The Jeff Hornacek Thread

[MHSL82]

Posts #s 34, 37, 38 - not quoted for sake of brevity.

Why you gotta poke holes in my argument with stupid "facts" and "objectivity", man? Duncan, to me, is a center who can and does shoot from anywhere inside the three point line. I think he plays and is used like a power forward, but it's like a QB who runs like a runningback is still a QB despite his skill and use of his legs.

As to minutes, I am probably alone here, I think that's like usage rate, where part of the minutes played is due to the player's durability, role in the offense, reliability when others would be tired, the quality of backup, hack a Shaq, etc. Bear with me, because I feel this will be hard to explain what I mean. I hate the 36 minutes stat because I think you make your money in the minutes after 36, too. I understand that it's a rate - it doesn't literally mean the first 36 minutes, but I'll explain why I don't like it, despite it being a legitimate method. Again, bear with me.

Presumably, players are less effective the more tired they could be, as in the minutes before being subbed out and in the waning minutes of a game (as accumulated time takes a toll). Taking a player out at 2 minutes left of the quarter is different than taking them out at the 4 minute mark. If one player's substitution pattern removes him at the 4 minute mark because he's less durable physically or less effective or more foul prone, his rate of when he is in would be artificially higher than if he had played those last two minutes tired. The difference between Malone and Duncan's minutes is so small that I don't think it changes anything, because no coach is going to take a player out a quarter of 2 minutes (30 seconds) earlier because of concerns for efficiency and Duncan's in great shape, too; so this is a moot point, but since you cite the 1.9 minutes as a factor, I'll address it here.

I think physical and mental stamina are important in an all-encompassing comparison. Duncan and Malone are very similar in this regard, but when comparing everybody, this stands out for Malone. I think it's part of what made him great. Malone's physique allowed him to be more efficient in the minutes before substitution or took him longer to get spent than others. But compared to the fresh minutes, it took a toll I bet. I'm not comparing him to Duncan here, just in general. Rates are great, but while these rates suffer as the legs lose their freshness, those who are in great physical shape are effected less in the last minutes than others - but still affected.

The fact is, the coaches didn't use the two players equally and acting like they did would be like me inflating Alex Smith's numbers by saying "if he threw as much as Tom Brady..." Some nuttier Smith fans have done that, ignoring the fact that defenses would defend differently if Smith were to throw that much. I recognize this doesn't make any sense because minutes played is different than style of play, but applying a rate, to me, is incomplete. Every year, I see someone very efficient in few minutes, where I could not extrapolate to get accurate what-ifs. Similarly, pro-rating minutes doesn't work for me because most likely the player with longer minutes had their rate suffer due to those extra minutes (but total increased).

I know coaches also limit minutes due to other factors like long term health, how strong your backup is, rotation factors, blowout wins or losses, etc. If Malone played more per game, that's a credit to him. Same to Duncan, if he had done so. Because say, had he stopped at however number of minutes Duncan averages, his total points would be lower, but his per minute wouldn't be the same. I don't know if he was better or worse than Duncan in the waning minutes after long stretches, but the point is, not knowing, applying a rate doesn't make sense.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ginobli made it easier on Duncan, just like Stockton made it easier on Malone. Not to the same extent obviously. Maybe without Ginobli, the whole winning aspect of Duncan's candidacy lessens because they lose more? Maybe his stats go down because teams wouldn't have to back off to defend the three? Again, don't want to exaggerate the extent, but we're only talking about 1-2 shots per game, so a little help from a good Ginobli can go relatively a long way. It's like how a great runningback can make a quarterback be able to pass more, despite appearing to be taking yards away from the passing game by rushing instead.

So, in regard to supporting cast's roles, there are too many moving parts for me - like how would Malone be if he had Robinson? Yes, his points would go down, but would the rings make up for it in consideration for being the best PF ever? Malone would be much less of a player without Stockton. Duncan won without Robinson, but I feel overall his supporting cast was better and more diverse. His stats and winning were affected positively and negatively in different aspects by having Ginobli and the like there. Jeff Hornacek was as great of outside shooter as Ginobli, but he didn't take usage rate points from Malone? Bryon Russell shot enough for local papers to be talking about him being a future cornerstone to when Stock and Malone retired, how did he affect usage rate? How did Robinson?

I know I feel I'm talking in circles - because I can't really discredit Duncan and I know there were some areas where Malone could have been better. I'm a traditional stat guy (since you wouldn't buy my passive lay man claim) and I value those stats more than some. I know that leaves me empty sometimes when there are other stats that disprove what's on the surface level. I just feel that Duncan has done less and achieved more - whether that's due to supporting cast, coaching, eras, etc., that's how I feel. I know I can be wrong, but this whole thing started from people shoving it down my throat how Duncan was all-time. He's the winningest qualified PF, to me - but that doesn't say as much to me as most. I'm not going to make the fake mention of Luke Longley to discredit championships as being the criteria for all-time, but I will say it's not everything to me.

 

[nuraman00]

Why you gotta poke holes in my argument with stupid "facts" and "objectivity", man? Duncan, to me, is a center who can and does shoot from anywhere inside the three point line. I think he plays and is used like a power forward, but it's like a QB who runs like a runningback is still a QB despite his skill and use of his legs.

As to minutes, I am probably alone here, I think that's like usage rate, where part of the minutes played is due to the player's durability, role in the offense, reliability when others would be tired, the quality of backup, hack a Shaq, etc. Bear with me, because I feel this will be hard to explain what I mean. I hate the 36 minutes stat because I think you make your money in the minutes after 36, too. I understand that it's a rate - it doesn't literally mean the first 36 minutes, but I'll explain why I don't like it, despite it being a legitimate method. Again, bear with me.

Presumably, players are less effective the more tired they could be, as in the minutes before being subbed out and in the waning minutes of a game (as accumulated time takes a toll). Taking a player out at 2 minutes left of the quarter is different than taking them out at the 4 minute mark. If one player's substitution pattern removes him at the 4 minute mark because he's less durable physically or less effective or more foul prone, his rate of when he is in would be artificially higher than if he had played those last two minutes tired. The difference between Malone and Duncan's minutes is so small that I don't think it changes anything, because no coach is going to take a player out a quarter of 2 minutes (30 seconds) earlier because of concerns for efficiency and Duncan's in great shape, too; so this is a moot point, but since you cite the 1.9 minutes as a factor, I'll address it here.

I think physical and mental stamina are important in an all-encompassing comparison. Duncan and Malone are very similar in this regard, but when comparing everybody, this stands out for Malone. I think it's part of what made him great. Malone's physique allowed him to be more efficient in the minutes before substitution or took him longer to get spent than others. But compared to the fresh minutes, it took a toll I bet. I'm not comparing him to Duncan here, just in general. Rates are great, but while these rates suffer as the legs lose their freshness, those who are in great physical shape are effected less in the last minutes than others - but still affected.

The fact is, the coaches didn't use the two players equally and acting like they did would be like me inflating Alex Smith's numbers by saying "if he threw as much as Tom Brady..." Some nuttier Smith fans have done that, ignoring the fact that defenses would defend differently if Smith were to throw that much. I recognize this doesn't make any sense because minutes played is different than style of play, but applying a rate, to me, is incomplete. Every year, I see someone very efficient in few minutes, where I could not extrapolate to get accurate what-ifs. Similarly, pro-rating minutes doesn't work for me because most likely the player with longer minutes had their rate suffer due to those extra minutes (but total increased).

I know coaches also limit minutes due to other factors like long term health, how strong your backup is, rotation factors, blowout wins or losses, etc. If Malone played more per game, that's a credit to him. Same to Duncan, if he had done so. Because say, had he stopped at however number of minutes Duncan averages, his total points would be lower, but his per minute wouldn't be the same. I don't know if he was better or worse than Duncan in the waning minutes after long stretches, but the point is, not knowing, applying a rate doesn't make sense.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ginobli made it easier on Duncan, just like Stockton made it easier on Malone. Not to the same extent obviously. Maybe without Ginobli, the whole winning aspect of Duncan's candidacy lessens because they lose more? Maybe his stats go down because teams wouldn't have to back off to defend the three? Again, don't want to exaggerate the extent, but we're only talking about 1-2 shots per game, so a little help from a good Ginobli can go relatively a long way. It's like how a great runningback can make a quarterback be able to pass more, despite appearing to be taking yards away from the passing game by rushing instead.

So, in regard to supporting cast's roles, there are too many moving parts for me - like how would Malone be if he had Robinson? Yes, his points would go down, but would the rings make up for it in consideration for being the best PF ever? Malone would be much less of a player without Stockton. Duncan won without Robinson, but I feel overall his supporting cast was better and more diverse. His stats and winning were affected positively and negatively in different aspects by having Ginobli and the like there. Jeff Hornacek was as great of outside shooter as Ginobli, but he didn't take usage rate points from Malone? Bryon Russell shot enough for local papers to be talking about him being a future cornerstone to when Stock and Malone retired, how did he affect usage rate? How did Robinson?

I know I feel I'm talking in circles - because I can't really discredit Duncan and I know there were some areas where Malone could have been better. I'm a traditional stat guy (since you wouldn't buy my passive lay man claim) and I value those stats more than some. I know that leaves me empty sometimes when there are other stats that disprove what's on the surface level. I just feel that Duncan has done less and achieved more - whether that's due to supporting cast, coaching, eras, etc., that's how I feel. I know I can be wrong, but this whole thing started from people shoving it down my throat how Duncan was all-time. He's the winningest qualified PF, to me - but that doesn't say as much to me as most. I'm not going to make the fake mention of Luke Longley to discredit championships as being the criteria for all-time, but I will say it's not everything to me.

Thanks.

I don't focus on winning too much. If I did, I wouldn't say Bird > Magic, for example. Or I wouldn't think that Olajuwon or Duncan could be considered the greatest, over Jordan.

I think that even if Malone is better than Duncan on offense, that Duncan was better by more on defense. However, I wish some of these advanced stats were available in the mid 90s. And, I don't think the national TV coverage was the same in the 90s. I don't remember watching many regular season games, only the playoffs, for the Jazz. The broadcast coverage wasn't the same back then, as I think TBS and NBC were the only networks that aired regular season games, and I think once a week each.

Now, you can watch ESPN games almost every Wednesday and Friday, as well as TNT games on Thursdays. And ABC games on Sundays. So that's usually 4 days a week that nationally televised games are available, thus increasing exposure. And it increases the chances of watching other teams, such as the Jazz. (I have League Pass Broadband, but if I didn't, I'm saying I could have watched a lot more Jazz games during the regular season if they were aired back then on national TV like they are now).

I also didn't know that TBS aired the NBA during the 90s, so if they were ever on there, I never saw it.

So what I'm saying that is if I had the same access to the 90s Jazz then as I do to any team now, I might think differently in regards to Duncan's defense vs. Malone's.

But, I could only watch during the playoffs.


Also, according to Hollinger's analysis, back when he advocated the use of per 36 stats, players rate of production usually holds steady if you increase their minutes.

(That also usually leads to the joke about a bedroom activity, about how whether a 2 minute performance can be extended to 10).



You bring up a good point about stamina.

I will say one thing about Popovich that I mentioned before. He pulls his starters early during regular season games if they're down big. He'll pull them late in the 3rd or early in the 4th.

The 1.9 minutes a game can probably be largely accounted from in this manner, IMO.

When the Spurs came back from down 24 against the Clippers in game 3 of the playoffs last year, there is no doubt in my mind that the Spurs wouldn't have won that game if it was during the regular season. Duncan played 8:40 in the 2nd, when the comeback began, and all 12 minutes in the 3rd. That would not have happened in the regular season. Yes the Spurs eventually won by 10, but perhaps 2 less minutes from Duncan then would have changed things. Perhaps Duncan would have played 4-5 less minutes, because it would have been near the end of a long road trip, or during a back-to-back, etc.



What do you think about how many games MLB pitchers used to pitch during a season, vs. now? Or how many innings per start they pitch now, vs. how they used to? Let's pretend we're talking about the AL only, so we don't have to worry about a pitcher being removed for offense, as is done in the NL. I'm fine with the way things are managed now, if the research has shown that pitchers careers are lasting longer because of that. But I also respect what was done before too. And I think sometimes having specialist pitchers is helpful too, because it gives the other team a different delivery and it changes how they have been used to seeing the ball, during the game.

 

[MHSL82]

I got Malone's autograph at a University of Utah football game, his arms are leg sized! I was a kid so it looked even bigger. I also got his autograph at a record store when he was selling his workout video. My grandmother won a Jazz ball autographed by the team with Stock, Malone, Hornacek, Russell, etc. I also got Greg Ostertag's autograph at a mall.

 

[nuraman00]

So what I'm seeing is that you have PGs that averaged 10apg once or twice, but not more than that.

So if they did it once or twice, why couldn't they do it again?

I don't think it's because they changed their mentality. The PGs that could reach this, had to have been pass-first.

So there must be other factors that contributed to each unique case.

For example, with Jose Calderon, I've brought up his Assist % before, but I know you don't like it when I use that. But what I'm trying to show is that because his assist % is high, that he has the same mentality as other pass-first PGs. But his case, he's not able to get 10apg, partially because they have to take him off the floor for defense. He plays less minutes, because he's a defensive liability.

Calderon shoots even less than Stockton did, for example.

Mark Price and Terrell Brandon were other PGs who averaged a lot of assists, but not quite 10. Price only had 2 seasons with 9+, 9.1 and 10.4. And he shot about the same amount as Stockton. I think Price had the same kind of pass-first mentality, but just because he didn't average 10apg+, doesn't mean he was more of a shoot-first either.

With other players, maybe the team changed schemes a little, or brought in another player to run the offense through, such as a SG or SF.

Maybe those other teams took more 3's. The PG is the least likely to get an assist on a 3-pointer, unless it's a player that can hit 3's coming off screens (Ray Allen, Stojakovic, Reggie Miller, Korver). But most 3-point shooters are catch-and-shoot players. For those players, a big man or SF/SG is most likely to get an assist, because the ball was in the paint, and one of them kicked it back out to a 3-point shooter.

The Jazz rarely attempted 3's, ranking worse than 20s in most of the Stockton years (and many years in the 27-29 range).

The Spurs, meanwhile, attempt a lot of 3's, many years in the top 10.

Maybe the team is blowout out a lot of teams, and thus the PG plays less minutes. I've mentioned that the Jazz rarely had a top record in the Stockton years, which is partially why he or Malone didn't get more MVP consideration, and why Sloan didn't get more Coach Of The Year recognition.

So the Jazz were likely in closer games, and thus needed more from their PGs.

Chris Paul this year, for example, averages 3 less minutes than normal, and the Clippers have one of the best point-differentials, +9.6. A quick scan at the Jazz reveals they only had 7+ once, in 1997 (+9.6).

You also mentioned that the Jazz never had a legit backup for Stockton.

The Clippers have Bledsoe and Crawford, and soon Billups too, who can play PG.

Ok, Paul shoots a little more in the 4th, but that's because Griffin and Jordan can't be counted on, and they can't make FTs either, so Paul shooting is the best option for the way they run the team. Although I think a better coach could run different sets so other players could get good shots too. But those other players wouldn't create an assist for the PG in my way, it would be more about big to big passing, like Odom to Griffin. Just like Boozer to Noah or Noah to Boozer in Chicago.

That brings up another idea. What if the Jazz had two bigs that could pass to each other, like other teams have had (Grizzlies, Hawks, Bulls, Spurs with Duncan to Robinson, etc.)? That's just another way one could run the offense, rather than through the PG.

None of this is taking away from Stockton, but rather trying to examine why other PGs haven't done 10apg more often.

As this discussion is more about PGs in general.


And maybe it doesn't happen more often just because. I've mentioned that I don't think Tinsley could get 10apg even if he tried. When watching how the offense works, it just doesn't look like he could get that many, and he is averaging 5.25 FGAs in his 12 starts. So he's shooting even less than a Stockton, for example. With barely any FTAs either, lol.


So from my observations from watching other teams, sometimes I see PGs with a similar passing mentality, yet they still don't seem capable of averaging 10apg. And they're not shooting much either, about the same, or in Tinsley's case, less than a Stockton. I think some of it is about the Jazz schemes. (I don't think it's the same Flex offense as the Sloan one.) And maybe Hayward takes on more of a creator role than Hornacek.

So there must be other reasons why it's so hard to do. I've listed some possible ones. It could be a combination of a lot of things. I don't think teammates make that much of a difference, whether good ones or bad ones. But schemes do (such as having a SF/SF to run the offense through, instead of SG/SF/PF as finishers only).

So I don't think it's from a lack of trying to get assists, but for whatever reasons, it just doesn't seem to happen. Because I'm seeing PGs that don't shoot much, but also don't get 10apg either (while playing decent minutes), and I think they have the right mentality to try and get 10 apg.

Again, this post is more about whether PGs have the same mentality as other pass-first, and I think they do, even if they don't average 10apg. Because some of these guys, I think they're making the right decision, and also not shooting much, when I watch them play.

 

[MHSL82]

I made a non-serious split on Jeremy Lin's season so far, but this one is serious.

In his first 17 games (pre-December) he was 16-55 (29.1%)

Since then, in December and January combined, he's 32-60 (53.3%)
In the last 10 games, he's 20-32 on 3-PTers (62.5%)
In January, he's 13-19 from 3-point land (68.4%).

Overall, he's 48-115 (41.7%)

I would be upset if he's not in the 3-point Shooting Contest in the All-Star Game. Either because he was overlooked or goes through a serious slump prior to selection. He must seriously be working on it with Hornacek.

 

[nuraman00]

I made a non-serious split on Jeremy Lin's season so far, but this one is serious.

In his first 17 games (pre-December) he was 16-55 (29.1%)

Since then, in December and January combined, he's 32-60 (53.3%)
In the last 10 games, he's 20-32 on 3-PTers (62.5%)
In January, he's 13-19 from 3-point land (68.4%).

Overall, he's 48-115 (41.7%)

I would be upset if he's not in the 3-point Shooting Contest in the All-Star Game. Either because he was overlooked or goes through a serious slump prior to selection. He must seriously be working on it with Hornacek.

Only 6 are chosen and no one knows how the participants are chosen.

Better guys have not played. When Morrow was in GS, he would routinely be among the top 2-3 in 3-point % but never participated. I don't now if he turned it down, or if he wasn't asked.

Same would go for anyone.

 

[MHSL82]

Utah Jazz vs. Atlanta Hawks We lost by 8, so I blame Hayward for this loss - I expect him to make at least 3 of the four three-pointers! What's Hornacek doing?

 

[Shanemansj13]

Shanemansj13, I don't know if you're still checking this thread, but one incident from the Cavs still bugs me.

Ilguskas made the All-Star game in 2003. Yet he only played 3 minutes, 57 seconds.

Someone made a comment that maybe it was because East All-Star coach held a grudge from some Pistons-Cavs rivalry.

But that was a huge injustice. All the injuries Ilgauskas went through, he finally makes a ASG, and plays the least amount of minutes I've ever seen anyone healthy play. (Sometimes a player will be banged up and request to not play much, but that wasn't the case with him).

I wanted to see him have his moment at the ASG.

Also, do you have any fun memories from Daughtery-Malone or Price-Stockton matchups?

IMO, Ilgauskas had other seasons where he got jipped. And he has had foot problems his whole career, but still a very good career. I agree, I thought he shOuld hVe his time with all his hard work.

I grew up in 90's. I don't remember Daughtry and Price too much. I remember The Mailman and Stockton always playn Jordan and the Bulls in the Finals. I remember always cheering for the Jazz with Hornacek, Russell, and those guys. I hated MJ. But I grew up watching Shawn Kemp, Ilgauskas, Danny Ferry, etc.

I was probably to young to the greats Price and Daughtry in their prime.

 

[nuraman00]

IMO, Ilgauskas had other seasons where he got jipped. And he has had foot problems his whole career, but still a very good career. I agree, I thought he shOuld hVe his time with all his hard work.

I grew up in 90's. I don't remember Daughtry and Price too much. I remember The Mailman and Stockton always playn Jordan and the Bulls in the Finals. I remember always cheering for the Jazz with Hornacek, Russell, and those guys. I hated MJ. But I grew up watching Shawn Kemp, Ilgauskas, Danny Ferry, etc.

I was probably to young to the greats Price and Daughtry in their prime.

Thanks.

Yeah he had foot problems early in his career, from from about 2003 and later, he remained very healthy.

 

[MHSL82]

Okur's 3 record isn't that good. I'd rather have someone get in the top 10 for 3's made, for any single season.

(Someone like Jason Richardson has probably had a few seasons where his 3's made total was top 10 season of all time).

Even if Foye beat's Okur's record, it's a small-time goal. As are winning divisions.

Well, as long as we're choosing. I'd rather have my SG score in the top ten all-time for an individual season, all while playing the best defense in the league.

I got to have something to root for besides wins and we're not even winning that much. We have no statistical feats other than beating Okur. I'm sure there could be one or two somewhere, but don't take this away, man.

The expectations I'd like to see are:

* Can Kanter and Sexual Favors play big minutes, and produce consistently?
* Is Hayward an average swingman, or below average?

Kanter's nickname is now Can Kan. With a 'C' in honor of your dislike for alliterations. Compromise.

And these aren't expectations, they're question marks. What's up with that?

Just kidding. I hope those three can prove to be consistent, play big minutes, and/or be an average swingman. Hayward knows how to pick his shots and shoot well, as I noted in the Hayward Streak Thread. Hornacek is working with his shot, no doubt with other things too. My fingers are crossed and he better be back for the first game after the All Star break - he's missed 10 games already - though we've won 6 of them.

 

[MHSL82]

Thoughts?

Will come back later, but I think the Hornacek one was best off the top of my head. Hated the Seikaly or Harper non-trades, though I don't know if those were deadline deals or not..

 

[Sackataters]

Do you think Horny would be an upgrade at head coach? He can at least speak English and communicate. I don't hate Corbin. I just don't think he's intelligent enough to be a head coach.

 

[nuraman00]

Do you think Horny would be an upgrade at head coach? He can at least speak English and communicate. I don't hate Corbin. I just don't think he's intelligent enough to be a head coach.

It's worth a shot.

Right now though, I think the lack of overall talent is the biggest factor.

The Jazz surprised teams last year, but there's been hundreds of teams in sports that couldn't follow it up the next year. That's not to say it's because they're complacent, but just because sometimes age catches up, or injuries, or whatever.

Most of these players, I don't think they'd be any better on another team. So I think a lot of them just appear to be on the downside, IMO.

 

[nuraman00]

If I didn't know about the commercials I would have thought the pairs were: John Stockton and Karl Malone; Hardees and Diet Pepsi, or Jerry Sloan and John Deere tractors. Or Courtney Kirkland and Kirkney Courtland.

The other Jazz pair was Jeff Hornacek and Getting Horny. Hornacek was in a Horny State when a certain body part was on fire:

















-- his hands.

 

[nuraman00]

If I didn't know about the commercials I would have thought the pairs were: John Stockton and Karl Malone; Hardees and Diet Pepsi, or Jerry Sloan and John Deere tractors. Or Courtney Kirkland and Kirkney Courtland.

The other Jazz pair was Jeff Hornacek and Getting Horny. Hornacek was in a Horny State when a certain body part was on fire:

















-- his hands.

 

[nuraman00]

If I didn't know about the commercials I would have thought the pairs were: John Stockton and Karl Malone; Hardees and Diet Pepsi, or Jerry Sloan and John Deere tractors. Or Courtney Kirkland and Kirkney Courtland.

The other Jazz pair was Jeff Hornacek and Getting Horny. Hornacek was in a Horny State when a certain body part was on fire:

















-- his hands.

 

[nuraman00]

If I didn't know about the commercials I would have thought the pairs were: John Stockton and Karl Malone; Hardees and Diet Pepsi, or Jerry Sloan and John Deere tractors. Or Courtney Kirkland and Kirkney Courtland.

The other Jazz pair was Jeff Hornacek and Getting Horny. Hornacek was in a Horny State when a certain body part was on fire:

















-- his hands.

 

[Sackataters]

I haven't started too many threads with the word horny, but since Hornacek is likely taking a head coaching job for the Suns. What is your take? Do you think Corbin is a credible to decent coach? Should we have canned him and hired Horny?

 

[Sackataters]

I haven't started too many threads with the word horny, but since Hornacek is likely taking a head coaching job for the Suns. What is your take? Do you think Corbin is a credible to decent coach? Should we have canned him and hired Horny?

 

[nuraman00]

I haven't started too many threads with the word horny, but since Hornacek is likely taking a head coaching job for the Suns. What is your take? Do you think Corbin is a credible to decent coach? Should we have canned him and hired Horny?

Why are the options between Corbin and Horny?



The options should be Corbin vs. Horny vs. Byron Scott vs.
Phil Jackson vs.
Nate McMillan,
Mo Cheeks,
Flip Saunders,
Jerry Sloan
Mike Brown
Jeff Van Gundy
Stan Van Gundy
Paul Silas
Alvin Gentry
Scott Skiles
Doug Collins
Lawrence Frank
Michael Curry
Mike Dunleavy Sr.


And cmon Sackataters, I know you text your wife with the subject "horny" all the time. J/K.


Corbin didn't impress me, but he also had arguably the league's worst starting backcourt to work with. That will make any offense look bad.

And Jefferson being the defender that he was, makes the team defense look bad, along with that aforementioned bad backcourt.

If the Jazz made some decent moves, I would give Corbin a chance, but he'd better make it work within 2 months.

It was also Corbin's own fault that he didn't play Kanter and Favors more over Jefferson, since Jefferson's defense was worse than normal last year.

So there's plenty of blame and responsibility from the GM to the coach himself.