Interview with GM Dennis Lindsey

Did y'all catch this? It wasn't anything earth shattering, but I got positive vibes.
Talks about a statistical system of metrics he is developing/having developed to analyze players/games. Says he analyzes data daily.
He seems to have a plan. He seems eager to take the reins. I think we will see his brand start to take over the team. I think the jazz are lucky to have him. I like what I see/hear.

Like I said, nothing mind blowing, but I do like that he answers the questions seemingly openly and directly. Not a lot of "no comment" responses. Of course, the content was a little vanilla, but still....

http://1280thezone.com/index.php/audio/listen/the_big_show_dennis_lindsey_utah_jazz_general_manager6

You'd think DL was studying the numbers every game and would let Ty know in no uncertain terms that Foye is killing the team as a starter. Still singing my "start the 5 best guys" song and Foye has absolutely and unequivocally played horrible ball since before the All-Star break. The numbers are glaring, so why isn't DL doing anything about putting his stamp on this year's model? Move GH to the 2, DC to the 3 and suddenly the starting 5 looks long and competitive.

MTJazz wrote:

You'd think DL was studying the numbers every game and would let Ty know in no uncertain terms that Foye is killing the team as a starter. Still singing my "start the 5 best guys" song and Foye has absolutely and unequivocally played horrible ball since before the All-Star break. The numbers are glaring, so why isn't DL doing anything about putting his stamp on this year's model? Move GH to the 2, DC to the 3 and suddenly the starting 5 looks long and competitive.

That really would be ideal, and now with Gordo BACK in the starting lineup, and again not what I necessarily wanted, but since he is, I'm for keeping DC there too. He did what he was supposed to do, and because the Jazz kept losing through no fault of DC's, Corbin yanked him again. Move Fo now, keep DC in there and we have some really good defending wings. Gordo brings the outside shooting with Mo, Al and Paul down low. It's a balanced 5..........but why have a balanced team, right.....
Did see Corbin say if Carmelo played tonight he'd look at bringing in a bigger SF like DC. Lets just hope he makes the CORRECT move and takes out Foye.

But again, we come back to Corbin. He ALMOST makes the right moves, ALMOST some of the time. Always making a move that is ALMOST the correct one.....so irritating.

MTJazz wrote:

You'd think DL was studying the numbers every game and would let Ty know in no uncertain terms that Foye is killing the team as a starter. Still singing my "start the 5 best guys" song and Foye has absolutely and unequivocally played horrible ball since before the All-Star break. The numbers are glaring, so why isn't DL doing anything about putting his stamp on this year's model? Move GH to the 2, DC to the 3 and suddenly the starting 5 looks long and competitive.

Alright, you convinced me, I wasn't sure before but I'm 100% on board now.

I love that starting lineup. I really do. And I think the second unit featuring Burks at the point with Marvin and Foye would also be excellent.

I think we will see some changes next year.

I think this year is kind of a transitional year for him, and he probably feels a little in limbo. Since he wasn't here for the hiring of Ty, last year, the draft, and everything else...plus he is probably not just being handed the reins from KOC completely...yet, I think this year the changes and his influence are incremental and almost not noticed.

I hope that moving forward he will settle in to his responsibility and KOC will let him have it. Personally, I think we will like what we will see once Lindsey has a chance to really "get his fingerprints" on this team.

The Voice of Reason wrote:

Personally, I think we will like what we will see once Lindsey has a chance to really "get his fingerprints" on this team.

My guess is that the first visible fingerprints of DL was the Travis Leslie signing, super below radar pick-up with no obvious need for minutes out of him this year. I think Leslie is DL's first "draft pick". The invisible fingerprints are probably his ongoing custom analytics he is developing for Jazzland and helping KOC avoid doing something marginal during the trade deadline. Let us hope that he represents a secret weapon advantage for the Jazz moving forward because this season is ending in tears no matter what, (playoffs or not). Beyond having fun watching our young guys develop I'm mostly at this point suffering from season-long frustration and angst, losing confidence in Ty and by extension the FO support of him. However I'm already excited to see what comes out of this year's draft and FA period and the new Jazz look.

Here's what I thought was the most interesting quote from the Lindsey interview., when he was asked about whether it is better for the team in the long run to win or lose now...

Dennis Lindsey wrote:

Really, from my perspective, I really want us to win for Ty. You know, I think it’s important for a young coach. I really want us to win, because the players have done what we’ve asked them to do...

I think there are just so many different thigs you could read into that statement. When I read it it almost sounds like "I hope we win, because I don't want to fire Ty", but it could be read more like "I think winning now is critical for Tyrone Corbins development" implying that they intend to keep him like they would keep a young player. I also thought it interesting that threw in an unequivocal statement about how the players have "done what we've asked", which effectively throws all of the responsibility for losing back on Corbin and himself.

TheMagnus wrote:

Here's what I thought was the most interesting quote from the Lindsey interview., when he was asked about whether it is better for the team in the long run to win or lose now...

Dennis Lindsey wrote:

Really, from my perspective, I really want us to win for Ty. You know, I think it’s important for a young coach. I really want us to win, because the players have done what we’ve asked them to do...

I think there are just so many different thigs you could read into that statement. When I read it it almost sounds like "I hope we win, because I don't want to fire Ty", but it could be read more like "I think winning now is critical for Tyrone Corbins development" implying that they intend to keep him like they would keep a young player. I also thought it interesting that threw in an unequivocal statement about how the players have "done what we've asked", which effectively throws all of the responsibility for losing back on Corbin and himself.

You're right, it's really hard to figure out what that staement means. Each sentence makes me think something different about Ty's job security.

Interesting.

TheMagnus wrote:

Here's what I thought was the most interesting quote from the Lindsey interview., when he was asked about whether it is better for the team in the long run to win or lose now...

Dennis Lindsey wrote:

Really, from my perspective, I really want us to win for Ty. You know, I think it’s important for a young coach. I really want us to win, because the players have done what we’ve asked them to do...

I think there are just so many different thigs you could read into that statement. When I read it it almost sounds like "I hope we win, because I don't want to fire Ty", but it could be read more like "I think winning now is critical for Tyrone Corbins development" implying that they intend to keep him like they would keep a young player. I also thought it interesting that threw in an unequivocal statement about how the players have "done what we've asked", which effectively throws all of the responsibility for losing back on Corbin and himself.

I agree with your take, however, if the player's have done everything asked of them I think Corbin definitely needs to raise the bar and ask for more. We've all discussed several weaknesses, like Big Al's lack of defense. I think asking Big Al to at least put forth a consistant, solid effort on the defensive end would be appropriate. There are nights he tries and blocks a shot or two. On other nights his defense is non-existant. This is just one example of things I'd like to see asked.

I could be reading in to things way too much, but I almost take the "the players have done everything we have asked them to do" statement as:

- Jazz are stuck with Jefferson's contract this year.
- Jazz want to make the playoffs this year.
- TyCo feels like the best option to win this year and make the playoffs is to play Jefferson even though it means putting off the youth movement another year.
- Basically the players have been asked to win now, whatever that takes...and for some people, that means sacrificing playing time, position, whatever...

- I almost wonder if people (players AND Dennis Lindsey) are more or less feeling like they are required to ride the Jefferson wave the rest of the year and hopefully squeak in to the playoffs. There is no way that Jefferson is re-signed next year if DL's metrics are worth anything at all. They have to be seeing the same thing we are seeing. Maybe they feel like this is the best thing to win now (ish) and preserve team chemistry....a player could almost deal with this, this year, if they have the promise that next year it all goes away and they won't have to deal with it.....

Just some random musings...

The Voice of Reason wrote:

I could be reading in to things way too much, but I almost take the "the players have done everything we have asked them to do" statement as:

- Jazz are stuck with Jefferson's contract this year.
- Jazz want to make the playoffs this year.
- TyCo feels like the best option to win this year and make the playoffs is to play Jefferson even though it means putting off the youth movement another year.
- Basically the players have been asked to win now, whatever that takes...and for some people, that means sacrificing playing time, position, whatever...

- I almost wonder if people (players AND Dennis Lindsey) are more or less feeling like they are required to ride the Jefferson wave the rest of the year and hopefully squeak in to the playoffs. There is no way that Jefferson is re-signed next year if DL's metrics are worth anything at all. They have to be seeing the same thing we are seeing. Maybe they feel like this is the best thing to win now (ish) and preserve team chemistry....a player could almost deal with this, this year, if they have the promise that next year it all goes away and they won't have to deal with it.....

Just some random musings...

This could be true. On the flip side, if DL's metrics say that Al is a problem, then why would they waste time playing a guy who isn't good for the team if they are not planning on bringing him back next year? Wouldn't it make more sense to make the guys on the team happy that will be back next year instead of the player that won't be in Utah ..... especially if the numbers say that the team would be better off (this year included) without that player?

I'm at a complete loss about where this team is headed. The good news is there is TONS of flexiblity when it comes to roster space, money & direction. It's just a matter of getting it all to come together over the next two seasons.

First, there aren't many questions you could ask a GM that he could honestly give an unequivocal yes/no, black/white answer. There are SO MANY factors that all effect each other, and the GM has to keep them all in mind, all the time.

Second, how did we miss "TyCo" as a nick for Corbin? Just right.

Third, I'm pissed that Kanter's getting the short end of the stick, minutes-wise. I'm convinced that given Jefferson's minutes, he'd approximate Jefferson's production RIGHT NOW. I don't think the FO is much concerned with losing Big Al. Going forward, Kanter will match the scoring, improve the rebounding, and show better, more active defense, better, and he's a better, more willing passer, etc., etc. I understand their dilema, and Al is probably more RELIABLE as a scorer, but still...

4th...how's this for a Small ball defensive lineup:
PG-Mo
SG-Burks
SF-Hayward
PF-DC
C-Favors

DC is pretty strong and active enough to guard most PFs AND he's WILLING to do so. That's a pressurin' team there.

Against teams where we'd want some size advantage:

PG-Burks
SG-Hayward
SF-DC
PF-Favors
C-Kanter

Again, this is looking at DEFENSE ONLY, but that's a beast lineup for sure-BIG, long, athletic, ACTIVE and young.

Now...both those lineups have one thing in common: No Big Al and no Millsap. I think even without those two players, we have a team as good as this years WITHOUT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT PLAYERS WE CAN ACQUIRE FOR THE $30 or so mill we'd have available under the cap.

Things looking good for the future in Jazzland? Magic 8-Ball says "Without a doubt".

zero24gravity wrote:

The Voice of Reason wrote:

I could be reading in to things way too much, but I almost take the "the players have done everything we have asked them to do" statement as:

- Jazz are stuck with Jefferson's contract this year.
- Jazz want to make the playoffs this year.
- TyCo feels like the best option to win this year and make the playoffs is to play Jefferson even though it means putting off the youth movement another year.
- Basically the players have been asked to win now, whatever that takes...and for some people, that means sacrificing playing time, position, whatever...

- I almost wonder if people (players AND Dennis Lindsey) are more or less feeling like they are required to ride the Jefferson wave the rest of the year and hopefully squeak in to the playoffs. There is no way that Jefferson is re-signed next year if DL's metrics are worth anything at all. They have to be seeing the same thing we are seeing. Maybe they feel like this is the best thing to win now (ish) and preserve team chemistry....a player could almost deal with this, this year, if they have the promise that next year it all goes away and they won't have to deal with it.....

Just some random musings...

This could be true. On the flip side, if DL's metrics say that Al is a problem, then why would they waste time playing a guy who isn't good for the team if they are not planning on bringing him back next year? Wouldn't it make more sense to make the guys on the team happy that will be back next year instead of the player that won't be in Utah ..... especially if the numbers say that the team would be better off (this year included) without that player?

I'm at a complete loss about where this team is headed. The good news is there is TONS of flexiblity when it comes to roster space, money & direction. It's just a matter of getting it all to come together over the next two seasons.

Lindsey has repeatedly said that Cobin makes all of the decisions on rotations and playing time, and his #1 priority is winning right now, so it is not really surprising (though it is dissapointing) that Corbin would feel like riding a quality veteran like Jefferson is the best way to go.

I'm as down on Jefferson as anybody, but I still think he's a decent player that adds value, just not as much as he's being paid for. Everybody knows that I think Millsap is the best player on this team, but he's not the Center (litterally and figuratively) of this team, Al Jefferson is. Corbin has designed both the offense and defense around his strengths and weaknesses, and for better or worse (mostly worse) I think he will put any efforts to change that off until the season is over.

Trollificus wrote:

First, there aren't many questions you could ask a GM that he could honestly give an unequivocal yes/no, black/white answer. There are SO MANY factors that all effect each other, and the GM has to keep them all in mind, all the time.

Second, how did we miss "TyCo" as a nick for Corbin? Just right.

Third, I'm pissed that Kanter's getting the short end of the stick, minutes-wise. I'm convinced that given Jefferson's minutes, he'd approximate Jefferson's production RIGHT NOW. I don't think the FO is much concerned with losing Big Al. Going forward, Kanter will match the scoring, improve the rebounding, and show better, more active defense, better, and he's a better, more willing passer, etc., etc. I understand their dilema, and Al is probably more RELIABLE as a scorer, but still...

4th...how's this for a Small ball defensive lineup:
PG-Mo
SG-Burks
SF-Hayward
PF-DC
C-Favors

DC is pretty strong and active enough to guard most PFs AND he's WILLING to do so. That's a pressurin' team there.

Against teams where we'd want some size advantage:

PG-Burks
SG-Hayward
SF-DC
PF-Favors
C-Kanter

Again, this is looking at DEFENSE ONLY, but that's a beast lineup for sure-BIG, long, athletic, ACTIVE and young.

Now...both those lineups have one thing in common: No Big Al and no Millsap. I think with those players, we have a team as good as this years team WITHOUT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT PLAYERS WE CAN ACQUIRE FOR THE $30 or so mill we'd have available under the cap.

Things looking good for the future in Jazzland? Magic 8-Ball says "Without a doubt".

TyCo...

The motion caries without objection, TyCo it is. Is that a VOR trademark?

I think I would probably replace Mo with Marvin in your small ball D lineup, move Burks to the 1, Gordon to the 2, DC to 3, and put Marvin at 4. Funny thing is that in todays NBA that isn't realy very small, and could match up pretty well against 80% of the teams in the NBA. It would be perfect for tonights game against the Knicks if Melo was starting at PF.

The Voice of Reason wrote:

I could be reading in to things way too much, but I almost take the "the players have done everything we have asked them to do" statement as:

- Jazz are stuck with Jefferson's contract this year.
- Jazz want to make the playoffs this year.
- TyCo feels like the best option to win this year and make the playoffs is to play Jefferson even though it means putting off the youth movement another year.
- Basically the players have been asked to win now, whatever that takes...and for some people, that means sacrificing playing time, position, whatever...

- I almost wonder if people (players AND Dennis Lindsey) are more or less feeling like they are required to ride the Jefferson wave the rest of the year and hopefully squeak in to the playoffs. There is no way that Jefferson is re-signed next year if DL's metrics are worth anything at all. They have to be seeing the same thing we are seeing. Maybe they feel like this is the best thing to win now (ish) and preserve team chemistry....a player could almost deal with this, this year, if they have the promise that next year it all goes away and they won't have to deal with it.....

Just some random musings...

I was just posting the exact same thoughts on everything you just said, VOR. So I wont waste space. I agree with everything you think, THEY are all thinking.
Now for what I, and everyone else thinks they should be doing.......

I'm pretty sure it's rare, very rare, for any front office to dictate specific playing time/substitutions to a coach.

And when I say "any", I'm even including idiots like Sterling and the Maloofs.

The one exception might be on overall strategic approach...and since the "strategy" of most teams, most of the time, is to try and win (derrr), the only time this is really going to come up is when tanking.

How the "tanking" strategy is communicated to someone like Marc Jackson, I'm not sure, but I bet it was some vague "Let's make sure our top players aren't at risk of long-term injury" and "We'd like to see what our young players can do, rather than rush anybody back from a bruised ear or hangnail." (Never mind that the "younger players" are D-League call ups, late 2nd-rounders and career backups.) Maybe throw a "Man, we'd sure HATE to have to give up that 1st round pick to the Jazz just because we beat the Wizards at home." into it too.

Other than that, I don't think there's too many direct orders. If the FO doesn't like what the coach is doing, they need to get rid of him.

Trollificus wrote:

I'm pretty sure it's rare, very rare, for any front office to dictate specific playing time/substitutions to a coach.

And when I say "any", I'm even including idiots like Sterling and the Maloofs.

The one exception might be on overall strategic approach...and since the "strategy" of most teams, most of the time, is to try and win (derrr), the only time this is really going to come up is when tanking.

How the "tanking" strategy is communicated to someone like Marc Jackson, I'm not sure, but I bet it was some vague "Let's make sure our top players aren't at risk of long-term injury" and "We'd like to see what our young players can do, rather than rush anybody back from a bruised ear or hangnail." (Never mind that the "younger players" are D-League call ups, late 2nd-rounders and career backups.) Maybe throw a "Man, we'd sure HATE to have to give up that 1st round pick to the Jazz just because we beat the Wizards at home." into it too.

Other than that, I don't think there's too many direct orders. If the FO doesn't like what the coach is doing, they need to get rid of him.

Given Jackson's well documented view that he's a "leader" and that being a "leader" justifies any necessary subterfuge and scheming, i'm betting the conversation went like this....

GM: "So Coach, we are thinking about trying your best active player for another injured guy?"

MJ: "we gonna try and keep our draft pick?"

GM: "ideally"

MJ: "if I lose out will I keep my job?"

GM: "you will be our coach next year.."

MJ: "alright, let's do it! Here's a list of guys with 'nagging injuries' that could use some 'rest'."

Very cynical, but I bet you're spot on.

I've never had any good will for Jackson since he came to the Jazz and *get this* tried to undermine Stockton in the locker room to take the starting PG job. In Stockton's LAST YEAR. I'm never shocked to hear of people doing unethical things to promote themselves, but *DAMN*, that's ego beyond cluelessness. That's being mindlessly competitive. That's like trying to cheat without knowing what game you're playing.

Also, he was a flopper before the Golden Age of flopping. All in all, with the tanking thing too, not my favorite guy.

(this was based on suspicions about some weird stuff that happened that year and then confirmed by Locke a couple years later, after Jackson retired. When I heard it, it clicked as valid because it explained things so neatly.)