Jenkins scores 28 in D-league

[Guest]

Another thing to think about is why are we spending time sending him back and forth to the D-League if we have no plans for him? Are we trying to build up his skill level so that he can sign someplace else next year? Are we simply doing him a courtesy? Are we trying to increase his value to use in a trade? Or are we planning on getting him some burn with the big club at some point?

Yes

[Guest]

Sometimes players just get lost on one team because of who's ahead of them and have to find their way on another team.

[Guest]

Digest it? Don't hurt yourself patting your back so hard. It's not like you just wrote War and Peace. You just said the same thing that's been said countless times before. But hey if it makes you feel special then sure, that post was 5 stars and the toughest to digest in Hawksquawk history.

Care to give any of the numerous examples of the players who disprove what I said? I mean, should be easy for you to give a reply. But then you'd kind of have to go back and see what I said to verify that you'd disprove what I mentioned.

But sure, thinking about causality is soooooo simple.

[Admin]

Care to give any of the numerous examples of the players who disprove what I said? I mean, should be easy for you to give a reply. But then you'd kind of have to go back and see what I said to verify that you'd disprove what I mentioned.

But sure, thinking about causality is soooooo simple.

 

I certainly could but why would I want to waste anymore energy on this. In your mind you're always right and so I'll just admit you were right there's never ever been a player who's not been used by a team who's gone on to be a good player for someone else.

[ATLien_]

The player needs to do something in the background to demonstrate to the coach that they are capable of producing. And if Bud hasn't played Jenkins, then I'm completely fine with the understanding that Jenkins is not worthy of minutes on this team.

 

Isn't this the same arguement that was used for Teague and all the other players that never developed under Mike Woodson? Everybody in every walk of life needs an opportunity to show case what they can do. What did Tom Brady show Bill Bellicheat in practice? If Drew Bledsoe never got hurt; he may have been cut in 2 years for a cheaper backup option. Regardless of what you think about a player, I still prefer to see someone sink or swim on their own volition.

 

I don't blame coach Bud; it's a numbers game. I'm not even advocating for Jenkins to get minutes, but I can't speak with the certainty you can that he has no value. Especially since he showed me alot more in his rookie year than both Jeff Teague and Dennis Schröder. And he IMO has the greatest chance of any player on this team to fill the Korver role in the future. None of these other guys project to be the kind of shooter Korver is other then Jenkins.

 

I'm still not convinced he won't be back. Maybe they didn't pick up his option because they think the market will bare less than his option contract salary. Meaning they think they can get him back cheaper. I'm really not sure what to read into this. I wouldn't read to much into playing time either. Remember Dennis was glued to the bench last year.

Edited January 21, 2015 by ATLien_

[Guest]

I certainly could but why would I want to waste anymore energy on this. In your mind you're always right and so I'll just admit you were right there's never ever been a player who's not been used by a team who's gone on to be a good player for someone else.

I can name 2 off hand: Doug Cristie (did nothing in NY, bacame a star in SacTown). Jermaine Oneal - couldn't get off the bench in Portland behind the Davis boys, anchored and blossomed in Indy for years. Edited January 21, 2015 by JayBirdHawk

[Guest]

Isn't this the same arguement that was used for Teague and all the other players that never developed under Mike Woodson? Everybody in every walk of life needs an opportunity to show case what they can do. What did Tom Brady show Bill Bellicheat in practice? If Drew Bledsoe never got hurt; he may have been cut in 2 years for a cheaper backup option. Regardless of what you think about a player, I still prefer to see someone sink or swim on their own volition.

If we operated in a laboratory and all the player's minutes in the NBA was distributed in a random fashion, then you'd be able to tell that playing opportunity (i.e. minutes) leads to improvement of the player. But that's the rub, we don't deal with data like that for the most part. Which is where this entire issue, and the reason why I posted, is that we have a causality problem here which makes cries for Jenkins to play more to be...well kind of strange. Because if Bud plays him more and plays well then people will say "told ya! all he needed was a chance!" But is that even it? Might it be the case that Bud plays the line-ups he plays based upon expectations of performance? In other words, that Bud is a good evaluator of talent and is optimizing his lineups in such a way that he is trying to win? And so, Bud is not playing players who he already has a strong prior that they are not valuable to the team.

If we keep with the idea that Bud is a good evaluator of talent, then the only way that Jenkins gets minutes is if he improves. So it is not the assignment of minutes, it is actually Jenkins improvement. Yelling for more minutes for Jenkins is really a way of yelling that Jenkins improves as a player so that he receives minutes. So....I don't know why you're yelling at Bud when you should be yelling at Jenkins.

You could also be a person who thinks that magically distributing minutes to players makes them better. Clearly, I don't buy that.

The alternative scenario seems to be that Bud is a poor evaluator of talent. If that is the case, sure we can yell at Bud. I don't buy it, but at least I know where the disagreement is.

Funny. Last week we had a similar discussion about Pero Antić with a certain poster bitching and moaning about how he hopes Bud isn't randomly assigning rest to certain players so as to get a better valuation of lineups. He was so unbelievably upset with that and insulted statheads. And now? Well, he is essentially bitching for random assignment. The very thing he was annoyed with last week.

Sidenote: I think my phrase of "That would clear up a roster spot, which is more value than what Jenkins would give us." was viewed by some that Idid not think Jenkins is valuable. No. I'm more concerned with having an open roster spot so that the team could utilize it through signing a position of need. Possibly through 10-day contracts. I think that flexibility is more valuable than Jenkins. A player we have known for 2+ years.

[Guest]

I can name 2 off hand: Doug Cristie (did nothing in NY, bacame a star in SacTown). Jermaine Oneal - couldn't get off the bench in Portland behind the Davis boys, anchored and blossomed in Indy for years.

These are what most people would call outliers. And I was promised numerous examples!

My point is probably summarized a bit better above. It's a causality issue that generally is not easily understood when confronted for the first time by individuals. From my experience, it's usually an issue that you'd need to think about more than a few minutes.

Or you could go around assuming I'm a complete shithead who doesn't know much. But I'm an asshole! And an asshole isn't necessarily a shithead! {/sarcasm}

Edited January 21, 2015 by hawksfanatic

[Guest]

I can name 2 off hand: Doug Cristie (did nothing in NY, bacame a star in SacTown). Jermaine Oneal - couldn't get off the bench in Portland behind the Davis boys, anchored and blossomed in Indy for years.

Add Drazen Petrovic to that list...RIP

[Guest]

Add Drazen Petrovic to that list...RIP

Yep and Danny Green and Patty Mills.

[Guest]

Yep and Danny Green and Patty Mills.

No, I don't think you're getting my point. Those two do not fit. The outliers like Lin, O'Neal, and Christie seem to fit...but Danny Green and Patty Mills undoubtedly stunk their first two years. Look at their metrics, they received a low amount of minutes and their statistics on a per minute or per possession basis were downright awful. They *then* got better and poof, they gets the minutes. Which is the point I'm illustrating.

The minutes did not change Green or Mills. They got better and then received minutes.

[Guest]

No, I don't think you're getting my point. Those two do not fit. The outliers like Lin, O'Neal, and Christie seem to fit...but Danny Green and Patty Mills undoubtedly stunk their first two years. Look at their metrics, they received a low amount of minutes and their statistics on a per minute or per possession basis were downright awful. They *then* got better and poof, they gets the minutes. Which is the point I'm illustrating.

The minutes did not change Green or Mills. They got better and then received minutes.

Now I'm totally confused

Lin got his minutes because of injuries in NY, then went on a tear in NY. Before that he played a total of 285 minutes with GSW.

Danny Green played a total of 115 minutes with CLE then went to SAS.

[Guest]

Now I'm totally confused

Lin got his minutes because of injuries in NY, then went on a tear in NY. Before that he played a total of 285 minutes with GSW.

Danny Green played a total of 115 minutes with CLE then went to SAS.

Danny was not good because he got minutes. Danny got better and then received his minutes. He stunk until 2012. The Cavs had him yo-yo back and forth with the D-League then waived. Spurs signed him, then waived him. He went overseas. Then he came back to the Spurs, who proceeded to yo-yo him with the D-League again. Throughout his entire time up until 2012, he stunk in all of his play. So, he did not receive many minutes. It wasn't until Green became a better player through whatever he was doing that he then received the minutes.

For Lin, it wasn't really the case that he got better then received the minutes. He was just kind of thrown into the situation and viola, turns out he was good. Possibly from poor evaluation of others before hand, but it might have been because the minutes actually made him better. I'd be skeptical on that, but yaknow it could have been the case.

An attempt to rephrase what I'm trying to illustrate is that good players get minutes. You can't just toss minutes at a player to make them better much like you can't just toss money at a problem to fix it. Which this then has further issues, but I'm sensing those points aren't important to the board for various reasons.

[Guest]

I'm trying to figure out whose fault it is that Jenkins isn't draining threes for us and holding this team back.

Bud has been willing to play those on our team. If you aren't playing, then there is likely a reason for that. I'm cool with trusting Bud has made the right call because of all the information on Bud I have read indicates he's a smart guy.

We had basically this same discussion last year with Cunningham. He's not in the league anymore. How about we don't go around trying to find things to complain about?

DROPPED A THREE TONIGHT DIDN'T HE H8R!!!

oh wait. shit.

[AHF]

(1)  I agree with @hawksfanatic that Danny and Bud watched Jenkins the last two years and decided he wasn't worth keeping.  Declining his option signals he is done with the Hawks to me.

 

(2)  I also agree with him that I trust Bud's ability to evaluate people and appropriately hand out the minutes.  If I was going to second guess, it would be Payne that I would focus on, not Jenkins.  (Both are 23).

 

(3)  I am split on the last issue.  Most players get minutes when their play warrants more time but it isn't always true.  There are some guys coaches miss on and some that get in a coach's doghouse.  I do think minutes are usually important to a player's development but whether that is a priority over winning is a fact and circumstances issue for different teams.

 

(4)  I do not blame the lawyers for Dallas losing Parson.  That was a stupid GM move.  The lawyers intelligently drafted a contract including the option.  Then the GM foolishly decided not to exercise it.  We lawyers deserve enough grief without getting dumb moves like that attributed to us!