Do you want the Jazz to get the 8th seed or Not?

Hoops Addict · Post #1 » by **Hoops Addict** » Fri Jan 27, 2012 1:39 am

Do you want the Jazz to keep winning games .......and make the #8 seed and get tyheir ass kicked in the playoffs? Or do you want them to play the rookies a lot and probably ending up losing 5 or more games because of it.

I vote for playing Kanter and Burks at least 30 minutes a game........so we can develop them.

Of course, I am thrilled that the Jazz started the season with great record ( 9-4?) and showed they are good. I do not want them to throw games, but they need to play the rookies a lot for them to get good.

If we keep ploaying well we will probably get the 8th pick and 15th+ pick in the draft....and lose the pick to Minnesota.

VOTE- I vote play the rookies more.

MeestR · Post #2 » by **MeestR** » Fri Jan 27, 2012 2:36 am

if the jazz win the games they are supposed to, they will do a lot better than an 8 seed. im thinking more like 4 or better. but of course, this depends on the reliability of all those involved, including the rooks.

Post #3 » by **StocktonShorts** » Fri Jan 27, 2012 3:17 am

I vote for Mot.

reapaman · Post #4 » by **reapaman** » Fri Jan 27, 2012 3:30 am

No I don't want this team to keep winning. Thats how teams stay in a never-ending circle of mediocracy. We have way too many holes on this team. Our 3 point shooting sucks, we have very little consistent playmaking, we don't have a go-to guy I trust in important games (not even big milli), no sure things with our young guys, wings are either inconsistent or just plain suck, ect...

We need to stack talent. We don't wanna get to the playoffs this year and then next year our luck runs out and our weaknesses are on full display. That happens alot such as the bucks who 2 years ago look like a team on the rise and now.... their the bucks.

Litany · Post #5 » by **Litany** » Fri Jan 27, 2012 4:52 am

reapaman wrote:No I don't want this team to keep winning. Thats how teams stay in a never-ending circle of mediocracy. We have way too many holes on this team. Our 3 point shooting sucks, we have very little consistent playmaking, we don't have a go-to guy I trust in important games (not even big milli), no sure things with our young guys, wings are either inconsistent or just plain suck, ect...

We need to stack talent. We don't wanna get to the playoffs this year and then next year our luck runs out and our weaknesses are on full display. That happens alot such as the bucks who 2 years ago look like a team on the rise and now.... their the bucks.

I agree, we need that asset. Because of how deep and strong this draft is, we could trade our own pick along with the GSW pick to move up to say the 5th pick to get Barnes.

I just think it is critical. I think it is the difference between pretender and contender.

BJSmiles · Post #6 » by **BJSmiles** » Fri Jan 27, 2012 5:19 am

HappyProle wrote:I vote for Mot.

MeestR · Post #7 » by **MeestR** » Fri Jan 27, 2012 5:43 am

(fans who want a team to lose cant legitimately call themselves a fan, even if losing opens up more obvious doors than winning might)

blackham9258 · Post #8 » by **blackham9258** » Fri Jan 27, 2012 6:15 am

I would be happy with either. But I don't think it is correct to say that you can't call yourself a fan if you want the team to miss the chance to get swept in 4 games, and lose out on another lottery pick.

Pose it this way:

If with say the #13 pick and the GSW #8 or #9 pick, we package those two to move up 3 or 4 spots to pick #4 or #5 and select Harrison Barnes, Perry Jones, Kidd-Gilchrist, Jeremy Lamb or some other player who turns into an all star, how would we then feel about missing out on those four playoff games? 90% of all All Stars are selected in the top #5, and with two lottery picks and possibly flipping one of our past lottery picks we could do some real moving up.

If we move up to #4 and that turns into Gillchrist or Barnes and they end up being the next say: Michael Jordan, Paul Pierce, Scottie Pippen, Carmelo Anthony... you name it... and if they end up being the reason we ultimately contend for a championship 5 years from now are you really going to look back and opine for 4 meaningless games in the 2012 playoffs?

RealGm is a forum for us wannabe GM's to talk about the options for the progress for the team. Teams need to win, and make the playoffs to make them better to be sure. However, championship teams are built around dominant star players and we don't have any. Kevin O'Connor if given truth syrum would say Utah is a market that will need to rely on trades and the draft to develop a championship team (not free-agency). While he would prefer to make the playoffs, he knows we aren't a championship team as currently constituted, and the opportunity to take a couple lottery picks and move up to snag an all star is a situation that is far superior to 4 quick losses in the playoffs.

As a fan who knows we are not winning a championship this year, I am okay with either outcome and will cheer every win. But I won't cry when we lose either because when we lose we win too... at least this year with a strong draft and lots of assets to move up, we have a real opportunity.

Amish Mafioso · Post #9 » by **Amish Mafioso** » Fri Jan 27, 2012 6:41 am

MeestR wrote:(fans who want a team to lose cant legitimately call themselves a fan, even if losing opens up more obvious doors than winning might)

Winning more now might very well mean winning less in the future.

You can't be a true fan if you want your team to lose more in the future.

Having said that, I don't want to give a ton of minutes to the young guys, just to develop them in a situation where they lose all the time. That can backfire. I'd like to see them get as many minutes as possible, while developing in a situation where they expect to always be able to win. I'd rather keep the pick than getting swept in the first round, but consistent losing isn't a good development strategy.

Soul Patch · Post #10 » by **Soul Patch** » Fri Jan 27, 2012 6:48 am

The way I see it, the young guys pretty much know how to play. The Coaches have to teach them how to win. That's why I can swallow a game like yesterday's, you can learn a lot from that but blowouts can suck a dozen thorny cocks.

carrottop12 · Post #11 » by **carrottop12** » Fri Jan 27, 2012 1:57 pm

Regardless of where we finish, I think our young guys are learning valuable lessons this season.

First of all, nothing is given to you in this league. Playing time, wins, easy nights, everything is earned.

Second, winning is expected. This team wasn't expected to do anything nationally, but the organization expects one thing, and it's wins.

Third, it's a tough league. The jazz have had an insanely good start to the year, and I'd bet they still arent favorites to make the postseason.

These are all valuable things to learn as a young player. Not getting blown out every night will teach these guys how to compete, regardless of whether we make or miss the playoffs.

Jazzfan12 · Post #12 » by **Jazzfan12** » Fri Jan 27, 2012 2:06 pm

Regardless of how Favors and Kanter play, they get the same minutes. It doesn't matter if they're dominating the game or playing terrible, they still get around 20 or 12 a game. Not sure that's really setting the example that playing time is earned.

HolyToledo · Post #13 » by **HolyToledo** » Fri Jan 27, 2012 4:33 pm

Always play to win! Young guys need to know the importance of winning and avoid the losing attitude teams like the Clippers have had for many years.

QuantumMacgyver · Post #14 » by **QuantumMacgyver** » Fri Jan 27, 2012 6:15 pm

reapaman wrote:No I don't want this team to keep winning. Thats how teams stay in a never-ending circle of mediocracy. We have way too many holes on this team. Our 3 point shooting sucks, we have very little consistent playmaking, we don't have a go-to guy I trust in important games (not even big milli), no sure things with our young guys, wings are either inconsistent or just plain suck, ect...

We need to stack talent. We don't wanna get to the playoffs this year and then next year our luck runs out and our weaknesses are on full display. That happens alot such as the bucks who 2 years ago look like a team on the rise and now.... their the bucks.

So the jazz should put themselves in a situation to increase team losses so that they could be LESS like the Bucks?
The reason the Bucks haven't been able to capitalize on their previous success is because of a cheap @ss push in the back (amare) that lead to a dislocatedelbow, broken wrist, and a broken hand for their best player. Their luck definitely ran out but it wasn't cuz teams figured them out. Its because Bogut is made from the same mold as greg oden.

johnnyblazzed · Post #15 » by **johnnyblazzed** » Fri Jan 27, 2012 6:41 pm

I've gone back and forth on this. I would love a great pick or 2 in the draft. I would also love for the young guys to taste the Playoffs and hope it gives them greater motivation to improve and play hard. I would love for Jefferson to make the playoffs.

I've concluded on this - As long as the players are playing as if they care, they are playing with effort, and improving - I will be happy whether we make the playoffs or not.

DeadlyTreeStump · Post #16 » by **DeadlyTreeStump** » Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:54 pm

All these guys saying we should tank remind me of the fact there are eternal bottom feeders in this league, and I'm just glad the Jazz isn't one of them. I don't want this team to suck to get a shot at a title later. Some teams get there without tanking, why can't we?

Post #17 » by **StocktonShorts** » Sat Jan 28, 2012 1:33 am

DeadlyTreeStump wrote:Some teams get there without tanking, why can't we?

Name some.

Only one I can think of is the Lakers.

reapaman · Post #18 » by **reapaman** » Sat Jan 28, 2012 8:27 am

QuantumMacgyver wrote:
reapaman wrote:No I don't want this team to keep winning. Thats how teams stay in a never-ending circle of mediocracy. We have way too many holes on this team. Our 3 point shooting sucks, we have very little consistent playmaking, we don't have a go-to guy I trust in important games (not even big milli), no sure things with our young guys, wings are either inconsistent or just plain suck, ect...

We need to stack talent. We don't wanna get to the playoffs this year and then next year our luck runs out and our weaknesses are on full display. That happens alot such as the bucks who 2 years ago look like a team on the rise and now.... their the bucks.

So the jazz should put themselves in a situation to increase team losses so that they could be LESS like the Bucks?
The reason the Bucks haven't been able to capitalize on their previous success is because of a cheap @ss push in the back (amare) that lead to a dislocatedelbow, broken wrist, and a broken hand for their best player. Their luck definitely ran out but it wasn't cuz teams figured them out. Its because Bogut is made from the same mold as greg oden.

Not exactly what I meant. What I was eluding to was that they were under .500 with bogut 2 years ago until they got a contract year salmons in a mid-season season trade. That was the problem, they took off and won like 22 of their last 30 (in the tougher part of there schedule) with salmons scoring nearly 20 points. Contract Year Salmons pushed them over the edge and they tried to make moves the next season to capitalize on there potential rise but then Salmons got paid. Poor management (i.e. trading for the modern day king of chuckers and signing gooden) and losing ridnour played a part but it was mostly salmons getting paid.

Bogut is nice and all but they have done well for stretchs and even went to 7 games with the hawks w/o him. So their luck was getting a contract year salmons and after he got paid they found out they really didn't have enough talent even in the strecthes were bogut was healthy last year. I don't want our version of luck to run out and find out we don't have enough talent.

DeadlyTreeStump · Post #19 » by **DeadlyTreeStump** » Thu Feb 2, 2012 7:39 pm

HappyProle wrote:
DeadlyTreeStump wrote:Some teams get there without tanking, why can't we?

Name some.

Only one I can think of is the Lakers.

The Pistons, the Suns, the Mavs, the Bulls have built contending teams in recent years without all-out tanking.

Jazzfan12 · Post #20 » by **Jazzfan12** » Thu Feb 2, 2012 7:54 pm

DeadlyTreeStump wrote:
HappyProle wrote:
DeadlyTreeStump wrote:Some teams get there without tanking, why can't we?

Name some.

Only one I can think of is the Lakers.

The Pistons, the Suns, the Mavs, the Bulls have built contending teams in recent years without all-out tanking.

Pistons: Massively lucky in free agency
Suns: Lucky in free agency
Bulls: Won the #1 pick
Mavs: Team is based around a guy they got from tanking

The Jazz are never majorly involved in free agency and the other two teams built from draft success and that generally takes tanking. I don't think those are good examples.