RealGM

I've learned from Stockton fans that he was a super dominate player. He led the league in assists nine times. His Win Share and Offense Rating numbers are through the roof. The only problem was idiot sportswriters didn't recognize his greatness due to a bias against short pasty white guys by short pasty white sportswriters.

The Jazz also had Karl Malone who always made first team All-NBA and was known to be even better than the dominate John Stockton. Jerry Sloan was and is a very good coach.

They won an average of 53 games. They got eliminated in the first round 4 times, and only made the Western Conference finals two times.

If you have two dominate players top 25 players all time, a good coach, you should accomplish a lot more unless your supporting cast is historically bad. Every other similar pairing of top 25 players who were at their peak accomplished significantly more (Jordan/Pippen, Duncan/Robinson, West/Baylor, etc.)

Why did the Jazz accomplish so little from 88-95?

Karma?

sp6r=underrated wrote:I've learned from Stockton fans that he was a super dominate player. He led the league in assists nine times. His Win Share and Offense Rating numbers are through the roof. The only problem was idiot sportswriters didn't recognize his greatness due to a bias against short pasty white guys by short pasty white sportswriters.

Sportswriters recognize his greatness because during his prime and after that, for almost decade he was usually second (behind Magic) or first point guard in the NBA:

(place among point guards in All NBA Teams)
1988 (his first season as starter) - 2nd (Magic 1st)
1989 - 2nd (tied with KJ, Magic 1st)
1990 - 2nd (tied with KJ, Magic 1st)
1991 - 3rd (Magic 1st, KJ 2nd)
1992 - 1st (tied with Hardaway)
1993 - 2nd (Price 1st)
1994 - 1st
1995 - 1st (tied with Penny)
1996 - 2nd (tied with Payton, Penny 1st)

Show me other point guards not named Ervin Johnson who were year by year during 9 season 8 times first or second best in the league. Rally, please do it, how many point guards were so good for so long period of time? West, Oscar, probably Cousy, maybe Frazier, Kidd, who else?
And what competition they faced, because Stockton fight with Magic, Tim Hardaway, Penny, Isiah, Payton, KJ, Porter or Price. You know, it’s not too hard to be on the top for year or two, but for almost decade?! Don’t you think that says something about player?

sp6r=underrated wrote:I've learned from Stockton fans that he was a super dominate player. He led the league in assists nine times. His Win Share and Offense Rating numbers are through the roof. The only problem was idiot sportswriters didn't recognize his greatness due to a bias against short pasty white guys by short pasty white sportswriters.

The Jazz also had Karl Malone who always made first team All-NBA and was known to be even better than the dominate John Stockton. Jerry Sloan was and is a very good coach.

They won an average of 53 games. They got eliminated in the first round 4 times, and only made the Western Conference finals two times.

If you have two dominate players top 25 players all time, a good coach, you should accomplish a lot more unless your supporting cast is historically bad. Every other similar pairing of top 25 players who were at their peak accomplished significantly more (Jordan/Pippen, Duncan/Robinson, West/Baylor, etc.)

Why did the Jazz accomplish so little from 88-95?

You answered your own question...

Eaton... a great defensive man, but a Frankestein in offense... Marc Iavaroni... enough said... and Bob Hansen.
When they get another player (Jeff Malone) they went to WCF vs Blazers. When they get another (Hornacek) they went in 94 vs Rockets.

Utah Jazz had a little talent but Stockton and Malone. The best player in my mind are Hornacek (and he was not as good as in Suns or Philly), Jeff Malone (great scorer, bad deffender), Thrul Bailey and Griffith (too many injuries)

Because of M.J.

Jase wrote:Because of M.J.

M.J. is even more amazing than I realized because the Jazz never played the bulls during these years.

DavidStern wrote:

sp6r=underrated wrote:I've learned from Stockton fans that he was a super dominate player. He led the league in assists nine times. His Win Share and Offense Rating numbers are through the roof. The only problem was idiot sportswriters didn't recognize his greatness due to a bias against short pasty white guys by short pasty white sportswriters.

Sportswriters recognize his greatness because during his prime and after that, for almost decade he was usually second (behind Magic) or first point guard in the NBA:

(place among point guards in All NBA Teams)
1988 (his first season as starter) - 2nd (Magic 1st)
1989 - 2nd (tied with KJ, Magic 1st)
1990 - 2nd (tied with KJ, Magic 1st)
1991 - 3rd (Magic 1st, KJ 2nd)
1992 - 1st (tied with Hardaway)
1993 - 2nd (Price 1st)
1994 - 1st
1995 - 1st (tied with Penny)
1996 - 2nd (tied with Payton, Penny 1st)

Show me other point guards not named Ervin Johnson who were year by year during 9 season 8 times first or second best in the league. Rally, please do it, how many point guards were so good for so long period of time? West, Oscar, probably Cousy, maybe Frazier, Kidd, who else?
And what competition they faced, because Stockton fight with Magic, Tim Hardaway, Penny, Isiah, Payton, KJ, Porter or Price. You know, it’s not too hard to be on the top for year or two, but for almost decade?! Don’t you think that says something about player?

He was never a top 5 player in the league during his career. I of course have learned that he was a super dominate amazing player who could carry teams on his back, which sportswriters must have been idiots for not ever placing him in the top 5 in MVP voting.

So again, Why did the Jazz accomplish so little?

Stockton's MVP votes (high placing: 7th. Most of the time out of the top 10) has been much discussed, but in particular check out this stretch:

91 - 12th - Finished behind Terry Porter
92 - 12th - Finished behind Mark Price
93 - 10th - Finished behind Mark Price
94 - 11th - Finished behind Mark Price

In 91 and 92 Stockton peaked statistically, putting up 17/14/2.7+ on .60 TS% on 54 and 55 win Jazz teams. So how'd he finish behind Terry Porter and Marc Price, who were similar PG 2nd bananas on elite teams?

Stockton's legacy is built on longevity and durability and being a great team guy, but his peak impact and place in the league has definitely been overrated over time.

sp6r=underrated wrote:

Jase wrote:Because of M.J.

M.J. is even more amazing than I realized because the Jazz never played the bulls during these years.

LOL

But to answer this....I'm not sure why they couldn't overcome the 93-94 Rockets? They had Malone/Stockton who were first team all-NBA at their respective positions. And they had Hornacek, who I think was a better SG than Maxwell. So they had the core of their teams that made the 97 and 98 Finals this year and they still fell to the Rockets in only 5 games. Aside from MVP Dream, the Rockets didn't have any other player that I would've regarded as top10 at their position that year.

Anyone would have lost to the Rockets with the way they played vs. the Jazz. I remember that series because it was when I first started watching basketball. The rockets were shooting 3's left and right, and they were making them all. They had so many weapons from the outside that you had to feel sorry for the Jazz. Then of course they had hakeem down low so they honestly had it all that year.

The 89 Jazz is an interesting case. Ignoring the playoffs where they got swept by the Warriors, just look at the regular season. Malone put up 29/10, Stockton put up 17/13.6, Eaton won DPOY over Hakeem and Rodman and finished 13th in MVP voting. Thurl Bailey put up 19.5ppg off the bench and finished 2nd in 6th man of the year voting. Griffith scored 14ppg. All 5 of these players played 80 games+. So if you have top 30 ever players at PG and PF, the best defensive C in the league, one of the best 6th mans in the league, a fairly dangerous former 20ppg guy, and everyone stays abnormally healthy, how do you only win 51 games? And of course, how do you get swept by a 7th seed Warriors team in the 1st round...

And looking at that playoff series again. Malone put up 30/16. Stockton put up 27/14. And they got swept. WOW

I don't know much about the Jazz pre-1993, but in 93-94 (WCF), the Rox were just that bit better. MVP Hakeem generally eclipsed Karl Malone, and Stockton had ok games (several 12/10 games), but never had a "WOW" game. No Jazz player except Malone could score more than 20, whereas Vernon Maxwell, Kenny Smith and Robert Horry got hot from 3.

This is a easy question, John Stockton was never a capable player to build around, IMHO you need a legitimate scoring option on the perimeter, and Stockton wasn't that. He was only top 10 in MVP voting three times, and like someone stated earlier, even in his peak season---dropping 17 and 14 a game he was behind Terry Porter in MVP voting. He was never a superstar in the league, the Jazz thought something was working for them, but it clearly wasn't enough to get them over the hump---something they should have realized before it continued on for 18 years.

Those Jazz also didn't beat the '95 Rockets, who were a 46 win 6th seed, they had a chance to squash them, but even with HCA, they couldn't beat them. I'm never going to get tired of saying this, but Stockton would be the best complimentary player to a team that's building around a legitimate superstar that already has its 1-2 punch in place.

pretty much the same question you could pose as to why Nash/Dirk didn't go anywhere in the playoffs when they were together. They were all-nba but neither were hands down the best player in the league. their supporting cast was good, but not amazingly good like the Pistons or the Suns.

It is funny how Payton/Kemp got to the finals and Stockton/Malone couldn't. just too many good teams in the late 80s/early 90s to contend with.

Point forward wrote:I don't know much about the Jazz pre-1993, but in 93-94 (WCF), the Rox were just that bit better. MVP Hakeem generally eclipsed Karl Malone, and Stockton had ok games (several 12/10 games), but never had a "WOW" game. No Jazz player except Malone could score more than 20, whereas Vernon Maxwell, Kenny Smith and Robert Horry got hot from 3.

Mario Elie too

FJS wrote:You answered your own question...

Eaton... a great defensive man, but a Frankestein in offense... Marc Iavaroni... enough said... and Bob Hansen.
When they get another player (Jeff Malone) they went to WCF vs Blazers. When they get another (Hornacek) they went in 94 vs Rockets.

Utah Jazz had a little talent but Stockton and Malone. The best player in my mind are Hornacek (and he was not as good as in Suns or Philly), Jeff Malone (great scorer, bad deffender), Thrul Bailey and Griffith (too many injuries)

lol. In '86-87, the year before Stockton was a starter, they had those guys and won 44 games. Stockton comes in, puts up big numbers, and they win 47. Completely unreasonable to dismiss this question by saying that anything bad that ever happened to Stockton & Malone had to be because their supporting cast was infinitely worse than everyone. That supporting cast was good enough to make a winning team with Malone even without Stockton as starter, there can be absolutely no debate that much worse supporting casts have existed, and also no real debate that Stockton clearly didn't make a night & day difference at least when he first was putting up those big numbers.

I also object to dismissing Eaton as just "a great defensive man". In that era, the Jazz had the dominant defense in the entire league (it was clearly better than the Malone & Stockton led offense), and Eaton was far and away the dominant reason for that with blocking numbers that put anyone in the post-Russell era of basketball to shame. C'mon, some credit where credit's due.

Doctor MJ wrote:

FJS wrote:You answered your own question...

Eaton... a great defensive man, but a Frankestein in offense... Marc Iavaroni... enough said... and Bob Hansen.
When they get another player (Jeff Malone) they went to WCF vs Blazers. When they get another (Hornacek) they went in 94 vs Rockets.

Utah Jazz had a little talent but Stockton and Malone. The best player in my mind are Hornacek (and he was not as good as in Suns or Philly), Jeff Malone (great scorer, bad deffender), Thrul Bailey and Griffith (too many injuries)

lol. In '86-87, the year before Stockton was a starter, they had those guys and won 44 games. Stockton comes in, puts up big numbers, and they win 47. Completely unreasonable to dismiss this question by saying that anything bad that ever happened to Stockton & Malone had to be because their supporting cast was infinitely worse than everyone. That supporting cast was good enough to make a winning team with Malone even without Stockton as starter, there can be absolutely no debate that much worse supporting casts have existed, and also no real debate that Stockton clearly didn't make a night & day difference at least when he first was putting up those big numbers.

I also object to dismissing Eaton as just "a great defensive man". In that era, the Jazz had the dominant defense in the entire league (it was clearly better than the Malone & Stockton led offense), and Eaton was far and away the dominant reason for that with blocking numbers that put anyone in the post-Russell era of basketball to shame. C'mon, some credit where credit's due.

When people wanna make excuses for certain players, they always place all the blame on the supporting cast. The supporting cast sucked.

Then they'll try to take away from other players who DID get it done by overrating their supporting cast. "X only won because he was always surrounded by a good supporting cast."

ThaRegul8r wrote:
When people wanna make excuses for certain players, they always place all the blame on the supporting cast. The supporting cast sucked.

Then they'll try to take away from other players who DID get it done by overrating their supporting cast. "X only won because he was always surrounded by a good supporting cast."

And then there's people like you who don't like an excuse for anything, thinking your position is the high road. Pathetic.

Jase wrote:Because of M.J.

WTF!!!

I didn't realize the Jazz made the finals in that time frame.

The Jazz pretty much lost to every other elite team in the west during that time. In 1995 they lost in round 1 winning 60 games while the Rockets won 47 games.