green
Well-Known Member
I agree with this 100%.
Debunking the "losing is bad for culture" people. To win a title, you have to suck.
- Thread starter green
- Start date
I agree with this 100%.
You are so full of crap that it is refreshing. Either that or you truly are incapable of understanding a single damn thing I have typed. I think it is a combination of the two.
We have four Kevin Durants on this team? Great. Championship ten-peat coming up. You can stop bitching now.
Was anyone in the rotation better than Durant or Harden? Because if you are saying that OKC did something different than playing the best player available, I'd be interested in who you think the alternative was. If you are not saying that, then OKC did the same thing the Jazz did (played the player most likely to help win the game).
For people who are going to say Kanter is better than Jefferson right now, or Favors better than Millsap, I will agree that the difference between Jefferson and Kanter is smaller than the starting/backup difference on almost any other team in the league (and the same for Millsap/Favors); however, that does not make Kanter better.
green
Well-Known Member
False. Why did Favors sit the fourth and OT the other night? Why is Marvin still starting? Why is Foye starting? Why is Al going to get his starting job back when he returns? Why did Favors start over Kanter the last few games?
The Jazz do NOT start/give big minutes to the players that are most likely to help them win. Until injuries happen, they did the opposite.
It absolutely does when you look at the differences. Al is better offensively in one on one situations. The Jazz offense has been fine without Al. Kanter is a better defensively, better in a team offensive game.
The differences make Kanter the better player now, and in the future. Kanter should be getting the most minutes right now. Favors should be second. Then Paul. Finally, Al should get his minutes.
Why?
You know Al isn't worth near max money, so you know you aren't going to resign Al.
Favors is up for a contract, so you need to see what he is worth.
You have to see if Paul can play well with Favors and Kanter and if he would be worth 12 million + a year.
Kanter looks to be your hope for a title. He needs to play.
Al is the least worthy of minutes right now. BUT, he will get the majority of minutes when he comes back.
You made no attempt to connect this to your argument about playing young players, hence it was a non sequitur.
I agree Wallace was a great find. What did Hamilton bring to the picture that a half-dozen other guards could not have brought?
You mean, dropping Jefferson drops us into the lottery, because Jefferson is that good, and we'll get more good drafts? Or, dropping Jefferson allows us to be better, because Kanter isn't good enough to take Jefferson's starting role in a couple of years, but will be a lynch pin for the team if he doesn't have any competition for the role?
I'm trying to find some logic in your thought beyond "I don't like Jefferson". It's difficult.
Duh, Sherlock.Everyone is saying Al will get close to the max. He isn't worth that. Like I said, depending on their price, Millsap and Mo might not be worth it as well.
Teams will pay the max to a player that is so clearly dooming a franchise to mediocrity, that even ordinary fans can see it? Jefferson will get a "can play center" bonus on his pay, but certainly won't be a max player.
I think that even if the composition of this team does not change, Burks will beat out Tinsley/Watson (possibly even Williams) for playing time within two years, and Hayward will beat out Foye next year. I'm not sure about Marvin Williams and Carroll, because the latter is so definitively an energy-off-the-bench player.
How sure can you be that the composition of the bottom four picks don't change?
Whom should they have played instead of Durant? Who was better?
If the Harden and/or Westbrook picks had tanked, would you still be using OKC as a model for success?
*You* don't know what they have in Favors, *I* don't know. The Jazz see a lot more of Favors than we do. They have as good an idea as for any player who is 21(?). No matter how minutes Favors would have played, how he will develop from 21 to 25 is difficult to predict. It would be gamble, even if Favors had been playing 35 minutes a night.
Kanter has quite obviously been developing very well. How much further along would you think a 20-year-old center would be?
I disagree. Both have made terrific progress.
So, even though we can't afford three max deals, you want to go out and get another max player?
So, we get players in order to trade them off in 3-4 years?
Because Corbin though Mllsap and Kanter were doing well. Whom should Favors have come in for, and why?
Because Corbin feels he is a better complement to the other starters, presumably.
Ibid.
Because overall, he is currently slightly better than Kanter.
Because overall, he is currently slightly better than Kanter. (Say, weren't you saying that Favors should play over Kanter four questions ago? Make up your mind.).
I disagree. Heck, you can't even agree with yourself over a single paragraph.
Corbin obviously disagrees, and I think he knows the game better than you. I've read many arguments on the subject in here, but none of them have been convincing.
YOu don't play player based on what they mayu or may not do in the future, you play them on who they are today.
So we just keep players on the bench and hope they get better or that they stay? You are the one not making any sense.
I am the most interesting man in the world. I don't always make sig bets but when I do I get my *** kicked.
MoreFeasts
Member
Green makes some good points... The people arguing with him don't.
Hartsock
Banned
I see where hes coming from, I just think hes over simplifying it. Obviously if KOC and Lindsey thought they could make a few trades to get a star to turn us into a championship team they would do it. Its not like they don't know what the **** is going on.
We don't have to hope they get better. We have empirical evidence that they do get better. As for staying, that's a risk whether you play them or not, as anyone with a memory longer than two seasons would know.
Aside from the part where he tries to argue with some of us on things we are not saying.
Yes, we understand we're being trolled by green and that other guy. Thanks for your input though k sweetie.
The Fresh Prince
Well-Known Member
Never underestimate the Lindzz.
darthlarryboy
Well-Known Member
Green
Do you still feel Kanter is the one to build around? I've always believed Favors was the one of the two that I wanted to breakout, but that was because of his defensive potential more then anything. Seems like DL was just a year off from doing this posts premise.
Do you still feel Kanter is the one to build around? I've always believed Favors was the one of the two that I wanted to breakout, but that was because of his defensive potential more then anything. Seems like DL was just a year off from doing this posts premise.
green
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I re-read that and wondered the same thing. Both Kanter and Favors are PF's. I think you don't decide quite yet. If Gobert pans out, then you keep Kanter. If you get Randle in the draft, then I lean toward Favors.
Anyways, with Favors being locked up, and at the price you got him at, there is a good chance that you build around Kanter, Favors and whatever wing you get in the draft. I would LOVE to keep Hayward...at the right price. If you can have this lineup:
Burke or vet P&R PG
Hayward
Parker
Kanter
Favors
Where Parker is your #1, Kanter #2, Hayward#3, Favors the P&R specialist...wow. That could be a crazy good team. Crazy good.
Anyways, with Favors being locked up, and at the price you got him at, there is a good chance that you build around Kanter, Favors and whatever wing you get in the draft. I would LOVE to keep Hayward...at the right price. If you can have this lineup:
Burke or vet P&R PG
Hayward
Parker
Kanter
Favors
Where Parker is your #1, Kanter #2, Hayward#3, Favors the P&R specialist...wow. That could be a crazy good team. Crazy good.