It's a figurative train. I'll be fine.If you’re waiting until it leaves the station, it may be too hard to catch up to, and if you do, you have to dangerously run and jump, and may risk getting your legs severed on the track.
It's a figurative train. I'll be fine.If you’re waiting until it leaves the station, it may be too hard to catch up to, and if you do, you have to dangerously run and jump, and may risk getting your legs severed on the track.
Your figurative legs will be severed.It's a figurative train. I'll be fine.
Figuratively, I don't have legs.Your figurative legs will be severed.
Then it may severe your figurative ****.Figuratively, I don't have legs.
Probably not.Then it may severe your figurative ****.
But what if @Gameface is figuratively ****-less, though?Then it may severe your figurative ****.
We couldn't do that. Moving away from Rubio and Favors created the space to get Bogey. They could've had the space if they got rid of Favors. The other problem is I'm pretty sure Bogey wouldn't have been so certain of coming here without the Conley trade.
I'm not sure he has explicitly stated Conley, but he may have at the introductory press conference. It seemed pretty clear based on numerous comments he's made.Ive only heard that Bogey decided to come here because of the Conley signing from a handful of posters, like you. I’ve never actually read him or anyone that I can put a real name to, to citing the Conley deal as the reason for him coming. I just tried Google, and I didn’t find anything. Maybe I missed something? But I’m thinking that claims that Bogie’s signing were contingent on Conley’s acquisition is more of an attempt to justify the disastrous Conley trade than on actual evidence.
https://www.indystar.com/story/spor...rs-utah-jazz-2019-nba-free-agency/1703286001/Ive only heard that Bogie decided to come here because of the Conley signing from a handful of posters, like you. I’ve never actually read him or anyone associated with reporting on him as citing the Conley deal for the reason he came here. I just tried Google, and I didn’t find anything. Maybe I missed something? But I’m thinking that claims that Bogie’s signing were contingent on Conley’s acquisition is more of an attempt to justify the disastrous Conley trade than on actual evidence.
The financials is where I admit I’m not an expert at and where things do get murky. I wonder if sticking with essentially the same team but making Bogie a priority wouldn’t have triggered additional moves which would’ve enabled us to keep Favors, Rubio, Neto, Crowder, while adding Bogie. Whether those additional moves would’ve included jettisoning Exum and/or Bradley, I’m not sure. This goes into the vague realm of “what ifs.”
Regardless, I think one could easily argue that had we stayed put, we’d be a better team than we are today and we’d have more tradeable assets. Yes, Bogie is good. But it’s easily arguable that both he and Conley cost us our starting 4/backup center, our entire bench, and our length, toughness, and chemistry. What is becoming increasingly obvious, is that we aren’t an elite team. So what did last summer actually accomplish?
Seeing that we have Conley, Donovan Mitchell, and Rudy Gobert – that’s the best defensive player in the league – that was huge for me to decide.
I'm not sure he has explicitly stated Conley, but he may have at the introductory press conference. It seemed pretty clear based on numerous comments he's made.
The Jazz were going nowhere with the roster they had and regardless of how this goes, it was well-past time to move on. The question is how they should move on, but I couldn't do another year of a starting lineup that featured three brick-layers, a chucker, and Joe Ingles.
He mentions Conley... explicitlyYeah, I’ve read that before. Sounds like he’s really excited to play with the reigning defensive player of the year.
How very Thriller of you.Yeah, I’ve read that before. Sounds like he’s really excited to play with the reigning defensive player of the year.
How very Thriller of you.
By changing reality to fit your narrative after it's been disproven.By being logical? Yeah, I guess.
He mentions Conley... explicitly
By changing reality to fit your narrative after it's been disproven.