Apathy

[Sackataters]

So, no secret, this year's incarnation of the Utah Jazz is very underwhelming. Some of it has to do with me working nights and not being able to be in every moment of the season. I have my DVR and record the games, but rarely have the desire to go back and watch the team slop through a known outcome (win or loss). If I am home on a game night, I definitely tune in .. but find myself flipping around. This is not normal for me. You are talking to a guy that would move mountains just to tune in to a scratchy am radio call of a Jazz game in year's past. So, is it me or is the team?

I think about past Jazz teams and compare them to this year's. The thing that we are missing are characters. We have to keep in mind that this is a game and it is entertainment. The NBA was huge to me because the people were the stuff of tall tale. Or, comic book characters. Think about the 90's Jazz: Batman (Karl), Robin (John), and commissioner Gordon (Jerry). AK was a character to be sure.

I think about the characters of recent NBA history: Shaq, Rodman, Grandmamma, the Rainman.

I look at our whole team and fail to see any compelling character or personality. Throw Corbin into that mix too - boring, not a guy that I care to follow. I want fire and brimstone. Grit. So, Jazz organization - give me some grit in the next incarnation and I'll be there. Keep feeding me this PC line of BS and I'll line up some new hobbies.

 

[MHSL82]

So, no secret, this year's incarnation of the Utah Jazz is very underwhelming. Some of it has to do with me working nights and not being able to be in every moment of the season. I have my DVR and record the games, but rarely have the desire to go back and watch the team slop through a known outcome (win or loss). If I am home on a game night, I definitely tune in .. but find myself flipping around. This is not normal for me. You are talking to a guy that would move mountains just to tune in to a scratchy am radio call of a Jazz game in year's past. So, is it me or is the team?

I think about past Jazz teams and compare them to this year's. The thing that we are missing are characters. We have to keep in mind that this is a game and it is entertainment. The NBA was huge to me because the people were the stuff of tall tale. Or, comic book characters. Think about the 90's Jazz: Batman (Karl), Robin (John), and commissioner Gordon (Jerry). AK was a character to be sure.

I think about the characters of recent NBA history: Shaq, Rodman, Grandmamma, the Rainman.

I look at our whole team and fail to see any compelling character or personality. Throw Corbin into that mix too - boring, not a guy that I care to follow. I want fire and brimstone. Grit. So, Jazz organization - give me some grit in the next incarnation and I'll be there. Keep feeding me this PC line of BS and I'll line up some new hobbies.

It isn't winning or not winning for me. It's the idea that we won't win just to win. We never won any championships, but we always made the playoffs. I was happy. Then, some people started saying that that was settling, that we'd be better off being no good for a year or two and get some big shot college guy. It was like selling out for the devil.

Now, we didn't purposely lose, but we built for the future, drafted projects, etc. Losing Stockton and Malone, Hornacek and Sloan were the biggest factors for losing and building was the right way, but I keep my interest highest when it's good, good, good rather than bad, bad, great. Note, that great year is better than good - I'm no bandwagoner. I want to be competitive even when we lose. I'm not into attrition.

I want to win the big one but when you are talking about apathy good always beat "bad then great."

 

[MHSL82]

It isn't winning or not winning for me. It's the idea that we won't win just to win. We never won any championships, but we always made the playoffs. I was happy. Then, some people started saying that that was settling, that we'd be better off being no good for a year or two and get some big shot college guy. It was like selling out for the devil.

Now, we didn't purposely lose, but we built for the future, drafted projects, etc. Losing Stockton and Malone, Hornacek and Sloan were the biggest factors for losing and building was the right way, but I keep my interest highest when it's good, good, good rather than bad, bad, great. Note, that great year is better than good - I'm no bandwagoner. I want to be competitive even when we lose. I'm not into attrition.

I want to win the big one but when you are talking about apathy good always beat "bad then great."

Disagree.

You can't tell me what to do. I will not disagree with myself on this one!

 

[nuraman00]

So, no secret, this year's incarnation of the Utah Jazz is very underwhelming. Some of it has to do with me working nights and not being able to be in every moment of the season. I have my DVR and record the games, but rarely have the desire to go back and watch the team slop through a known outcome (win or loss). If I am home on a game night, I definitely tune in .. but find myself flipping around. This is not normal for me. You are talking to a guy that would move mountains just to tune in to a scratchy am radio call of a Jazz game in year's past. So, is it me or is the team?

I think about past Jazz teams and compare them to this year's. The thing that we are missing are characters. We have to keep in mind that this is a game and it is entertainment. The NBA was huge to me because the people were the stuff of tall tale. Or, comic book characters. Think about the 90's Jazz: Batman (Karl), Robin (John), and commissioner Gordon (Jerry). AK was a character to be sure.

I think about the characters of recent NBA history: Shaq, Rodman, Grandmamma, the Rainman.

I look at our whole team and fail to see any compelling character or personality. Throw Corbin into that mix too - boring, not a guy that I care to follow. I want fire and brimstone. Grit. So, Jazz organization - give me some grit in the next incarnation and I'll be there. Keep feeding me this PC line of BS and I'll line up some new hobbies.

Who are some young, compelling characters that you like around the league right now?

 

[Sackataters]

"Who are some young, compelling characters that you like around the league right now?"

That is a really good question that I will have to dwell on for a minute. I like the hunger and toughness of the Pacers right now, along with their coach. Paul George. Maybe Lilliard. Ibakka (not a young guy but not afraid to bang).

I really think that Corbin needs to go. It is not that I think any other coach in the league would do better with the athletes that we have. But, he doesn't seem to have the communication skills or the
enthusiasm to make it work. He seems like he is just accepting and happy to be collecting a paycheck. I've yet to see him hold anyone accountable - including himself.

We really dropped the ball by letting Jeff Hornacek go. You start with a coach like that in a small market - a guy that can bridge the generations and relate to a lot of people.

 

[nuraman00]

"Who are some young, compelling characters that you like around the league right now?"

That is a really good question that I will have to dwell on for a minute. I like the hunger and toughness of the Pacers right now, along with their coach. Paul George. Maybe Lilliard. Ibakka (not a young guy but not afraid to bang).

I really think that Corbin needs to go. It is not that I think any other coach in the league would do better with the athletes that we have. But, he doesn't seem to have the communication skills or the
enthusiasm to make it work. He seems like he is just accepting and happy to be collecting a paycheck. I've yet to see him hold anyone accountable - including himself.

We really dropped the ball by letting Jeff Hornacek go. You start with a coach like that in a small market - a guy that can bridge the generations and relate to a lot of people.

Corbin hasn't shown much, agree.

Brad Stevens, and Monty Williams, are some young coaches I like more.

I think the Jazz dropped the ball more by picking Hayward over George.

 

[MHSL82]

Who are some young, compelling characters that you like around the league right now?

I'm sold on NSK. He kan do it and I'm glad we have him. He's not good at interviews and this isn't a language thing, it's just him. But otherwise I like him.

My list of favorite players used to be:

1. Trey Burke - I either like you or want you replaced if you are our starting PG. John Lucas IIIif he's off the bench or starting, thumbs down. He's better than Amaechi, though. Everyone is.

2. Gordon Hayward. He was supposed to be Hornacek.

3. Diante Garret - Tough competitive and not scared to go after somebody, confident, but not an asshole/arrogant.

4. Derrick Favors.
5. Alec Burks
6. NSK.
7. Gobert
8. Jefferson
9. Evans
10. Rush.
11. Williams
12. Everyone else.

13. John Lucas III

Now, it's:

1. Trey Burke
2. NSK.
3. Gordon Hayward.
4. Diante Garret
5. Marvin Williams
6. Alec Burks
7. Derek Favors
8. Gobert
9. Jefferson
10. Evans
11. Rush.
12. Everyone else.

13. John Lucas III

 

[nuraman00]

I'm sold on NSK. He kan do it and I'm glad we have him. He's not good at interviews and this isn't a language thing, it's just him. But otherwise I like him.

My list of favorite players used to be:

1. Trey Burke - I either like you or want you replaced if you are our starting PG. John Lucas IIIif he's off the bench or starting, thumbs down. He's better than Amaechi, though. Everyone is.

2. Gordon Hayward. He was supposed to be Hornacek.

3. Diante Garret - Tough competitive and not scared to go after somebody, confident, but not an asshole/arrogant.

4. Derrick Favors.
5. Alec Burks
6. NSK.
7. Gobert
8. Jefferson
9. Evans
10. Rush.
11. Williams
12. Everyone else.

13. John Lucas III

Now, it's:

1. Trey Burke
2. NSK.
3. Gordon Hayward.
4. Diante Garret
5. Marvin Williams
6. Alec Burks
7. Derek Favors
8. Gobert
9. Jefferson
10. Evans
11. Rush.
12. Everyone else.

13. John Lucas III

Can you make it more clear which of these are the young, compelling characters that you like? Maybe bold font them.

Don't forget to include all members of the Jazz, such as Rigby.

 

[MHSL82]

Can you make it more clear which of these are the young, compelling characters that you like? Maybe bold font them.

Don't forget to include all members of the Jazz, such as Rigby.

Jefferson and Williams are not young. John Lucas III is not compelling. The rest should be bold.

 

[MHSL82]

Seriously though, if you are talking about league wide, here are the players I think are compelling to watch:

LeBron James
Jeremy Lin (Not because he's great or anything.)
Kobe Bryant at times, when he's not in his "I don't have to shoot and you can't make me" moods.
NSK
Trey Burke
Diante Garrett.
Rondo, Carter-Williams, and Valejeafdajkdha or whatever his name is for the assists, but I'm just a box score watcher here.
I am surprised on how quickly Love got 21 points against us before I noticed him. I noticed his two missed three pointers. He then made one and I saw he had 21 points. I must have been watching the play, not the people. He could be compelling on a good team. Not sure if his game goes down when he's not the guy.

I like to watch Deron lose but don't like to see him win, so I don't watch. Same with lying Derrick Fisher. He lied, people. It wasn't about his daughter. He moved farther away from her treatment center in New York. WHY DON'T PEOPLE GET THIS? Utah is CLOSER to New York than Los Angeles is from New York. Yes, she continued New York treatment after the move, not LA treatment. Utah's cancer center is better than LA's anyway. They voted him out of being the player representative.

No, I don't care to watch Durant. He's great, I know, I just am not compelled - I'll watch if it's against someone big, but that's just as much the other player as it is him. I felt he was an out of the spotlight humble guy who would never get involved in making comments, but he changed. No bad examples, it's just he hadn't remained his previous under-the-radar I don't care what the narrative is kind of guy. James never was that, so I never expected it.

Durant is like a better Melo to me but on a good team. He can shoot whenever he wants and is pretty good at making them. Green light when he misses, too. Not just green light from the coaches but from himself. I've never seen James get 30+ shots and make in the low teens. (Yes, I know it's happened, but look at his game log.) Durant can make 13 on 37 shots? Big whoop.

I know he's taking pressure from the lack of Westbrook (until now) and others (and LeBron has Wade when he's healthy and Bosh sometimes), but make your damn shots and if you don't when LeBron does, you're second. Get smarter in your shots. There's no reason that taking more shots should mean dumber shots. I don't even like LeBron, I just like that he does everything and can shoot a good percentage. Durant had that big streak of points, so did Kobe. People acted like this stuff was revolutionary.

Look at his shooting - James's improved every year he's been in the league. One year it appears to go down, but that was an example if he had made 3 shots fewer the year before, that year would be lower than the next year and higher than the previous. He's improved from three-pointers, too.

Now, the Nuraman discount: he's not great at free throws and that's inexcusable, right? It's a free shot. Maybe I'm assuming too much, but you like free throw statistics, right?

 

[MHSL82]

Durant is like a better Melo to me but on a good team. He can shoot whenever he wants and is pretty good at making them. Green light when he misses, too. Not just green light from the coaches but from himself. I've never seen James get 30+ shots and make in the low teens. (Yes, I know it's happened, but look at his game log.) Durant can make 13 on 37 shots? Big whoop.

I know he's taking pressure from the lack of Westbrook (until now) and others (and LeBron has Wade when he's healthy and Bosh sometimes), but make your damn shots and if you don't when LeBron does, you're second. Get smarter in your shots. There's no reason that taking more shots should mean dumber shots. I don't even like LeBron, I just like that he does everything and can shoot a good percentage. Durant had that big streak of points, so did Kobe. People acted like this stuff was revolutionary.

Look at his shooting - James's improved every year he's been in the league. One year it appears to go down, but that was an example if he had made 3 shots fewer the year before, that year would be lower than the next year and higher than the previous. He's improved from three-pointers, too.

Now, the Nuraman discount: he's not great at free throws and that's inexcusable, right? It's a free shot. Maybe I'm assuming too much, but you like free throw statistics, right?

Wow, he chose the number 37, too.

"Earlier this season in November, after Rudy Gay scored just 29 points on 37 field goal attempts in a game against Houston, James declared that he could score twice that.

"If you give me 37 shots in a game, I'd put up 60, easy," James said then.

On Monday, he scored 61 points on 33 shots -- against a top-ten defense, no less."

 

[MHSL82]

Wow, he chose the number 37, too.

"Earlier this season in November, after Rudy Gay scored just 29 points on 37 field goal attempts in a game against Houston, James declared that he could score twice that.

"If you give me 37 shots in a game, I'd put up 60, easy," James said then.

On Monday, he scored 61 points on 33 shots -- against a top-ten defense, no less."

Ahh, this close. Durant could have outdone LeBron 64-61 if he had made all his shots and free throws. Come on, just once, shoot 100%. Geez.

On a more serious note, Westbrook got a triple double in 20 official minutes (21 according to the recap). He would have had 20 assists if Durant had made all his shots, damn Durant.

Philadelphia 76ers vs. Oklahoma City Thunder - Box Score - March 04, 2014 - ESPN

BTW, this game qualifies for our ever-easy requirements of everyone shooting within one shot of 50% or better. It looks like that happens too often as I've found it without even really looking. I think the new standard is everyone being at 50% or everyone being below. The super game would be to have two in the same game, either extreme or both. I think you found one once, but it might have been the "everyone within one" requirement.

 

[MHSL82]

Wow. Actually, both did happen in that game. Everyone was within one shot of 50% or greater for the Thunder and everyone was within one of 50% or lesser on the Sixers.

We still need to eliminate the "within one" part of it. I had added that because I thought it wouldn't ever happen and "within one" would be rare, but it's becoming not so rare. Technically, it's always been not so rare, I just didn't notice it before.

 

[MHSL82]

 

[nuraman00]

Does red mean below average? How come in 2005, he shot 69.9% in the paint in the restricted circle, but it's marked red? That seems really good to me.

 

[MHSL82]

Does red mean below average? How come in 2005, he shot 69.9% in the paint in the restricted circle, but it's marked red? That seems really good to me.

I think the colors are just to mark time change - because if you are focusing on one area statistic, it is harder to see the year change (not difficult, but relatively harder).

 

[MHSL82]

LeBron James of Miami Heat says sleeved jersey partly to blame for off night - ESPN

 

[MHSL82]

Wow. Actually, both did happen in that game. Everyone was within one shot of 50% or greater for the Thunder and everyone was within one of 50% or lesser on the Sixers.

We still need to eliminate the "within one" part of it. I had added that because I thought it wouldn't ever happen and "within one" would be rare, but it's becoming not so rare. Technically, it's always been not so rare, I just didn't notice it before.

DAMN YOU, WILLIE GREEN!!! I'M PUTTING YOU IN JOHN LUCAS III CATEGORY!

Los Angeles Clippers vs. Los Angeles Lakers - Box Score - March 06, 2014 - ESPN

 

[MHSL82]

LeBron James of Miami Heat says sleeved jersey partly to blame for off night - ESPN

LeBron had only his second back to back sub-50% shooting games. One could say it was the mask, the sleeves, the defense, or whatnot, but it appears mental in the way he adjusts to the physical (mask, sleeves). What I mean is, the mask didn't bother him in his 61 point game, but now it's gotten in his head? Maybe he re-injured his nose since? Maybe it's the defense, but I don't think so.

I have to note, I am only talking about TWO GAMES. I can't extrapolate too much from it. He's 14-41. His worst before that was 11-24 combined in two comfortable wins. Even his one-game off days, his percentage was ok. He was 15-32 and 15-31 once each, but he was over 50% for one game of each of those two game streaks.

LeBron James Game By Game Stats and Performance - Miami Heat - ESPN

 

[nuraman00]

LeBron had only his second back to back sub-50% shooting games. One could say it was the mask, the sleeves, the defense, or whatnot, but it appears mental in the way he adjusts to the physical (mask, sleeves). What I mean is, the mask didn't bother him in his 61 point game, but now it's gotten in his head? Maybe he re-injured his nose since? Maybe it's the defense, but I don't think so.

I have to note, I am only talking about TWO GAMES. I can't extrapolate too much from it. He's 14-41. His worst before that was 11-24 combined in two comfortable wins. Even his one-game off days, his percentage was ok. He was 15-32 and 15-31 once each, but he was over 50% for one game of each of those two game streaks.

LeBron James Game By Game Stats and Performance - Miami Heat - ESPN

He's mostly blaming the sleeved shirts, not the mask. His other games with the sleeved shirts are also not as good as normal.


Also, maybe the mask has worn down? It could be like shoes, where it starts to feel uncomfortable the more hours it is worn.

But yes, you are right, it's the physical adjustment he doesn't like.