One thing really impresses me of this Jazz team is: they win close games. Win some games they are supposed to lose both in regular season and playoffs. the Jazz is the top 5 team in WC that has the smallest point differential because they are able to win close games, come back games. Jerry Sloan had his team playing behind in 1st half in so many regular season games and made the Jazz a tough 3rd & 4th quarter team. Jerry Sloan has coached his team into a hard fighting 3rd & 4th quarter team. This is the kind of team that can win but they still need to fix some weak spots like SG to win it all. I really wish Jerry Sloan win a championship before he retires. Sloan is the only ringless veteran coach who truly deserves a ring.
I guess Jazz is THAT good. The fairy tale of GS had to be ended sooner or later. There was no way that GS would reach to WCF.
Sorry but I don't see that happening. Warriors were Suns Lite Edition. If haven't noticed lately the Suns are beating the Spurs to their won game. How many points did Phoenix score last game? I don't see them being able to guard Phoenix. Deron vs Nash - No contest here, Nash will run all over this guy and Fisher can't guard him either. Its is not a matter of speed of strength but Nash is too smart to get played by these fools. Deron will be kept in check by a taller more physical Raja Bell. Marion vs AK47 - This could very interesting to watch cause both players are so versatile and do so many things like rebounding, blocks, hustle plays. However Marion has the slight edge because he has a better jumpshot and more range the Kirelenko. Look at Rockets/Warriors who constantly left this guy open near the 3 point line challenging him to a make a shot. Amare Vs Boozer - Both are a handful in the post, Boozer is the better post-up player but Amare lives off the pick n roll with Nash. Pretty even in this matchup but Boozer is just a little bit slow to guard Amare. Okur Vs Thomas - This could be the X-factor in the series if Okur finds his touch like in the Golden State series. But Houston has shown that if you put a smaller more physical guy like Hayes on Okur than he struggle badly so I expect a healthy doze of Marion on him plus a sprinkle of Bell from time to time. Anyway if the Suns make it beyond Spurs that the West is their's to lose. No way do I see Jazz going more than 6 games with the Suns.
Correct. Last year the Western rep was determined in the semis, the Suns-Clips winner pretty much had no chance versus the Mavericks-Spurs. This year the same thing is happening, the Suns-Spurs winner is the West rep. If Utah can push either the Suns or Spurs to 6 that is about all they can hope. Remember the Jazz barely beat the Rockets and most GSW games were close only for the GSW to play incredibly terrible down the stretch. Which GSW also did versus the Mavs, yet still won the series. Even if the Jazz manage to keep the games close, they are not going to out execute the Suns or Spurs down the stretch in the half court like they did the Rockets (at least in the games where the Rockets were on the verge of putting a stake in them) and Warriors (every close game). But I will say assuming the Pistons go ahead and put away the Bulls nobody should doubt they have a very real chance to win it all--they match up decently well with SA as well as Phx.
I don't know why many are quickly dismissing Jazz's chance in the WCF. If the regular season's records are any indication, it seems there's no WC elite team that the Jazz cannot handle. Jazz vs Suns: 3-1 Jazz vs Spurs: 2-2 Jazz vs Mavs: 2-1 Jazz vs Rockets: 3-1 in contrast: Rockets vs Suns: 1-3 Rockets vs Mavs: 1-3 Rockets vs Spurs: 2-2 Rockets vs Jazz: 1-3 Still gleeful the Rockets finally and barely edged the Jazz in the regular season's W-L standing? I wonder if those Gundy lovers dwelling on the gratification of 52 wins would ever acknowledge how pathetically JVG's Rockets played against the top teams in the West, which is a much more reliable measure to gauge the team's outlook in the playoffs than the overall regular season record.
But if the Jazz are so good how come we had chances to put the dagger in them in games 3, 6, & 7? I don't think for a second we would have had such a chance to put the dagger in Phx or SA. As for the regular season I think nobody really gunned for them. From what I have seen I think the level of play is far better in the other series than what I have seen from the Jazz.
I agree. This Jazz group is the same team that had a meltdown last month of the season and their owner called them out. Yes they did win against Houston and Golden State but they haven't faced a playoff veteran team like San Antonio or Phoenix. Put them in place of Phoenix in the current series, I really don't see how they handle all this bullying by Spurs and the cheap shots taken by their players. But then again it takes a dirty flopper to meet its match
Well, once again we're in complete disagreement... That's what I am saying: he's a clutch playoff performer and has been for years. That's pretty much how his career will be ultimately defined. He's a solid role player, nothing great but he's solid on a GOOD team. He's a specialist in that he feeds off the star players on good teams. Horry is the same way and has been for most of his career. During the regular season, Horry is even less serviceable than Juwon Howard. I haven't seen anyone complain. As for his years with the Warriors and before now with the Jazz, neither of those teams made the playoffs and were considered 'bad teams' for the most part. Fisher is not the type of guy that can help a bad team. He's a 'structure and discipline' type of player, and that's where he thrives. I thought he was in the wrong situation and now that he's finally on a good playoff team, we're seeing what he can do for you. Look beyond the numbers...
Those kinds of number (38%FG and 31% from long range) don't lie. Besides, I AM looking beyond the numbers because I watched the Jazz several times this year and Fisher was pretty rough. You want to know one of the reasons for the late Jazz tank job after they beat us? Derek Fisher. If you want to say Fish didn't fit on the Warriors, fine. The fact is he didn't perform well when they put him on the court. Same for this season with the Jazz, ever with all of their "structure and discipline". The fact he's recently become deadeye from the field is great, but all season long he's been the Jazz version of Rafer (with Ronnie Brewer as V-Span and Sloan as JVG). I don't even have to check, but after game 1 against the Warriors, I bet you a lot of Jazz fans said they pulled it out because Fish didn't play. I'm very happy for the guy. His daughter's health aside (which is really impossible for him to put aside), Fisher looks like he's having the time of his NBA life. Deron Williams played like a dog last night and it was Fisher to the rescue. I hope he doesn't revert to form in the WCFs because I want the Jazz to win now. He's played waaaay over his head the last couple of games and it isn't likely to last.
don't ever compare this jazz team to that rockets team. When the hell did we ever play an 8th seed? If you remember anything about those 2 years you would know we beat the best both years. 94: blazers, suns, jazz, knicks 95: jazz, suns, spurs, magic like i said, jazz are in by default once the mavs got ousted.
No, I still remember the Lakers 3-peat. And he was a good role player then. And you're right -- clutch even. But I didn't remember him scoring back-to-back 20 point games in crucial situations. A clutch shot here and there, yea, but not to the extent of these playoffs. Him and Deron has been a great tag team. I guess it's just disappointing to me that other teams have players who step up during these playoffs and we had none this year. Very discouraging.
Fisher is not clutch just cause he he that one famous shot doesn't make him clutch by any stretch of the imagination. For anything Fisher is remembered for flopping miserably and drawing the most charges in the league. Now wonder he finds a home in Floppertown, Utah.
Bull****. Sorry, but I have to reply to this crap. I've bit my tongue lately because I hate trolling opposing boards, but I'm going to make the exception here. Firstly, the Jazz aren't in the Western Conference Finals by default, or you could say the Spurs/Suns and the eventual NBA Champion is the winner by default as well, since none had to go through the "best" team in the NBA -- at least the best regular season team. No one knows if Utah would have beaten Dallas, but the Jazz played them really tough in the regular season, winning 2 of 3 and their lone loss coming in the closing minutes. It wasn't as if the Mavs rolled the Jazz during the regular season. Secondly, if you want to get technical, the Rockets first championship came because the Sonics were upset in the first round by the Nuggets. Or do you conveniently forget that one? Seattle entered the postseason with the best record, picked by many to make the NBA Finals and win it over a weaker eastern opponent. If you recall the Sonics lost to the Nuggets, who then lost to Utah, who turned around and lost to the Rockets 4-1 in the Western Conference finals. And since the Rockets were Seattle's b****es in the late 80s and 90s (losing 4 times to the Sonics in the playoffs), I could just as easily assume the Rockets would have lost, again, to Seattle. Thus they, by the Nuggets stunning victory over Seattle, were only in the NBA Finals by default using your logic. Thirdly, it isn't as if Utah had an easy path to the Western Conference finals. They opened the playoffs on the road, fell behind 0-2 before rallying to win a game 7 on a visiting team's floor. Utah became only the second road team in history to win Game 7 of a seven-game series in which the home team won each of the first six games. Then they had to play probably the hottest team in the NBA playoffs, fresh off upsetting the number 1 seed in and the Jazz won that series 4-1. Not impressive? Only there by default? I don't think so. Utah is in the WCF because they played great basketball against Houston and did something Dallas couldn't do against Golden State. And I guarantee you if the Rockets had won game 7 and actually beat Golden State (probably not nearly as easy as the Jazz did, however), you wouldn't be saying they backed their way into the WCF by default. And you know what? I wouldn't either. Just like I don't blame the Nuggets for Houston winning their first championship.
Maybe because most fans are blind, they only see what they want to see? I think Jazz beats the Suns if Suns can beat the Spurs.
So the Sonics would have beaten the Jazz in the second round? You are comparing something that did happen to something that you assume would have happened. It's dumb to compare the Jazz with the '94 Rockets anyway, because the Rockets won the championship. I won't say the Jazz got in the Western Conference finals by "default," because they beat the teams they played, but they did get lucky with their match up. Luck is an important part of sports. A couple of rebounds bounce the other way, and the Rockets are facing the Warriors. A couple of rebounds bounce the other way and Michael Jordan doesn't get a chance to hit that shot over Russell, and the Jazz get a seventh game. A lottery ball bounces another way and the Spurs draft Keith Van Horn and Popovich is coaching at Ball State. The only thing that matters is winning a championship. Whether luck is involved or not (and it usually is), no one can take away that team's trophy and rings. The Jazz can silence any talk by defeating the Spurs or Suns and winning it all. No one fondly remembers a playoff run that ultimately ends in defeat. Twenty-nine teams either miss the playoffs or end their season with a heartbreaking loss, and questions about what went wrong. The champion will forever having "bragging rights..." at least for that season. It seems pretty black and white. I guess that is one of the reasons people like sports.
because they were a bad match up all season. remember the first game. with no one who can guard boozer, and okur shooting outside, and a really good point guard, the rockets' weakeast spot, they were a bad matchup
And there is no assuming the Jazz would have lost to Dallas? It's all about assuming, is it not? The fact is, the Mavs have shown over the years to be an upset prone basketball team in the playoffs and I'm not so so sure it would have been such an upset if the Jazz had pulled out a win. My point however is that there really is no difference between the two. The path to the World Championship got a lot easier in 1994 when the Sonics were knocked out in the first round, because they were the best team heading into the playoffs, at least by what happened in the regular season. This is fact and the Rockets were the #2 seed and only became the "best" team when Seattle was knocked out. Oh and yes I think Seattle would have beaten Utah in '94. The Jazz were a 5 seed going up against a Sonics team that Utah never matched up well with. Utah was 1-3 against the Sonics that season and I wouldn't have expected much different in the second round. The fact Seattle was knocked out however opened the door for Houston and don't tell me Rocket fans back then were not relieved when their playoff nemesis was shown the door. I always felt Dallas was overrated and were going to be exposed in the playoffs. It probably just happened a series earlier than I really expected, because I thought Utah could take them. Of course they got lucky, but that's the playoffs. The Warriors were lucky to play Dallas, because if they had been a 7th or 6th seed, they would have been either swept or knocked out in 5 against Phoenix or San Antonio. But, as I was saying, Houston was lucky in 1994 that Seattle was bounced in the first round. If they had made the WCF and played the Rockets, I think one could assume the Sonics stood a better chance of defeating Houston than Utah did. I don't want to take Houston's trophy away and I won't. They earned their right by making it through four very difficult playoff series. Utah has not done that and I don't think they will this year. Not doing so however won't hurt anything they've accomplished this season, because no one thought at the start of the season Utah would be in the Western Conference finals -- not even Jazz fans. But I disagree that no one fondly remembers a playoff run that ultimately ends in defeat. Because many Jazz fans still are consumed with our NBA Finals runs in 1997 and 1998. And I'm guessing Rocket fans still hold '81 and '86 Finals close to their hearts, even though both ended with a loss to Boston. This season will be a success with or without that championship because we're young and it shows me that Utah is capable of making a deep playoff run. Yeah they were helped a bit by Golden State beating Dallas, but they're still there regardless. If it ends this round, it'll be tough, but I think I can accept what has happened. And I will definitely look back on this season as one of the best in recent history. For a team to not make the playoffs for 3 years, then to go on a run and make the conference finals is pretty remarkable. Especially when people wrote the Jazz and Jerry Sloan off the second Stockton retired and Malone bolted for LA.
Where did I say Dallas would win ? I know they would have matched up better with the Jazz than the Warriors, however. The only way your comparison would work was if the Rockets had played the Nuggets in the second round. It doesn't work. But if you did want to, could you? I'm not old enough to know what those runs were like, but I know whenever they play either of those finals series on ESPN Classic, I can't watch because I know they lost. I guess we have different views of "success." Do you think the Blazers of the late 1990s, or the Kings of a few years ago, view their runs as a success ? What about Dallas? I don't know, maybe they do, but after you experience the excitement and joy of watching your favorite team winning a championship, nothing (besides feeling that again) is ever good enough. I guess you can hope a team "builds" on their success from the previous year, but each season is different. The Clippers took the Suns to the seventh game of the second round last year, and they didn't even make the playoffs this year. The Mavericks went to the finals last season and didn't make it out of the first round. The Heat won the championship, and didn't...and so on, and so on, and so on... There are no guarantees or carry-overs... We just have two completely different philosophies when it comes to sports, I guess... *Shrugs* Only one team is happy at the end of the season.
You can't draw a conclusion from a team's head-to-head standing in the regular season. Remember Utah is 3-1 against Rockets because we gift wrapped the last game of season to the Jazz for giving us home court advantage beforehand. Had we not done so then maybe we would be 2-2 and thus the conclusion would be that both teams are close in the regular season and should be a close playoff series. If I remember correctly we went down the wire in game 7 in a close hard fought game and lost a by a few points. Now it would be foolish to say Utah will beat San Antonio and Phoenix just because they have a better head-to-head standing against both teams. No a 7 game series is a completely different ball game. I don't see how Utah advances pass those two teams.
No one is saying Utah WOULD beat Pho and SA, but they definitely COULD. They are solid in every position and have a very deep bench. After witnessing firsthand how they beat us and GS, I've gained alot of respect for that team.
