor for others. What that team needs is some sharp shooting wings to space the floor and some big guys to rebound and defend in the paint. I can't see them becoming a true contender until that happens. Aldrich could help, but from what I've seen he's a ways away from being that guy, and they really need an offensive minded guy there, anyway.

I don't think I need to cover Denver. They are a dry field waiting for a match, imo.


I just think that Utah is the safest bet in the division. They'll win 50 games like they always do. They'll execute the offense, get good shots and make people work to beat them. Will they make that leap? I dunno, chances are they won't, and I can see how it would be easier to think that OKC and Portland WOULD before Utah would. But Utah has the most stability and the more proven track record, and a far higher floor than either team, imo. I just think they should be the favorite, and the facts kinda back that up. So does popular sentiment on RealGM, btw, as a thread on the subject yielded more pro-Utah responses than anything else.

[The59Sound]

Kyle Korver (20mpg and a specialist who took as much off the table as he put on it

I don't think that's fair. What did Kyle "take off the table?" Any role player is known for something in particular. No, Kyle didn't have great handles; you always knew what he wanted to do on offense. But he did it, quite successfully, was extremely reliable at the end of games, and -- contrary to some hyperbole -- was generally an average or, at worst, slightly below average defender who gave it all he had despite limited athleticism.

[Ern III]

Kyle Korver (20mpg and a specialist who took as much off the table as he put on it

I don't think that's fair. What did Kyle "take off the table?" Any role player is known for something in particular. No, Kyle didn't have great handles; you always knew what he wanted to do on offense. But he did it, quite successfully, was extremely reliable at the end of games, and -- contrary to some hyperbole -- was generally an average or, at worst, slightly below average defender who gave it all he had despite limited athleticism.

While he was highly accomplished in his role, I would suggest that the fact that Korver played only 18mpg - about half of the minutes someone adjudged an all-positive player might contribute - illustrates what erudite23 might have meant. He took "off the table" the capacity to play more than 18mpg without it costing the team. Just redefined a role player, is all.

[erudite23]

Kyle Korver (20mpg and a specialist who took as much off the table as he put on it

I don't think that's fair. What did Kyle "take off the table?" Any role player is known for something in particular. No, Kyle didn't have great handles; you always knew what he wanted to do on offense. But he did it, quite successfully, was extremely reliable at the end of games, and -- contrary to some hyperbole -- was generally an average or, at worst, slightly below average defender who gave it all he had despite limited athleticism.

No, the dude just didn't do certain things. He couldn't dribble a lick and hurt you defensively to a large degree. Not just that, but it seemed like he was more temperamental than even the typical shooter. More than anything, he was the type of guy that you could only have on the court for so long before he did/failed to do something that made you scream "get him out of the damn game!" Raja isn't that type of player. He might no longer be capable of playing big minutes, but he doesn't have the limitations that keep you from having him on the floor that long. He can guard his position as well or better than 90% of all NBA SGs, he hits his open shots, he's tough minded, he's a leader and he does his job. Kyle....wasn't that stuff. The only thing he had on Raja was rebounding (and the occasional shot block).

I liked him a lot, but I'm getting REALLY sick of hearing people talk about how much his loss is going to hurt us without even acknowledging the addition of Raja (who has been every bit as good a 3 pt marksman as Kyle during his career). No disrespect to Kyle, but he was a role player who we have replaced. Good luck and happy hunting.

[carrottop12]

I don't think I need to cover Denver. They are a dry field waiting for a match, imo.

I'm pretty sure that match hit the field last season around game 6 of the first round.

Melo wants out.
Karl career is teetering on being over.
2 of the 3 bigs are starting the season injured, one of them who is constantly plagued by injures.
Their star PG is in his twilight years and isn't getting better.

[The59Sound]

The trade isn't Bell for Korver; it's Bell for Matthews. And though I love Hayward, and he's a far more versatile player than Korver, he can't shoot like Kyle. One can definitely argue that we can get by without someone replacing Kyle's role as sharpshooter, but the fact remains that no one's filled that void.

Plus, I think you're being too hard on Kyle's defense. He wasn't as atrocious, in my opinion, as many proclaim in that regard. Again, Bell is a much, much better defender than Korver obviously, but that's not who he replaced; he replaced Wes Matthews.

[Ming Kong!]

Our center is MUCH improved with Jefferson able to play the position, Fes is much improved, and I'll take Elson over Koufos. Okur's effectiveness after injury is too be seen, but there isn't much we could of done to prevent this one.

PF, sort of a wash. To fill in Boozer's minutes, Kirilenko will get some PT at the 4, Evans will get a few minutes, Jefferson will obviously get playing time at the 4, likely starting, and ofcourse Millsap, who could earn the starting role for the year.

SF, here we might be weaker, Korver, Mathews, and Brewer were all capable of playing the 3 last season, all of which left, who do we have in their place? An unproven rookie (though I think he'll be immediately as productive as Korver), and I guess Jeremy Evans. Ofcourse this means more playing time for AK on a contract season, and Miles, who has improved alot too.

SG, defensively we're much better, Bell being an all-defensive player beats anything we had last season as option, Hayward will provide length, passing, and can make soften the blow of Korver's loss as he has a great shot too, not to mention he shines in the big moments. Offensively I think it's kind of a wash, so we're better at the SG in my opinion.

PG, assuming Watson can play some defense, we're a little better here.

Basically where the hell haven't we improved our depth, outside of the Lakers, who's really improoved?

Dallas - nope, but they definitely played better at the end of the season last year, so they're a threat
OKC - Durant, Westbrook, Green and Harden are a year older, that's enough to climb a few spots

But after that..

SAS - while they get Splitter, Manu and Duncan are a year worse, and Parker is coming off injury, could potentially be threat, but they would need a miracle to be at full health
Denver - definitely not
Portland - already have injuries, Mathews though was GREAT for them in the preseason
Phoenix - will they even make the playoffs?
New Orleans - they've improved some, but how reliable are Paul and Ariza coming off big injuries? Also they lost Collison, and Bayless is no replacement IMO. Not a threat.