Jazz vindicated for controversial Jordan Clarkson decision

Keeping him proved to be a bad choice, but getting rid of him wasn't!
Dallas Mavericks v New York Knicks
Dallas Mavericks v New York Knicks | Nathaniel S. Butler/GettyImages

The Utah Jazz waived Jordan Clarkson primarily because it had been long past time to move on from him. But it's not like it was an unamicable split. Both sides knew they were better off without each other after a peaceful union. However, with the season half over, it's become abundantly clear that Utah got rid of him at the best time because Clarkson's best days seem to be behind him.

His traditional numbers this season support this notion. While his shooting efficiencies (42.5% from the field & 33% from three) are par for the course for the Jazz alum, his stats are all down across the board. 9.5 points, 1.8 rebounds, and 1.3 assists are all career lows for him. It's gotten so bad that the Knicks have started reducing his minutes.

Because of his inefficiencies, the Knicks (who have been in a bit of a tailspin as a whole), have begun to only play him when their games are out of hand. Granted, it's not like they're paying him a hefty sum for his services (the Jazz are doing that for them), but it's becoming increasingly apparent that adding him did not help much.

The Knicks have had bigger disappointments on the team (Guerschon Yabusele), but Clarkson has not held his own on his end. Just look at his net rating. Per NBA.com, the Knicks are mediocre when he's on the floor (plus-1.2), but are just that much better when he's off it (plus-6.3).

The Jazz basically agreeing to pay him to get off their roster should have been a strong hint to the Knicks that they weren't getting the prime version of him

That's not to say anyone is rooting against Clarkson

Utah has no reason to gloat about Clarkson's decline because, at the end of the day, he was loyal to them. He chose to stay when many in his position would have opted to leave (in all fairness, they gave him money that no other team may have during that time). Plus, it's readily apparent that his ex-teammates in Utah hold him in high regard.

If anything, Jazz fans should hope that he's simply just a bad fit in the Big Apple and on another team next year, things could get better. Maybe Utah would think about bringing him back when they start trying next season, but that might be complicated because they already have the new version of Clarkson on the roster.

So yes, the Jazz got rid of Clarkson at the right time, even if it's not likely how they would have preferred to get rid of him, but because of the good will he rightfully earned as a Jazzman, here's to hoping it's not the end of his NBA career just yet.

Loading recommendations... Please wait while we load personalized content recommendations