Utah Jazz - Oklahoma City Series Thread.

[Sackataters]

Man, Hood or Crowder?

 

[Sackataters]

Joe Ingles is feisty

 

[Sackataters]

Favors is big time. Is he gonna be with us next year?

 

[Sackataters]

Mitchell finishes at the rim like no other

 

[Sackataters]

What a game. Crowder holy bad from the field. But he def brought the toughness.

 

[Sackataters]

I do love Steven Adams tho. Tough bastard.

 

[nuraman00]

Man, Hood or Crowder?

Crowder. His role is smaller, but that's fine.

The Jazz don't need another perimeter scorer in Hood.

 

[nuraman00]

Favors is big time. Is he gonna be with us next year?

I have no idea. He's fine if the price is right. Gobert should still be higher in terms of team role.

 

[nuraman00]

Mitchell finishes at the rim like no other

Good to see him going to the basket again. I don't want to see him take too many 3's, because of his finishing ability.

 

[nuraman00]

I do love Steven Adams tho. Tough bastard.

Adams adjusting his nose was hilarious.

Adams does a good job of playing aggressive and with an edge, without crossing the line or getting into too much extra-curricular activities.

 

[nuraman00]

I know these things are backed up with numbers, but I think it is crazy that Oklahoma City had a 90.5% chance of winning when they were up 77 to 69 with 42 seconds left in the third. I get that they are home, up by eight, only 12.7 minutes to go, etc., but it doesn't seem like it should be 90%.

Jazz vs. Thunder - Game Summary - April 18, 2018 - ESPN

Can you post your thoughts on any of the other games, or the series?

 

[nuraman00]

I'm not surprised by the blown 25 point lead. I pointed out several times during this series, that the big swings by both teams scared me.

I paused the game at halftime, and went to bed. I resumed in the morning. When they got that 25 point lead, with Crowder continuing to hit shots, it reminded me of how Marcus Smart came up big for Boston during a playoffs game last year. One of those games where someone unexpected comes through.

I was also looking forward to them doing something the Williams-Boozer teams couldn't do. Those teams had a 3-1 lead on Houston in 2008, and Denver in 2010, and couldn't finish it off in 5.

This team looked to be on the verge of making more Utah history, and finishing a series quickly. But they couldn't.

Having seen big runs before, as I said, I'm not surprised. I don't understand it, but it doesn't shock me. Sometimes, when a team looks good, I'm not sure why, and sometimes, when they look bad, I don't know why they keep playing like that. The Jazz exhibited both facets.

Also, for what it's worth, I was going to make toast in the pot again, before I decided I was too full and tired to eat, and that's why I paused it at halftime, to resume the game this morning.

 

[nuraman00]

Going under those Westbrook screens was not a good strategy.

Gobert passing up an open dunk for a 3 was not the right choice either.

And as I noted earlier, it seems that they don't look for the bigs early, enough times.

 

[MHSL82]

I'm not surprised by the blown 25 point lead. I pointed out several times during this series, that the big swings by both teams scared me.

I paused the game at halftime, and went to bed. I resumed in the morning. When they got that 25 point lead, with Crowder continuing to hit shots, it reminded me of how Marcus Smart came up big for Boston during a playoffs game last year. One of those games where someone unexpected comes through.

I was also looking forward to them doing something the Williams-Boozer teams couldn't do. Those teams had a 3-1 lead on Houston in 2008, and Denver in 2010, and couldn't finish it off in 5.

This team looked to be on the verge of making more Utah history, and finishing a series quickly. But they couldn't.

Having seen big runs before, as I said, I'm not surprised. I don't understand it, but it doesn't shock me. Sometimes, when a team looks good, I'm not sure why, and sometimes, when they look bad, I don't know why they keep playing like that. The Jazz exhibited both facets.

Also, for what it's worth, I was going to make toast in the pot again, before I decided I was too full and tired to eat, and that's why I paused it at halftime, to resume the game this morning.

I will get to the rest of your post, but I wanted to make this comment first. The 25 point lead was erased in 8:34 of game clock. I don't know how long it took to turn that tie into a lead, but let's say it was nine minutes total.

So I will no longer complain about resting our players with less than 25 point lead and nine minutes to go. The outscored us 61 to 28 so technically we could have been up by 33 and still lost. But that was over 20:34 and I don't think I would've ever said to sit everybody was 20:34 left. At least not in a playoff game. Even with a 33 point lead.

To be clear about my comments in this season, I was talking about that if our bench lost a 20 something point lead, we deserved to lose. That would be true for starters as well, of course.

This is all hypothetical, but I think that my comments are in the context of a playoff game. If we are up by 33 points in a regular-season game and it is not playoff clincher, I would be fine sitting the starters a little bit as long as you are not making a statement to the other team by sitting them. Just rotate more. I don't care about playoff seeding as much because injury is worse. Making the playoffs? Yes, secure the wind and injuries hopefully unlikely.

I think home and away matters, but in a playoff game, obviously a 25 point lead in the third quarter is not safe. Even in the fourth quarter they have been big comeback's. I will be more comfortable in the fourth even though you could lose it in either game. All it took was under nine minutes. Granted, that was without Gobert, but that could've been true with injury, sitting your player, or foul trouble.

 

[MHSL82]

Never stop a game and sleep on it. That advice is not for you, Nuraman. It's for the Jazz. They took a nap after building the 25 point lead.

Losing a 25 point lead is not surprising. Losing it straight, is. It should have taken 20 minutes to lose it. Not 8:34. I mean, the score was 71 to 46. Ended with a tie at 78. 32-7. That's not a run. Runs are in basketball. That's not a run, that's a collapse. 16-3 is a run. Two of those? Collapse. Mutually inflicted.

 

[nuraman00]

For this Jazz-Thunder game, it took 7:59 for them to tie it with 35 seconds left in the 3rd.

Add 50 more seconds for Westbrook to take the lead with 11:45 left in the 4th, so they no longer lead in a 8:49 span.


The Clippers-Memphis game 1 from 2012 was similar. That was a 27 point lead for Memphis. It was 57-84 with 2:12 left in the 3rd.

The Clippers took the lead with 50 seconds left in the game. Memphis was at home and lost that lead.

So that took 13 minutes and 22 seconds for the lead to be lost.


Boston and New Jersey had a similar game in game 3 in 2002.

New Jersey had a 74 - 49 lead with 3:09 left. It was still a 21 point game at the start of the 4th.

Boston took the lead with 46 seconds left after 2 FTs. So it took 14 minutes, 23 seconds to lose the 25 point lead.

So in summary, in reverse chronological order:

Jazz-Thunder Game 5 2018: Utah lead by 25 with 8:34 left in the 3rd, and no longer lead after 8:49.

Clippers-Memphis Game 1 2012: Memphis lead by 27 with 2:12 left in the 3rd, and no longer lead after 13:22.

Boston - New Jersey Game 3: New Jersey lead by 25 with 3:09 left, and 21 with 12 minutes left. They no longer lead 14:23 after taking the 25 point lead.

 

[nuraman00]

Most of the examples I had brought up, in the earlier season discussions were referencing playoffs games.

Thanks for clearing that you draw a distinction between regular season and playoffs games.

Yes, there have been large leads lost in regular season games too, but I didn't want to focus on them as much, as they're not as important as playoffs games.

 

[MHSL82]

For this Jazz-Thunder game, it took 7:59 for them to tie it with 35 seconds left in the 3rd.

Add 50 more seconds for Westbrook to take the lead with 11:45 left in the 4th, so they no longer lead in a 8:49 span.


The Clippers-Memphis game 1 from 2012 was similar. That was a 27 point lead for Memphis. It was 57-84 with 2:12 left in the 3rd.

The Clippers took the lead with 50 seconds left in the game. Memphis was at home and lost that lead.

So that took 13 minutes and 22 seconds for the lead to be lost.


Boston and New Jersey had a similar game in game 3 in 2002.

New Jersey had a 74 - 49 lead with 3:09 left. It was still a 21 point game at the start of the 4th.

Boston took the lead with 46 seconds left after 2 FTs. So it took 14 minutes, 23 seconds to lose the 25 point lead.

So in summary, in reverse chronological order:

Jazz-Thunder Game 5 2018: Utah lead by 25 with 8:34 left in the 3rd, and no longer lead after 8:49.

Clippers-Memphis Game 1 2012: Memphis lead by 27 with 2:12 left in the 3rd, and no longer lead after 13:22.

Boston - New Jersey Game 3: New Jersey lead by 25 with 3:09 left, and 21 with 12 minutes left. They no longer lead 14:23 after taking the 25 point lead.

Thanks. Memphis had the highest and the Jazz had the quickest. Ours was more impressively bad. Two more points over five more minutes isn't as surprising.

How big and quick was the Lakers comeback over Portland? I will look that up. I think it was 25 or 20 or 28 points or something.

Edit: It appears it was only 15. I felt it was a huge comeback. Maybe I'm thinking of a different game? Top Moments: Famous alley-oop from Kobe to Shaq caps Lakers' comeback | NBA.com

 

[nuraman00]

Never stop a game and sleep on it. That advice is not for you, Nuraman. It's for the Jazz. They took a nap after building the 25 point lead.

Losing a 25 point lead is not surprising. Losing it straight, is. It should have taken 20 minutes to lose it. Not 8:34. I mean, the score was 71 to 46. Ended with a tie at 78. 32-7. That's not a run. Runs are in basketball. That's not a run, that's a collapse. 16-3 is a run. Two of those? Collapse. Mutually inflicted.

I've done a lot for the Jazz this year. I've made toast in a pot. Something which your Auto Correct thought was provided at games.

 

[nuraman00]

Thanks. Memphis had the highest and the Jazz had the quickest. Ours was more impressively bad. Two more points over five more minutes isn't as surprising.

How big and quick was the Lakers comeback over Portland? I will look that up. I think it was 25 or 20 or 28 points or something.

Edit: It appears it was only 13. I felt it was a huge comeback. Maybe I'm thinking of a different game?

If you're talking about Portland vs. Lakers, then yeah, it definitely wasn't 20.

It was memorable because it was a game 7, and Portland had come back from down 3 - 1 and were 15 minutes away from completing the comeback.