# Is Utah falling back down to earth?



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

6-4 in their last 10 games. Lost to Minnesota tonight. 

Have the Jazz used up their magic already, creating no option but to settle back down to reality? Are they going to be in the running to win the conference until the very end? Are they, dare say, a title contender whom the Suns should worry about?


----------



## cima (Nov 6, 2003)

they're still a playoff threat, but far from a title contender. i can't remember the last time a team made a run in the playoffs with no playoff experience before. the jazz haven't been there since 12 and 32 ran the show. i see the jazz going no further than the semi-finals, but i'll be surprised if they even make it out of the first round.


----------



## Hyperion (Dec 5, 2006)

Like I've told people before, 50-55 wins (approx. 10 game improvement) and last I checked, they are 15-5... I think that they are a dangerous team because of the coach that they have. He has more experience than any other coach in the west for the playoffs other than Jackson.


----------



## Seuss (Aug 19, 2005)

I've been a skeptic of the Jazz since they begun their great streak of games. I'm confident the Jazz will not win 50 games. They have been fortunate because of all the close games going their way. If you continue to have so many close games over the season, you're going to start losing alot of them. 

That's one thing that lead me to be so skeptical. The Jazz, from what I have seen, have not had a blow out victory against anyone. Maybe winning by 10, but they have not blown out any team. The great teams usually get 10+ blowouts a year.


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

Yeah, but you need that experience in close games, though. Remember the Suns went 0-7 when it was 7 pts or less? Suns didn't win 1 or 2 till they hit the playoffs. I think that hurt. 

This yr, I think we're 4-5 when it's 7 pts or less. Started out poorly again though, and have won some on our streak.


Anywho, I keep getting the number 47 in my head for the Jazz. Could be more, though. Obviously.


----------



## Seuss (Aug 19, 2005)

Dissonance19 said:


> Yeah, but you need that experience in close games, though. Remember the Suns went 0-7 when it was 7 pts or less? Suns didn't win 1 or 2 till they hit the playoffs. I think that hurt.
> 
> This yr, I think we're 4-5 when it's 7 pts or less. Started out poorly again though, and have won some on our streak.
> 
> ...



That's the number I predicted. But 47-52 seem to be
the most realistic.


----------



## AK-47 (Jul 7, 2005)

that 6-4 can be somewhat explained. Think 5 games in 7 days hurting.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

AK-47 said:


> that 6-4 can be somewhat explained. Think 5 games in 7 days hurting.


That's coo'. So they are a premier team in the league and a contender for the title, and their rough schedule had the most to do with their losses?


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

They are not an easy matchup for us but we had them in the ropes both games, it was just our own stupidity that cost us the wins even when we were finding our identity early in the season and even without Nash the other game. We should have beat them both times easily, we blew double digit leads in the 4th quarter and gamewinning layups.


----------



## Hyperion (Dec 5, 2006)

Dissonance19 said:


> Yeah, but you need that experience in close games, though. Remember the Suns went 0-7 when it was 7 pts or less? Suns didn't win 1 or 2 till they hit the playoffs. I think that hurt.
> 
> This yr, I think we're 4-5 when it's 7 pts or less. Started out poorly again though, and have won some on our streak.
> 
> ...


Is that number in your head because it is Kirilenko's number? AK-47? So do you predict that the Kings will win 93 games because of Artest's number and the Suns will lose 13 because of Nash's number? Come on! If they play 0.500 ball for the rest of the season, they'll win 51 games! I think that they will win 55-60, playing just above 0.500 ball the rest of the way!


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

I think Utah is still going to have a very good regular season, but I definitely don't believe they'll win West. Usually when a new team is dominating, they have to endure a little adversity once the early-season hype is over and the serious expectations arrive. All the sudden teams play you different when there is a target on your back. 

Remember when the Suns were 31-4? That was insane. But it's a very long season, and noone knows for sure what'll happen. But I pity the team that has to play them in the second round. Either way, that probably won't be the Suns. 3 and 4 don't play each other until the conference finals, and I think it will be San Antonio then Dallas in the 1 and 2 spot.


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

IceMan23and3 said:


> Is that number in your head because it is Kirilenko's number? AK-47? So do you predict that the Kings will win 93 games because of Artest's number and the Suns will lose 13 because of Nash's number? Come on! If they play 0.500 ball for the rest of the season, they'll win 51 games! I think that they will win 55-60, playing just above 0.500 ball the rest of the way!



lol. Nope. I didn't think of AK's number 47 in why it stuck out. Just did.

And so, what if they play .500 they win 51? They can play below it, or tale off. Teams have their ups and downs, to where a lot can happen.


----------



## Hyperion (Dec 5, 2006)

Why are you not convinced the Deron Williams is a competent player? That's all Sloan needed. The Jazz can win the majority of their games (the east and their division).


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

IceMan23and3 said:


> Why are you not convinced the Deron Williams is a competent player? That's all Sloan needed. The Jazz can win the majority of their games (the east and their division).


I never said I wasn't convinced about Deron. He's right up there with Paul talent wise.


----------



## AK-47 (Jul 7, 2005)

ShuHanGuanYu said:


> That's coo'. So they are a premier team in the league and a contender for the title, and their rough schedule had the most to do with their losses?


Were the spurs a contender last season? (I will give what I have to say after you answer this question)


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

AK-47 said:


> Were the spurs a contender last season? (I will give what I have to say after you answer this question)


My question was first.  I wasn't trying to be derogatory or making fun or anything in any way, I just want to know what your realistic expectations are.

Yes, I believe the Spurs are always contenders due to their experience in the playoffs. They came very close to defeating the Mavs, and I believe they would have beaten Miami in a seven game series.


----------



## AK-47 (Jul 7, 2005)

ShuHanGuanYu said:


> My question was first.  I wasn't trying to be derogatory or making fun or anything in any way, I just want to know what your realistic expectations are.
> 
> Yes, I believe the Spurs are always contenders due to their experience in the playoffs. They came very close to defeating the Mavs, and I believe they would have beaten Miami in a seven game series.


Alright, last season the spurs were 4-9 on the ending of back to backs. With all 4 wins against non playoff teams. Back to backs are hard for almost every team, even title contenders. 

If the Jazz play .500 ball the rest of the season, they have 50+ wins. Playoff team, yes. Title contender, no. Maybe in a few years when the jazz players hit their prime, but right now they are a 1st round exit, maybe 2nd round at best.


----------



## Hyperion (Dec 5, 2006)

AK-47 said:


> Alright, last season the spurs were 4-9 on the ending of back to backs. With all 4 wins against non playoff teams. Back to backs are hard for almost every team, even title contenders.
> 
> If the Jazz play .500 ball the rest of the season, they have 50+ wins. Playoff team, yes. Title contender, no. Maybe in a few years when the jazz players hit their prime, but right now they are a 1st round exit, maybe 2nd round at best.


I'm not making any assumptions with this Jazz team because there are so many unknowns to this equation because they are to playoff inexperienced. However, Jerry Sloan is not. Sloan will prepare his team and have them focused for the playoffs. That mental toughness may be enough to surpise a lot of people. Then again, their inexperience may just be too much to overcome, but I don't buy it. They are a contender for WCFs along with Dallas, San Antonio, and Phoenix. So it will come down to focus and discipline to stick to the gameplan. Utah has that in spades.


----------



## AK-47 (Jul 7, 2005)

IceMan23and3 said:


> I'm not making any assumptions with this Jazz team because there are so many unknowns to this equation because they are to playoff inexperienced. However, Jerry Sloan is not. Sloan will prepare his team and have them focused for the playoffs. That mental toughness may be enough to surpise a lot of people. Then again, their inexperience may just be too much to overcome, but I don't buy it. They are a contender for WCFs along with Dallas, San Antonio, and Phoenix. So it will come down to focus and discipline to stick to the gameplan. Utah has that in spades.



Your predictions are higher than mine. Anything could happen, but I am not going to set myself up for a let down. It is hard to be optimistic after the last 3 seasons being in the lottery. 1st round playoff exit is an improvement over last years team, and all I can ask is that they make the playoffs and set their selves up with the best chance of winning. It's hard to expect too much over this young unexperienced team.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

San Antonio was a team that was hurt and old in their bench, so of course they would struggle. But a team with youth such as Utah shouldn't be affected as much. Utah last year was one of seven teams that had a winning record in back-to-back games.

That doesn't explain the loss to Minnesota and Orlando, which were definitely not back to back losses. I'm not trying to put them down, but to blame it solely on back-to-backs is a bit off in my estimation.


----------



## Zuca (Dec 4, 2003)

Your team should pick Rafael Araujo to play with Leandrinho Barbosa... Maybe he can play with this D'Antoni system...

Sean Marks+Pike for him is enough. Good for both teams.


----------



## AK-47 (Jul 7, 2005)

ShuHanGuanYu said:


> San Antonio was a team that was hurt and old in their bench, so of course they would struggle. But a team with youth such as Utah shouldn't be affected as much. Utah last year was one of seven teams that had a winning record in back-to-back games.
> 
> That doesn't explain the loss to Minnesota and Orlando, which were definitely not back to back losses. I'm not trying to put them down, but to blame it solely on back-to-backs is a bit off in my estimation.


I wasn't blaming it all on back to backs, I just said they contributed. 5 games in 7 days is super hard.

Out of the top 6 teams in the west (Utah included) the Jazz are 6-1 with wins over the mavs, spurs, suns (2x), lakers, and rockets and a road loss to the Lakers.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

AK-47 said:


> I wasn't blaming it all on back to backs, I just said they contributed. 5 games in 7 days is super hard.
> 
> Out of the top 6 teams in the west (Utah included) the Jazz are 6-1 with wins over the mavs, spurs, suns (2x), lakers, and rockets and a road loss to the Lakers.


Yes they are. Recently they weren't playing as well as they were to start the season, but roared back with the Dallas game/stomp. But still, we'll see what they do throughout the course of the season.


----------



## AK-47 (Jul 7, 2005)

ShuHanGuanYu said:


> Yes they are. Recently they weren't playing as well as they were to start the season, but roared back with the Dallas game/stomp. But still, we'll see what they do throughout the course of the season.


4 out of the last 6... I don't think any other team has beaten more top teams than the Jazz.

Rockets, Suns, Pistons, Clippers, Suns, Lakers, Spurs, and Mavs.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

AK-47 said:


> 4 out of the last 6... I don't think any other team has beaten more top teams than the Jazz.
> 
> Rockets, Suns, Pistons, Clippers, Suns, Lakers, Spurs, and Mavs.


True, but the Suns did the same thing two years ago when they went 31-4. They were beating just about everybody. Teams usually ebb and flow throughout the season. Noone needs convincing that they had played solid basketball to start the season, but how long can they continue it is the question.


----------



## AK-47 (Jul 7, 2005)

ShuHanGuanYu said:


> True, but the Suns did the same thing two years ago when they went 31-4. They were beating just about everybody. Teams usually ebb and flow throughout the season. Noone needs convincing that they had played solid basketball to start the season, but how long can they continue it is the question.


As long as Sloan is still coaching them. :cheers:


----------



## lilbasketball2 (Nov 24, 2006)

Amare and Nash is back


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

Looks like they're going to beat the Clip-Show in L.A. Utah is definitely still playing at a high level. Clippers have had their struggles, but they also beat Dallas the game before.


----------



## AK-47 (Jul 7, 2005)

17-5 now for the season. Boozer 28/15/4/3, Deron 28/14

They are not coming back to earth yet, could this team be for real?


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

AK-47 said:


> 17-5 now for the season. Boozer 28/15/4/3, Deron 28/14
> 
> They are not coming back to earth yet, could this team be for real?


It's definitely possible. I still can't for some reason put them above San Antonio or Dallas, but what I will say is that I already can't wait until this year's playoffs. If they stay healthy and continue playing at this level, man...they're going to be a nightmare for whoever plays them.

It'd make for an interesting discussion if Deron Williams were able to bring to Utah within a few years what Stockton and Malone were unable to do for their entire careers.


----------



## AK-47 (Jul 7, 2005)

ShuHanGuanYu said:


> It's definitely possible. I still can't for some reason put them above San Antonio or Dallas, but what I will say is that I already can't wait until this year's playoffs. If they stay healthy and continue playing at this level, man...they're going to be a nightmare for whoever plays them.
> 
> It'd make for an interesting discussion if Deron Williams were able to bring to Utah within a few years what Stockton and Malone were unable to do for their entire careers.


Right now the 4 top teams in the league (all western teams of course) are the spurs, suns, mavs, jazz in no order. the 2nd round of the western conference with just those 4 teams in it would be crazy basketball. Everyone would forget about what is going on in the east and tune in for the jazz vs suns vs spurs vs mavs series.

Even if Deron/Boozer win a ring in their career on the Jazz. It will still not make them better than Stockton/Malone. The league back then was different and a lot more competitive. Jordan kept a lot of great teams from getting a ring.

P.S. thanks for discussing this with me.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

AK-47 said:


> Right now the 4 top teams in the league (all western teams of course) are the spurs, suns, mavs, jazz in no order. the 2nd round of the western conference with just those 4 teams in it would be crazy basketball. Everyone would forget about what is going on in the east and tune in for the jazz vs suns vs spurs vs mavs series.


Heck yeah it will be. I don't see the top 4 changing much, so I think it's pretty safe to say that is what we'll be treated to five months from now. And then, with that, you have the dynamics of the flashy Lakers and the defensive Rockets and the uptempo Nuggets in there. If the Clippers can get back to playing where they were last year, there's another one. Or Nellie's GSW. Can't say it enough, the West is more stacked than ever!




AK-47 said:


> Even if Deron/Boozer win a ring in their career on the Jazz. It will still not make them better than Stockton/Malone. The league back then was different and a lot more competitive. Jordan kept a lot of great teams from getting a ring.


Totally agree. But I do think that the new Jazz have a better team of roleplayers now than they had with those two. Hornacek was always good, but they needed something more than Ostertag or Polynice or Antoine Carr or Felton Spencer up front. They finally have two big men who can score, with one of them being inside-outside. There is no defensive beast in Kirilenko to compare, even though Hornacek was big for them in the past. This team is a much more dominant rebounding team than any in the past. 



AK-47 said:


> P.S. thanks for discussing this with me.


Glad to chat, man. I feel bad for you guys that more Jazz fans haven't come across this board. You guys have a lot to offer.


----------



## AK-47 (Jul 7, 2005)

ShuHanGuanYu said:


> Heck yeah it will be. I don't see the top 4 changing much, so I think it's pretty safe to say that is what we'll be treated to five months from now. And then, with that, you have the dynamics of the flashy Lakers and the defensive Rockets and the uptempo Nuggets in there. If the Clippers can get back to playing where they were last year, there's another one. Or Nellie's GSW. Can't say it enough, the West is more stacked than ever!


I already can't wait for the playoffs.



ShuHanGuanYu said:


> Totally agree. But I do think that the new Jazz have a better team of roleplayers now than they had with those two. Hornacek was always good, but they needed something more than Ostertag or Polynice or Antoine Carr or Felton Spencer up front. They finally have two big men who can score, with one of them being inside-outside. There is no defensive beast in Kirilenko to compare, even though Hornacek was big for them in the past. This team is a much more dominant rebounding team than any in the past.


They are doing crazy stuff with the rebounding. They are shooting a good percentage from the field and they are the best rebounding team. They are #1 in rebounds per game and #1 in least rebounds allowed per game. Good for a 10+ differential. I agree about the supporting cast since Stockton and Malone _were_ the team



ShuHanGuanYu said:


> Glad to chat, man. I feel bad for you guys that more Jazz fans haven't come across this board. You guys have a lot to offer.


Over time hopefully more will come. It is hard to recruit them because all of them are at one major forum. Jazzfanz.com is too active, I am trying to get some over, but most say that it is better in jazzfanz. Myself like to hear what other teams fans have to say instead of just all Jazz fans.

I wish the jazz forum was as active as the suns. And maybe over time will be.


----------



## Knick Killer (Jul 16, 2006)

they never were for real.


----------



## AK-47 (Jul 7, 2005)

iNdIaNa31PaCeRs said:


> they never were for real.


Right on man! Pacers for the championship!


----------



## Kekai (Jan 12, 2005)

Jazz are a good team, im pretty worried about matchup problems we have with them. Deron is coming out as a great player, AK-47 is an all around awesome player and Boozer has been a beast up front. Looking forward to some great future matchups with the Jazz.


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

either way you look at it, they are 17-5 and still own the best record in the league.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

Man, that Fisher trade was a damn steal looking back. He's clutch in them playoffs, man. The team may not have playoff experience, but Fisher has loads of experience himself.


----------



## Hyperion (Dec 5, 2006)

Just remember, the Suns team that they barely beat at the beginning of the season is NOT the same Suns team that is wrecking the NBA right now. There were no Amare 20/10s, no Diaw at all, and there was definately no semblence of offense


----------



## AK-47 (Jul 7, 2005)

IceMan23and3 said:


> Just remember, the Suns team that they barely beat at the beginning of the season is NOT the same Suns team that is wrecking the NBA right now. There were no Amare 20/10s, no Diaw at all, and there was definately no semblence of offense


Neither is the jazz. Back then the jazz were starting CJ Miles and Paul Millsap and Ronnie Brewer never got time off the bench like they do now. You can say all you want about improving, but so have the jazz since they played you.

The 2nd game was a wash since both AK and Nash were not playing. CJ Miles and Ronnie Brewer had to start that game also. The starting lineup right now is Deron, Fisher, AK, Boozer, and Okur.


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

AK-47 said:


> I wish the jazz forum was as active as the suns. And maybe over time will be.



This place isn't that active. But I'm just glad this board doesn't over analyze every single player or loss like other teams boards. 

"Why was so and so off tonight?" 

"He must've broke his nail, and it made him shoot poorly!"

Exaggerrated example. I know. Just so annoying. What happened to the team just didn't play well, and other team was better that night? Or the obvious reasons that happen during a game. It's simple stuff. Maybe, it's just me, though.


----------

