Staff Scrimmage: Jazz Clips at 2-2, Plus Potential Series Turning Points

Mitchell has been a force in this playoff series, but what else needs to break right for Utah? Our panel weighs in. (via ESPN.com)

With the Clippers and Jazz even at two wins apiece in their best-of-7 series, five SCH writers got together to compare notes on Game 4, series trends, and what to expect from here.

Quin Snyder said the Jazz played hard in Game 4, but “we weren’t playing smart and we weren’t connected” to start the game. What is your diagnosis of Utah’s flat start on Monday?

Jake Lee: As the game went on, Donovan Mitchell looked more and more like himself. It seems like his ankle hadn’t warmed up yet completely during the first quarter. Because of this, he played tentatively during that stretch. Secondary creators Joe Ingles and Bojan Bogdanovic might have been a little more prepared to run the offense had they known this, but they don’t get a pass. They should have been ready. Still, isolation isn’t their forte, and the Clippers were switching 1 through 5, daring guys to create individually. On defense, the Jazz can’t allow nearly 70 points in any half if they want to win. If Rudy Gobert is pulled out from the paint, players can’t keep rolling out the red carpet. They have to stay in front!

Zarin Ficklin: L.A.’s length and switching defense was reminiscent of past series against Houston. It felt as if Utah’s offense sputtered and was reduced to Mitchell isos or ill-advised contested shots. The Jazz have beat switching defenses this season, even without the injured Mike Conley, so the extra effort and connection Snyder mentioned may be part of the answer.

Isaac Adams: I’m not a basketball physician so I hesitate to give any kind of diagnosis but I’m not sure the Jazz were playing hard to start the game, at least to my untrained eye. Outside of winning the opening tip and scoring the first basket, the Jazz looked like they weren’t prepared to play and were completely overmatched. Thankfully, that settled down in the second half, and there were signs that the Jazz will be okay. They just didn’t have it to start the game last night, which is unfortunate given the stakes.

Dan Clayton: Playoff basketball often comes down the little things, and the Jazz looked a little off in the “little things” areas to start the game: rotations, reading the help, boxing out, maintaining effort through a second and third action, etc. Snyder is probably right that those things aren’t necessarily about physical effort, but they do require mental energy, and that’s where the Jazz looked like they just weren’t processing the game as quickly as the Clippers, on either end. 

Mark Russell Pereira: Every basketball coach from grade school through the NBA preaches the pass. Move the ball to your teammates; play unselfishly. It’s a funny concept when you think about it, because ultimately somebody has to shoot the damn basketball—an inherently selfish act. But for all the talk the Jazz like to give about trusting anyone and everyone to take any shot, there is an unspoken tenet underlying that unwavering confidence: the eventual shooter of the basketball should be made free by the collective altruism of the other four men on the court. Whether it’s by screening, spring to a spot on the floor to stretch the defense, or giving a ball handler under duress an option, all of those forms of altruism present the shooter with an advantage that he must recognize and utilize.

Too often on Monday, the entire concept of offense for the Jazz stopped besides whoever had the ball, and this lone active member was attempting to dribble past or away from one, two, or even three Clipper defenders. The Jazz typically welcome a defense snding two or more men to the ball, as it often initiates the proverbial blender. This time, the Clippers were fiendish about sitting on passing lanes to take away that easy pass off the ball. Against that defense, the Jazz should have shown to the ball or set screens to help make those passes and kickstart the blender. Gobert loves setting the biggest screens in the league, but rarely helped to clear off one (or both!) of the two defenders engaged in a double-team. To the extent it is the ballhandler’s responsibility to call for Gobert’s assistance in this capacity, they failed to do so. And when the Clippers didn’t send a double-team to the ball, an isolation opportunity apparated in lieu of any functional offensive movement. In the first quarter interview, Snyder lamented the lack of “pick and roll[s] with our five man.” Where were the Ingles/Mitchell-Gobert pick-and-rolls that have been so deadly for literally the entire goddamn season? If the Clippers switched that action, that’s still a useful product that could have been built upon, but wasn’t.

While one-on-one basketball is needed in a switching defense context, it is not the only solution; against a swarming, amoeba-like switching-plus-doubling defensive style that the Clippers provided, you need to move your ass to counter the defensive strategy. Instead, nobody moved, waiting for the advantage to be handed to them.

How worried are you, on a scale of “oh no, LAC solved the Jazz” to “new series, bring it on!”?

Jake: I’m close to a 6.5/10 worry, but before last night honestly I was closer to an 8/10. I saw some flashes of a few things from Mitchell and from the offense in the second half that made me feel like the reincorporation of Conley could make this a winnable series. Mitchell looked like he still had some gas left in him. Ingles shot it well. Jazz found ways to feed Gobert. However, I do think it’s not the most likely scenario that the Jazz win this round considering how well the Clippers looked on offense and defense. Both sides of the ball need fixing, and we still don’t know about Conley.

Zarin: It does feel as if the series hinges on Conley’s return, but at the same time, we’ve seen this Jazz team outplay LA two times without him. Snyder has the tactical skill and personnel (even sans Conley) to punch back. Utah has the ability to improve upon the last two games, and it’s likely to remain a close series.

Isaac:

• 125-135 L (OT)
• 124-105 W
• 124-87 W
• 129-127 W
• 107-117 L
• 107-119 L
• 78-80 L

Those are the final scores of last year’s Round 1 Series between the Jazz and Nuggets. If you’d asked me after games 2 and 3 if the Jazz had “solved” the Nuggets, I probably would have said they obviously had. Especially after that 124-87 beat down in Game 3. But that’s not how series between closely matched teams work. The scores in Round 1 between the Clippers and Mavericks are similar, it looked like the Clippers had everything figured out after a blow-out win in Game 4 before the Mavericks came back to win Game 5. There are ebbs and flows to playoff series and things can change drastically from one game to another. Plus, home court advantage is a thing. So I guess I’m fully on “new series, bring it on!” especially if Conley returns for Game 5 or 6.

Dan: In a series between two great teams, what did we expect? Being 2-2 against a great team in the conference semis is what contention looks like, and we knew that a series between these two elite squads could go either way. This was always going to be mortal combat, and so far each game has gone chalk. If there’s anything that changes the outlook for the final 2-3 games, it’s the status of Mitchell, who has undeniably been a different player since midway through Game 2 when he appeared to tweak his right leg. He has still managed 37.3 points per game in this series, but he hasn’t manipulate the defense quite the same way since that apparent injury lessened his burst and limited his repertoire of tricky moves. If he gets more of that back, or if Conley returns to help Mitchell solve the Clippers’ swarming, switching defense, the Jazz should have every chance to find two more wins.

Mark: One of the benefits of racking up a 2-0 lead is you get a couple chances to read and react to the opponent’s “best” strategies before it resets to a best-of-three series. Ideally, of course, Utah could have stolen one of these road games as the Clippers figured out how to make it all work. From here, the Jazz still have a great advantage as a better overall team. The Jazz players are too good, and the coaches are too smart, to let this Clippers strategy work them like this. This isn’t a Houston-esque situation where the Jazz didn’t have the horses to deal with the skill and uniqueness of James Harden and company.

I’m very confident in a Jazz series win, but my confidence will be easily shaken if we fail to see meaningful adjustments offensively out of the gate in Game 5.

The defensive issues are largely based on effort and luck. I’m not worried on that end of the court.

Mitchell is obviously still banged up, but averaged 34-5-5 in two games at Staples, Outside of him, what was the biggest positive for the Jazz in G3 & G4?

Jake: I liked what I saw out of Gobert. It’s incredible to me that the Clippers are doing everything they can to take him out of the picture both on offense and defense, yet he’s finding ways to affect the game. Last night, for example, Gobert finished +0 in a game the Jazz lost by 14 points. The fact of the matter is that Snyder needs to play Gobert more minutes or Derrick Favors needs to return to his Games 1-2 prowess. If neither of those things change, I don’t see how Utah moves to the next round.

Zarin: Ingles had a team-high +4 and shot 7-for-9 from the field. If Conley remains out, Snyder may need to experiment with rotations to keep one of Ingles or Mitchell on the floor at all times. That may even require starting Jordan Clarkson, a move Snyder has only made three times.

Isaac: Going back to the “oh no, LAC solved the Jazz” scale, the biggest positive I have is that the Jazz seemed to have solved LAC a little bit in the 2nd half. Of course, the Clippers didn’t need to keep their foot on the gas with the leads they had but the Jazz fought back admirably and were able to battle with the Clippers to bring it close a few times. Even without Conley, the Jazz seemed to have started to solve some of the challenges the Clippers have thrown at them these past two games.

Dan: It took a 29-point deficit for them to get desperate enough to try it, but the Jazz finally decided to let Rudy be Rudy. They decided midway through G4 that unleashing Gobert’s interior defensive impact is worth it even if that means just leaving a Clipper (usually Nic Batum) wide open. Gobert was +15 in 21 minutes of second-half action, and this gives Utah a way to counter the Clipper’s attempts to tug him outside with 5-shooter lineups. (Also, great that Ingles finally got going after an otherwise very pedestrian series.)

Mark: The raw counting stats don’t show it, but Gobert is still playing relatively great. Gobert was, impressively, only a minus-1 in the Game 3 rout. As mentioned above, Snyder would have preferred more use of the Gobert pick-and-roll when the offense was in a total rut. The Jazz could get more from his size and skill on the offensive glass, but it may be a net positive if Gobert instead gets back on defense ASAP instead of glass-crashing. Importantly, Gobert is still shutting down the rim, and has already produced a dozen or so impressive efforts matched up in isolation against Kawhi Leonard or Paul George. In fact, I am borderline optimistic whenever a Clippers offensive possession resorts to either of the Clippers’ star wings taking Gobert off the dribble.

Note: Since this writing, Kawhi Leonard has been ruled out of Game 5 of the series, and his status going forward is in doubt, per ESPN’s Brian Windhorst and Ramona Shelburne.

As the series shifts back to SLC, all eyes are on Mike Conley’s availability. What’s the one area Mike could most help the Jazz if he’s available for G5 (or G6/G7)?

Jake: Mike won’t be super helpful on defense, though I’m sure he’ll surprise a few people that, despite his size, he can still affect shots and get into people. The biggest impact he’ll have is simply controlling the game in a calm, decisive manner. The way he can do that is breaking the paint and then kickstarting the blender. Mitchell and Clarkson haven’t consistently been able to pass out of their drives. This would not only help strengthen Utah’s rotations (pushing Ingles back to the bench), but it allows Mitchell to play off-ball, tapping into one of his best assets: his catch-and-shoot 3-pointer.

Zarin: Breaking the switching defense (or zone defense if it reappears). Utah’s secondary scorers haven’t provided enough oomph to counter LA’s defensive schemes, which have stalled Utah’s pick and roll offense. Another creator of Conley’s calibre will relieve Mitchell and open up a lot of plays that haven’t been working in the last two games.

Isaac: For me, a large portion of the Clippers success in Games 3 and 4 came from their aggression on defense. They tried to make life hell for Mitchell by doubling him and making anybody else beat them. While Donovan was able to score, the rest of the team wasn’t able to punish that aggression. If Conley is anywhere near 100%, he can make the Clippers pay for that defensive aggression. He just makes the back court so much more dynamic. Conley would also be able to maximize Gobert and punish the Clippers for going small; those two developed fantastic synergy throughout the season and the Conley-Gobert pick and roll is not something the Clippers have had to account for yet. Finally, Conley would provide a significant boost to the Jazz’s backcourt defense, which has been lacking throughout the series.

Dan: Mitchell is brilliant but obviously playing on one leg. Clarkson can get into the defense with the ball but doesn’t always make great reads. Bogdanovic and Ingles aren’t necessarily built to break down the switching and swarming Clippers on their own. The sum of those issues has been why the Jazz’s offense just hasn’t looked very dynamic since halftime of G2, and Conley can help with that. Even if he’s not a world-beater off the bat, just having one more patient creator who can solve defenses and make the right play will be a huge release of the burden currently on Mitchell and Clarkson, and to a lesser extent the Splash Uncles.

Mark: For all of the purported virtue of Ingles, Clarkson, and Bogdanovic as secondary playmakers, they certainly aren’t acting like it against the Clippers’ pressure. Conley is a second *primary* playmaker that just puts a way different type of pressure on the offense. His dribble-drive game, even at 70-80% capacity, would be a panacea for sticky offense. Even if Conley can’t reliably torch a defender for a wide-open floater, he has enough guile to put a man on his hip and dive into his deep layup package or, better yet, execute on his team-best lob chemistry with Gobert.

Outside of Conley playing, which Jazz player can turn the series around by performing at a higher level than we’ve seen so far in the series?

Jake: Most will probably think offensively for this question, but I think we’re going to need either Ingles and/or Bogdanovic to slow Kawhi or PG down. If those two Clippers stars both have good games, the Clippers are nearly impossible to beat. They’ve had great Games 3-4. Also, assuming Snyder stays with mid-30s minute totals for Gobert, Favors can really have an impact on this series. While Clippers aren’t really driving into the paint when Gobert is on the court, they are when Favors is. If he can have a positive impact on the game or even a neutral one, that can win a game for you.

Zarin: Bogdanovic isn’t giving the Jazz nothing, but he could be giving a lot more. He’s played the secondary scorer role in the past, and the Jazz could really use a 20+ ppg Bogey as opposed to the 15 ppg Bogey they’ve seen so far.

Isaac: If Conley can go, Gobert’s game will be amplified. I’m also among the chorus that Gobert’s been solid in the series but needs to play more. It’s not so much that he can boost his performance as that he can give Utah that same star impact for more than 32 minutes per game. Favors has had his moments these playoffs but he’s not at the same level he was a few years ago and he is not Gobert. One of the biggest advantages of a potential Conley return is shortening the rotation and limiting any lineups featuring Miye Oni or Georges Niang. Favors, Oni and Niang all provided invaluable contributions through the regular season but the less we see of them in the post-season, the better (unless it’s because Utah’s on the right side of garbage time, that is).

Dan: If Conley misses any more time, the Jazz simply need Ingles to be far less shy. He finally let fly on several jumpers on Monday night, but he still has long stretches where he’s uninterested in playing the initiator role. Part of that is because the Clipper defense takes away a lot of what he does best, but if he’s going to shirk those responsibilities, it makes the Jazz far too dependent on Clarkson in the non-Mitchell minutes, and that’s a dependency that often creates predictable, schemable play. If Conley is back, then the defensive responsibilities change, as he’ll draw the Reggie Jackson assignment and that means the other starters have to guard bigger wings on a full-time basis. In particular, Bogey will have to get back to his G1 & G2 defensive level while also finding ways to help the Jazz score and beat mismatches.

Mark: Rudy freakin’ Gobert. It’s so hard for Gobert to “play better” because he is a dependent offensive threat. He doesn’t really dribble. He doesn’t shoot jumpers. He rarely initiates passing from the perimeter or the elbows. But he’s capable of putting up 20-20 games from here on out if the rest of the team can get him the basketball. Every offensive initiator for the Jazz has found him in the right spots from time to time, but not consistently. The Clippers are sending late help into the lane when a ballhandler picks up his dribble, knowing that the pass to Rudy is a focal point. But if Gobert has the likes of Marcus Morris or Patrick Beverley on him, he can up the intensity by sealing their ass under the rim and getting that pass 8 feet high where no help can intercept the pass.

And so this is less of a Gobert thing than an “everybody else” thing, but I will say that if the ball starts going his way, the Clippers have absolutely no answer for Gobert at the rim. He needs to be ready and engaged, and not commit turnovers or hesitate.