Is Jerry the problem?

[Real Deal]

Not trying to hate on Jerry Sloan, but is it possible that he has been the problem with the Utah Jazz?

 

I know I can't put the blame on him in the 90's (I blame Michael Jordan for Utah's troubles), but it seems as if Utah has had a pretty solid group of guys (Deron, Boozer, AK, Okur), yet they can't catch a break.

 

Is Jerry to blame?

[Built Ford Tough]

I wouldn't say that he is the problem.

 

The way I look at it, the problem for the Jazz under Sloan is that they have been a good to great team for the majority of the time that Sloan has been there, but there has always been a couple of teams that you can look at and say that they are definitely better than the Jazz.

 

For example, like you already said, Jordan and the Bulls can be blamed for why they never won anything in the 90s.

 

You can also blame players/teams like Tim Duncan and the Spurs and Kobe Bryant and the Lakers for them not getting it done in the 00's.

 

They have been a very good team under Sloan for the majority of his time there, but there have always been a couple of teams that were better than they were and I think that is the reason why they haven't won a Championship under him.

[Real Deal]

Well, even while Jordan was retired (or when he came back to lose in the playoffs in 1995), how come the Jazz didn't get to the Finals out West? They would've played the Magic and the Sonics...and with Stockton and Malone, two of the best players at their positions, they would've had two consecutive rings.

 

Crazy enough, they lost both times to the Houston Rockets, eventual champs, who really only had Hakeem Olajuwon. Utah even had a 60-win season when they lost in the first round to a 47-win Houston team, who won their second title that year (they did have Clyde, but still...).

 

Maybe Hakeem was just too good.

[Built Ford Tough]

Well, even while Jordan was retired (or when he came back to lose in the playoffs in 1995), how come the Jazz didn't get to the Finals out West? They would've played the Magic and the Sonics...and with Stockton and Malone, two of the best players at their positions, they would've had two consecutive rings.

 

Crazy enough, they lost both times to the Houston Rockets, eventual champs, who really only had Hakeem Olajuwon. Utah even had a 60-win season when they lost in the first round to a 47-win Houston team, who won their second title that year (they did have Clyde, but still...).

 

Maybe Hakeem was just too good.

 

That pretty much sums up what I was going to say. But you know me and how I don't like to just have one line answers so I will say more, .

 

The Jazz were a better team during the regular season than the Rockets were, but Hakeem was playing some of the best basketball from a center ever and he just simply took over for the Rockets.

 

Again it goes back to what I said in my first post in how there was always an elite player or an elite team that stood in their way. That time period (Jordan's first retirement) was their best shot at winning a Championship and some people may consider it a dissapointment that they never won a Championship, but I am going to give the team and Sloan a pass because during their best years they have had to play against the best player of All-Time in Jordan and possibly the best teams of All-Time in the 90's Bulls.

 

Then they had to face a top 5 center of All-Time and a top 10 player of All-Time when he was at his absolute best in Hakeem.

 

Then when they got away from those players they would've had to beat another top 5 center and top 10 player in Shaq with the second best shooting guard and another arugable top 10 player in Kobe.

 

Even if they didn't have to deal with Shaq and Kobe they would've had to go up against the best power forward ever in Tim Duncan and his elite Spurs teams.

 

Lastly, they have the Kobe led Lakers who were the clear cut best team in the West the last two seasons.

 

Some people may not agree with me on this, but the way that I look at it, the Jazz have never really been a team that I would consider to be the heavy favourites to win the NBA Championship. You can make an argument for when Jordan first retired, but I don't think that anybody other than Jordan would've stopped Hakeem from winning those back to back Championships.

Edited September 3, 2009 by Built Ford Tough

[Multi-Billionaire]

His problem is I think...

 

He's too good to suck, and he's not good enough to win a championship with his current group. I feel his best chance was with Malone and Stockton (two players producing very high efficiency and effectiveness) but those were thwarted by MJ's Bulls.

[Erick Blasco]

I think Jerry gets very stubborn and tries to stay too committed to his offense sometimes instead of opening up. They'll struggle against good teams at times and instead of letting Deron Williams freelance, he'll try to hammer his offense in harder.

 

His main problem is that none of Utah's starting bigs can move or jump.

[Years]

I think Jerry gets very stubborn and tries to stay too committed to his offense sometimes instead of opening up. They'll struggle against good teams at times and instead of letting Deron Williams freelance, he'll try to hammer his offense in harder.

 

His main problem is that none of Utah's starting bigs can move or jump.

 

You know this is the greatest statement I've seen so far. If Jerry allows Deron to freelance with the ball he'd be putting up Cp3 numbers. But Utah is to committed to the pick and roll game with Boozer which comes at a price.

[Heir Rose]

It seems to me like he's always had very solid teams, but very few times has a Jazz team had the personnel to win a championship. The only time periods I see that they would have had a good shot of winning it all is the two years M.J. was gone, and the lockout season in which the Spurs won. There have been a few opportunities, but even then it's tough to capitalize and get all the way to the Finals, even if you're not going up against three different dynasties Sloan has had the misfortune of coaching against during his tenure with Utah.

 

The Bulls (x2) and Lakers have had dominant teams in nine of the past 20 years or so. Not many chances to win from the 90s through 2002, and after that the Jazz never really had a team that could go all the way. They've had very good squads on the floor, but look at the teams that have won in recent memory: L.A., Boston, San Antonio, Miami, Detroit, L.A. again, S.A. again, Chicago, Houston, and the Bulls again. Only one of those teams didn't have a great player (Detroit), which is what BFT was talking about. Teams like Utah rarely face a field weak enough for them to go all the way, and this Jazz team definitely isn't as good as that Pistons team was anyway.

 

I don't think they can go much further than 2nd-3rd seed in the West and possibly make it to the conference finals with this team. Not much interior defense, they've got some talented scorers but teams like L.A., Boston, Cleveland, etc. are simply better all-around.