GTS Indiana @ Utah 1/26/13

Calgary Jazz wrote:

Richardale wrote:

Sick of refs bogus calls.

They made biggest bogus call at the end of the overtime just to please you Richard and save Jazz from total collapse.....Uglier then ugly win.

What call would that be? The one where the ball hit the side of the backboard, bounced off Watson and into Millsap's hands? That's totally legitimate, as they pointed out on NBATV after the game (rule #4, section #1). The rules state that if the ball goes off the side of the backboard but afterwards lands in play, it is a live ball. You just wish it wasn't because you were rooting for the Jazz to lose.

Trollificus wrote:

I think this is a big game, an important one to win. They get this one, back on the winning track against another good team, all things are possible. They lose and it reinforces the perception, internal and external, that the Jazz are just mediocre. Not to mention the reality of dropping a lot closer to .500 than they should be.

All good troll, you can ride my coattails to the top of the pack.

You are totally right about this last part, which is why I think this was huge win. Indiana is a good team and this game was important to get the Jazz confidence up going into this stretch of home games before the All-Star break. 10 games over .500 by the All-star break is going to take some work though, that's 8-2 over the next 10, and it's do-able with 7 of the 10 at home, but those games are not all against cupcakes (Chicago, Milwakee, @Portland, @Minny, OKC) so the Jazz will have to play at a high level in pretty much every game to get it done.

Shame that discussion got lost in another Calgary bitch fest.

zero24gravity wrote:

I have a feeling I'll be in the upper bowl shaking my head in disbelief for this one.


Pacers by 5.
Pacers with more blocks.

Well, I was correct when I predicted, "I'll be in the upper bowl shaking my head in disbelief". Good thing they overcame a terrible end to regulation and pulled it out in OT.



Jazz won by 4
The teams tied in blocks..... 3 bonus points for everyone!

zero24gravity wrote:

zero24gravity wrote:

I have a feeling I'll be in the upper bowl shaking my head in disbelief for this one.


Pacers by 5.
Pacers with more blocks.

Well, I was correct when I predicted, "I'll be in the upper bowl shaking my head in disbelief". Good thing they overcame a terrible end to regulation and pulled it out in OT.

Jazz won by 5.
The teams tied in blocks..... 3 bonus points for everyone!

woah there big fella, I'm pretty sure the margin was 4. Troll will be super pissed at me if I don't produce results for us.

TheMagnus wrote:

zero24gravity wrote:

zero24gravity wrote:

I have a feeling I'll be in the upper bowl shaking my head in disbelief for this one.


Pacers by 5.
Pacers with more blocks.

Well, I was correct when I predicted, "I'll be in the upper bowl shaking my head in disbelief". Good thing they overcame a terrible end to regulation and pulled it out in OT.

Jazz won by 5.
The teams tied in blocks..... 3 bonus points for everyone!

woah there big fella, I'm pretty sure the margin was 4. Troll will be super pissed at me if I don't produce results for us.

I stand corrected. Both teams had five blocks, so that was on my mind.
Jazz won by 4. (edit made)

May I also add, that I was impressed with Watson last night. His line was not great (31min, 2pts, 4reb, 5ast, 2stl, 0 TO), but he came up with a lot of big plays. Steals and rebounds at very opportune times, diving into the stands for a loose ball, and a rebound tip in OT that sealed the deal. Nice job.

I remember way back to when Kobe was a young Laker playing the Jazz in his first playoffs. In the last game of the playoffs Kobe airballed some shots and missed most...but he was willing to be in there taking the shots when all the other veterans were either scared or worried to take the shots. That showed everyone that some day he would be a warrior. We can debate how much of one. I see that same determination in Hayward. He might not have Kobe's career but he does have that same warrior attitude. I give him credit, he made some mistakes but he didn't hang his head...he battle.

Hound Dog wrote:

I remember way back to when Kobe was a young Laker playing the Jazz in his first playoffs. In the last game of the playoffs Kobe airballed some shots and missed most...but he was willing to be in there taking the shots when all the other veterans were either scared or worried to take the shots. That showed everyone that some day he would be a warrior. We can debate how much of one. I see that same determination in Hayward. He might not have Kobe's career but he does have that same warrior attitude. I give him credit, he made some mistakes but he didn't hang his head...he battle.

Solid points. There has been several of us that wondered if that was going to be part of haywards persona, in the past he seemed to often be lacking it, but this year you are right, he has been aggressive regardless and has come up big in the clutch several times.

Calgary Jazz wrote:

Richardale wrote:

Sick of refs bogus calls.

They made biggest bogus call at the end of the overtime just to please you Richard and save Jazz from total collapse.....Uglier then ugly win.

Hah, good job Objective Expert....it was the right call. Typical......As for Hayward, he actually had an exceptional game, making great plays, knocking down big buckets, driving hard to the hole. Not that the Dr would admit it. Did have some unfortunate turnovers. But everyone does that from time to time, even Stockton. Not in Calgary's world, but everyone else's. Not to mention, who blocked that game tying 3 attempt by your other boy George???? Oh yea, Gordo. We fans love him.

Actually, I was going to drop some opinions, but seems the entire board has Calgary about nailed. Well, except one thing. Magnus nailed it awhile ago: Calgary cares more about his opinions than being a fan of this team. Always shows that.
I do wonder why he's on here, then again, FALaker trolled on here too.

Anyway, love Gordo in that game. Looked like a leader out there....

Mutangclan wrote:

Calgary Jazz wrote:

Richardale wrote:

Sick of refs bogus calls.

They made biggest bogus call at the end of the overtime just to please you Richard and save Jazz from total collapse.....Uglier then ugly win.

Hah, good job Objective Expert....it was the right call. Typical......As for Hayward, he actually had an exceptional game, making great plays, knocking down big buckets, driving hard to the hole. Not that the Dr would admit it. Did have some unfortunate turnovers. But everyone does that from time to time, even Stockton. Not in Calgary's world, but everyone else's. Not to mention, who blocked that game tying 3 attempt by your other boy George???? Oh yea, Gordo. We fans love him.

Actually, I was going to drop some opinions, but seems the entire board has Calgary about nailed. Well, except one thing. Magnus nailed it awhile ago: Calgary cares more about his opinions than being a fan of this team. Always shows that.
I do wonder why he's on here, then again, FALaker trolled on here too.

Anyway, love Gordo in that game. Looked like a leader out there....

I've been rewatching the game, and GH really did have quite a good game up until that last minute or two when things fell apart for him. I think it's fair to say that that sort of thing happens to all players, especially ones who are in high pressure situations. Looking back, I have no specific qualms about how events unfolded at the end, other than perhaps spacing and positioning on the floor. Indiana is a good defensive team, and in this game they really did look like genuine NBA championship contenders. The Jazz got a good win out there.

Someone mentioned Earl Watson's game. I liked it, too. He really does provide hustle and dog-headed determinedness that some of the Jazz players lack. I think he has it, GH has it, Millsap has it and DC has it. That helps those players to be useful at the end of games, even if they aren't the most talented or skilled. I hope Derrick Favors can learn it, but it seems to be inherent in one's personality.

Props to Millsap and Jefferson, both of whom had decent games. Al Jeff really carried the team in OT. That was a good win against probably the third best team in the Eastern Conference.

thejazzkickazz wrote:

I think it's fair to say that that sort of thing happens to all players, especially ones who are in high pressure situations. Looking back, I have no specific qualms about how events unfolded at the end, other than perhaps spacing and positioning on the floor.

I don't know. I was appalled by Hayward's three turnovers in the last thirty seconds and would have mentioned it myself if Calgary hadn't, simply for the reason that it appears possible that we are trying to make Hayward in to more of a player than he actually is. When we have Jefferson and Millsap, why are we putting the ball in Hayward's hands at the end of a game and telling him to try to create a shot? For a moment there, I thought we were seeing a repeat of an early season game where Mo went one on one three times at the end of the game and forced up three missed shots to give away a game. I know these guys, Hayward and Mo, want to be "go to heroes" at the end of a game, but they need to be the third or fourth option behind Jefferson and Millsap in the waning moments of a game imo. At the bare minimum, we need to go inside out. Look at what Jefferson did in the overtime when we suddenly got smart and committed to ride him.

thejazzkickazz wrote:

Al Jeff really carried the team in OT.

Indeed he did.

On another note, Carroll was doing a good job guarding George in the part I watched, and then suddenly we had George easily shooting over the top of Foye to nail a three to bring the Pacers back. Why didn't we keep riding Carroll when we had the lead? (Note: I was watching the game on about a three by three inch video feed on a laptop with lots of interruptions, so I could have this part wrong, but that was my impression.)

Crunchtime1 wrote:

On another note, Carroll was doing a good job guarding George in the part I watched, and then suddenly we had George easily shooting over the top of Foye to nail a three to bring the Pacers back. Why didn't we keep riding Carroll when we had the lead? (Note: I was watching the game on about a three by three inch video feed on a laptop with lots of interruptions, so I could have this part wrong, but that was my impression.)

Thanks for reminding me. Exhibit A. on why I love DC and he's actually a smart player. George is a phenomenal talent, who already at this point his almost unguardable. Foye can't even guard his own shadow and was certainly overmatched. But you know what DC did??? He simply denied George the ball. Did not leave his pocket, and George was irrelevant while DC was out there. Why in the world didnt Foye also just deny George the ball??? Got me.

thejazzkickazz wrote:

Someone mentioned Earl Watson's game. I liked it, too. He really does provide hustle and dog-headed determinedness that some of the Jazz players lack. I think he has it, GH has it, Millsap has it and DC has it. That helps those players to be useful at the end of games, even if they aren't the most talented or skilled. I hope Derrick Favors can learn it, but it seems to be inherent in one's personality.

Rep point.....absolutely. Those are my kinda guys. Not always the most talented, but they'll out work.

I hope you guys will allow me a little self-indulgence here. This is someone's comment on the game last night in response to the Jazz article in the Salt Lake Tribune, and my response to them:

From "mugsyg":

"UN-FRIGGIN-BELIEVEABLE !!!

WILL... THIS... TEAM... EVER... GRASP... THAT... THERE... ARE... 48 MINUTES... IN A GAME ????????????????????????????????????

Hayward, I hope you slept well last night. I sure wouldn't have if I were you. All the talk about your
"excellent" ball handling. Where does that come from? Really? You get
lucky at times, but in my eyes you are trying to dribble waaaaaaaaaaay
out of control. For you to be the ball handler on three straight plays
in the last minute of regulation... and turn it over EVERY time is
unconscionable."

And my response:

"There were actually 53 minutes in that ballgame last night, and they did pretty well during the 5 minutes that you excluded. Hayward had a good game, overall, with the exception of the final minute or two that you have for some reason chosen to give all of your focus. I'd hate to see your post if the Jazz had actually lost the game. Okay, time to take your pills."

Seriously, people out there...this is just a game! Try not to let it keep you up at night. Yeah, GH fouled things up at the end of the game. Yeah, maybe the coaches will have to rethink the endgame strategy and draw up some different plays, but let's keep this in perspective. Personally, I'd have preferred something more like a pick-n-roll play at the top of the key over some kind of GH isolation play, but that's neither here nor there now.

thejazzkickazz wrote:

Calgary Jazz wrote:

thejazzkickazz wrote:

Calgary Jazz wrote:

Richardale wrote:

Not a foul on Dc at end! Sick of refs bogus calls.

how predictable of you richard to bitch about refs. If your golden boy Hayward would not turn ball 3 times in a row in last 30 seconds, nobody would worry about refs

You must be the biggest douchebag in the world. I'm very pleased that I don't know you personally.

So me pointing to the fact that Richard is always bitching about refs and to the real reason why Jazz could not close it in regulation makes me biggest douchebag?
In fact this post makes you look like biased pathetic homer who can't accept the truth even if it hurts.

Aww, look at Calgary, playing the victim, as he typically does when people call him out for his pathological hatred of Gordon Hayward and/or Enes Kanter. The fact is, sir, you have an irrational hatred of those two players, and you find any opportunity to point it out when either of them has a bad game, or even a bad few moments, as Hayward did at the end of the game last night. Hayward had a pretty good game overall, but had several missteps in that game last night that helped Indiana to gain an overtime opportunity. So be it, I think most rational Jazz fans are willing to acknowledge that.

However, you...your modus operandi is to focus entirely on the bad, without any acknowledgement of the good. You rush to this chatboard when Hayward makes mistakes or has a few bad games in order to rub it in. And why? Because of your skewed perception of Jazz management (essentially Jerry Sloan and Kevin O'Connor) having misused and abused your golden boy (deploying your words that you use to mock those people here who like Gordon Hayward and what he has to offer the team) Andrei Kirilenko. That skewed perception has led to a grudge against the Jazz decision-makers that results in a feeling of desire that the players they choose in the draft lottery fail.

Nearly every time you participate on this board, other than in the 'guess the score' threads, it's to attack Hayward and/or Kanter. When you have said anything positive about either player, it has only been grudgingly and only after having been bested in debates by other fans who have more objective perspectives.

Seriously, you need to do some soul searching and think about your behavior on this (and Tribtalk) chatboard over the past decade. It's been nothing but a 10-year bitchfest about Jerry Sloan and Kevin O'Connor. If you hate them so much, how can you continue to follow this team? The team's identity is wrapped up in their legacies, and will be for at least a number of years.

Ditto and Amen bro!

Quote :

I don't know. I was appalled by Hayward's three turnovers in the last thirty seconds and would have mentioned it myself if Calgary hadn't, simply for the reason that it appears possible that we are trying to make Hayward in to more of a player than he actually is. When we have Jefferson and Millsap, why are we putting the ball in Hayward's hands at the end of a game and telling him to try to create a shot? For a moment there, I thought we were seeing a repeat of an early season game where Mo went one on one three times at the end of the game and forced up three missed shots to give away a game. I know these guys, Hayward and Mo, want to be "go to heroes" at the end of a game, but they need to be the third or fourth option behind Jefferson and Millsap in the waning moments of a game imo. At the bare minimum, we need to go inside out. Look at what Jefferson did in the overtime when we suddenly got smart and committed to ride him.

Indeed, Crunchtime, but had you have mentioned it, it would have been in a much more level-headed, unbiased manner, as you have presented here. I'm certainly not going to debate the fact that those errors at the end of the game by GH were very disturbing, and I hope the coaches will make adjustments so that that doesn't happen again. Let's give some credit to the Pacers for stepping up their defense and getting some deflections in those situations, they were pretty impressive.

The biggest lesson here is that GH is not a point guard, and ideally he shouldn't be the person doing all the ball handling at the end of the game, especially when the other team is desperate and is going to take defensive risks in order to deflect/steal the ball. The better option would probably have been to get the ball into Earl Watson's hands, after which he could have delivered it to Hayward at the free throw line extended, or tossed it into the post into AJ's waiting hands. The coaches will remember and adjust.

The last turnover by Gordo seems to me like poor play calling. No way should he be taking the inbound pass and dribbling the ball as time expires. That should have fallen on Watson. Gordon isn't the type of player to dribble the ball at the three point line and create his own shot with time winding down. They should have gotten the ball to the pg and had the rest of the team moving to open up a game winning shot. Gordon isn't a very good ball handler, He actually reminded me of AK with that. His dribbling looks awkward and out of control most of the time. He is much better moving without the ball and getting open that way. The turnovers were just Hayward doing things that he isn't very good at and it costing them. Having said that, with out Gordon they wouldn't have even been in the game in the first place. It's all about learning for him. You could tell by the look on his face that he was very upset with himself after those turnovers. He is still a young guy and things like this will help him in the future.

On Watson, with as much skill as he doesn't have, that guy is one hell of a player, He isn't a guy they can start, but he is a throwback player and I love the things him and DC bring to the team. Kanter is the same way, but he has the rare talent to go with it.

thejazzkickazz wrote:

Quote :

I don't know. I was appalled by Hayward's three turnovers in the last thirty seconds and would have mentioned it myself if Calgary hadn't, simply for the reason that it appears possible that we are trying to make Hayward in to more of a player than he actually is. When we have Jefferson and Millsap, why are we putting the ball in Hayward's hands at the end of a game and telling him to try to create a shot? For a moment there, I thought we were seeing a repeat of an early season game where Mo went one on one three times at the end of the game and forced up three missed shots to give away a game. I know these guys, Hayward and Mo, want to be "go to heroes" at the end of a game, but they need to be the third or fourth option behind Jefferson and Millsap in the waning moments of a game imo. At the bare minimum, we need to go inside out. Look at what Jefferson did in the overtime when we suddenly got smart and committed to ride him.

Indeed, Crunchtime, but had you have mentioned it, it would have been in a much more level-headed, unbiased manner, as you have presented here. I'm certainly not going to debate the fact that those errors at the end of the game by GH were very disturbing, and I hope the coaches will make adjustments so that that doesn't happen again. Let's give some credit to the Pacers for stepping up their defense and getting some deflections in those situations, they were pretty impressive.

The biggest lesson here is that GH is not a point guard, and ideally he shouldn't be the person doing all the ball handling at the end of the game, especially when the other team is desperate and is going to take defensive risks in order to deflect/steal the ball. The better option would probably have been to get the ball into Earl Watson's hands, after which he could have delivered it to Hayward at the free throw line extended, or tossed it into the post into AJ's waiting hands. The coaches will remember and adjust.

Ya, I think the bottom line here is that isolation plays where you hand a guy the ball and ask him to create a shot for himself or others are quite literally the least effective plays in basketball, it doesn't matter who the guy with the ball is, he's going to be less effective running the isolation play than he is in most other situations. For the Jazz that holds double true for everybody except Al Jefferson, because isolation is his primary offense, but even he is only marginally productive (40% Win) in those situations.

Bottom line is the Jazz need to execute an offense, and it doesn't matter who starts with the ball.

TheMagnus wrote:

thejazzkickazz wrote:

The biggest lesson here is that GH is not a point guard, and ideally he shouldn't be the person doing all the ball handling at the end of the game, especially when the other team is desperate and is going to take defensive risks in order to deflect/steal the ball. The better option would probably have been to get the ball into Earl Watson's hands, after which he could have delivered it to Hayward at the free throw line extended, or tossed it into the post into AJ's waiting hands. The coaches will remember and adjust.

Ya, I think the bottom line here is that isolation plays where you hand a guy the ball and ask him to create a shot for himself or others are quite literally the least effective plays in basketball, it doesn't matter who the guy with the ball is, he's going to be less effective running the isolation play than he is in most other situations. For the Jazz that holds double true for everybody except Al Jefferson, because isolation is his primary offense, but even he is only marginally productive (40% Win) in those situations.

Bottom line is the Jazz need to execute an offense, and it doesn't matter who starts with the ball.

So does this fall on Corbin AGAIN?? Really, I dont hate the guy having the job, but does he have upside, or are we just treading water?

thejazzkickazz wrote:

Mutangclan wrote:

Calgary Jazz wrote:

Richardale wrote:

Sick of refs bogus calls.

They made biggest bogus call at the end of the overtime just to please you Richard and save Jazz from total collapse.....Uglier then ugly win.

Hah, good job Objective Expert....it was the right call. Typical......As for Hayward, he actually had an exceptional game, making great plays, knocking down big buckets, driving hard to the hole. Not that the Dr would admit it. Did have some unfortunate turnovers. But everyone does that from time to time, even Stockton. Not in Calgary's world, but everyone else's. Not to mention, who blocked that game tying 3 attempt by your other boy George???? Oh yea, Gordo. We fans love him.

Actually, I was going to drop some opinions, but seems the entire board has Calgary about nailed. Well, except one thing. Magnus nailed it awhile ago: Calgary cares more about his opinions than being a fan of this team. Always shows that.
I do wonder why he's on here, then again, FALaker trolled on here too.

Anyway, love Gordo in that game. Looked like a leader out there....

I've been rewatching the game, and GH really did have quite a good game up until that last minute or two when things fell apart for him. I think it's fair to say that that sort of thing happens to all players, especially ones who are in high pressure situations. Looking back, I have no specific qualms about how events unfolded at the end, other than perhaps spacing and positioning on the floor. Indiana is a good defensive team, and in this game they really did look like genuine NBA championship contenders. The Jazz got a good win out there.

Someone mentioned Earl Watson's game. I liked it, too. He really does provide hustle and dog-headed determinedness that some of the Jazz players lack. I think he has it, GH has it, Millsap has it and DC has it. That helps those players to be useful at the end of games, even if they aren't the most talented or skilled. I hope Derrick Favors can learn it, but it seems to be inherent in one's personality.

Props to Millsap and Jefferson, both of whom had decent games. Al Jeff really carried the team in OT. That was a good win against probably the third best team in the Eastern Conference.

"dog-headed determinedness" heh.

Not sure if that's a real thing, jazzkick, but I like it, and it's perfectly descriptive.

Also, re: Hayward's endgame turnovers, I'm just glad they've finally changed the hand-check rules!!

Oh wait! What's that you say?? They haven't changed the hand-check rules?? Well then, somebody better remind the f'ing refs that HAYWARD, DRIBBLING THE BALL THIRTY FEET FROM THE BASKET, IS, IN FACT, A "BALL HANDLER", AND THE HANDCHECK RULES APPLY TO HIM!!!

I was bitching about George Hill's pathetic grab-push-and-hold "defense" against Hayward (and frickin' FLOPS, when Hayward pushed back), saying "I guess the hand check rules don't apply to 6'8" white guys." and my son got on me for bitching about the refs. He came out of his room at the end of the game SCREAMING about the "F'ing refs won't let the kid play blahdeblah...." lol.

The one reacharound steal was clean but there's about 70 players who would've drawn 4 or 5 fouls in those last couple of minutes, based on how they defended Hayward.

I noticed nobody mentioned that, so...

BTW, also unmentioned: the fact that the Jazz might not even have been in the game if not for Millsap's one-man crusade against West early in the 3rd quarter. That's the kind of thing he usually fails at when he tries to force it, but he made it work last night!

Mutangclan wrote:

TheMagnus wrote:

thejazzkickazz wrote:

The biggest lesson here is that GH is not a point guard, and ideally he shouldn't be the person doing all the ball handling at the end of the game, especially when the other team is desperate and is going to take defensive risks in order to deflect/steal the ball. The better option would probably have been to get the ball into Earl Watson's hands, after which he could have delivered it to Hayward at the free throw line extended, or tossed it into the post into AJ's waiting hands. The coaches will remember and adjust.

Ya, I think the bottom line here is that isolation plays where you hand a guy the ball and ask him to create a shot for himself or others are quite literally the least effective plays in basketball, it doesn't matter who the guy with the ball is, he's going to be less effective running the isolation play than he is in most other situations. For the Jazz that holds double true for everybody except Al Jefferson, because isolation is his primary offense, but even he is only marginally productive (40% Win) in those situations.

Bottom line is the Jazz need to execute an offense, and it doesn't matter who starts with the ball.

So does this fall on Corbin AGAIN?? Really, I dont hate the guy having the job, but does he have upside, or are we just treading water?

Well you know as well as I do that just because you call a play doesn't mean it's going to work out, or even be run, especially with a young player like Hayward facing a tough sophisticated defensive team like the Pacers. Still, it is a fixable problem, and we should expect to see better execution going forward.

That being said, it should also be noted that the Jazz are 5-3 in games decided by 3 pts or less, and 2-0 in overtime, so it can't be that bad.

TheMagnus wrote:

Well you know as well as I do that just because you call a play doesn't mean it's going to work out, or even be run, especially with a young player like Hayward facing a tough sophisticated defensive team like the Pacers. Still, it is a fixable problem, and we should expect to see better execution going forward.

That being said, it should also be noted that the Jazz are 5-3 in games decided by 3 pts or less, and 2-0 in overtime, so it can't be that bad.

True, true. I really wish I could watch that last few minutes again......lots to look at.

But hey, I dont have a problem with that victory. Pacers are no slouch, and have been beating the best. Jazz found a way to win, turnovers happen, but overall B+ game for this team.