Derrick Favors now with "Dwight Howard-type shoulders"

[squareinthecircle]

I'm relatively new here but why are certain forum members so rude and why is it accepted? I mean I thought we were on the same side being Jazz fans and all. I've been to many sports forums and none are like this. Is it because being from Utah naturally makes one defensive?

 

[Dr. Jones]

I'm relatively new here but why are certain forum members so rude and why is it accepted? I mean I thought we were on the same side being Jazz fans and all. I've been to many sports forums and none are like this. Is it because being from Utah naturally makes one defensive?

Just curious which ones you've been on that are not like this site?

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

I'm relatively new here but why are certain forum members so rude and why is it accepted? I mean I thought we were on the same side being Jazz fans and all. I've been to many sports forums and none are like this. Is it because being from Utah naturally makes one defensive?

Shut up

 

[Dr. Jones]

Shut up

or that ..

 

[GVC]

I'm relatively new here but why are certain forum members so rude and why is it accepted? I mean I thought we were on the same side being Jazz fans and all. I've been to many sports forums and none are like this. Is it because being from Utah naturally makes one defensive?

I'm not from Utah, I'm just an *******.

 

[squareinthecircle]

Just curious which ones you've been on that are not like this site?

Like I said I haven't been to any that are like this, therefore that list is much shorter to fill. I just don't get the internet tough guy/bully thing, especially when all it does is chase good Jazz fans away or encourage them to never post.

A little more back on track: If the 2010 draft were to be held now with the knowledge we have from watching them for a season would Favors still be #3? I mean Cousins, Davis and Patterson all look like they're going to do well.

 

[Ben10]

A little more back on track: If the 2010 draft were to be held now with the knowledge we have from watching them for a season would Favors still be #3? I mean Cousins, Davis and Patterson all look like they're going to do well.

But in the same breath would Evan Turner be the #2 pick? Favors was drafted on potential I don't think anyone thought he would come in and dominate this year. I would have to give all of them 3-4 years in the league before it is fair to ask this question IMO

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Most everyone on the board is use to each other, so being rude is fine. It's not like any new person who joins gets blasted.

 

[BYE]

One thing that has become abundantly clear to me is that Favors must have playing time (min. 30/gm), put on a little more weight, and practice shot after shot from about free-throw distance. His passing became quite impressive as the year progressed I might add. Favor's was third in efficiency according to hoopsstats.com among all rookies per 48 minutes of play. Our own Jeremy Evans was second (I know these adjusted stats are a bit misleading). He is really a player who has it on both ends, and I think he will be solid on offense but elite on defense. I would still take him over Cousins because of his horrible shooting %, TO rate, and general bone-headedness. https://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fantasy/nba/playerstats/11/7/eff/7-3

 

[Deleted member 848]

I'm relatively new here but why are certain forum members so rude and why is it accepted? I mean I thought we were on the same side being Jazz fans and all. I've been to many sports forums and none are like this. Is it because being from Utah naturally makes one defensive?

The bitterness fluctuates. I think the lack of things to talk about just has us prediciting our team's future, and of course different people always have differing views of which player we should hang onto and develop, and which should be traded etc. However, even times in the past, certain posters like Hooper and Sloanfeld cranked peoples gears plenty. You've just joined at a bad time, come pre-season or free agency, I think well all be less bitter. Regardless, its the internet. Why the hell do you care if people are rude? Just throw em on ignore.

 

[Deleted member 848]

Favos > Cousins. Looking forward to their many bouts that they will inevitably have in the future.

 

[squareinthecircle]

Ack- I'm on meds, normally I would not have asked that. Friendly ribbing is nice actually, IDK- just forget it.

I like Patrick Patterson a good deal- I think he has a big future, Davis is a little undersized for the pivot but effective and maybe he'll fill out. For me it's not just a Favors vs Cousins competition, those other cats can ball!.

 

[enchilada_style]

Ack- I'm on meds, normally I would not have asked that. Friendly ribbing is nice actually, IDK- just forget it.

I like Patrick Patterson a good deal- I think he has a big future, Davis is a little undersized for the pivot but effective and maybe he'll fill out. For me it's not just a Favors vs Cousins competition, those other cats can ball!.

Rep for being on meds

 

[InGameStrategy]

One thing that has become abundantly clear to me is that Favors must have playing time (min. 30/gm),

With the depth of Utah's frontcourt, nobody "must have" 30 minutes, especially to develop.

A player can develop plenty well with 20 to 25 MPG--or half that much (just more slowly).

Whoever busts his can out there and produces gets >30 minutes. I would put everyone's minimum (including Al's and Paperboy's) below 30 minutes and let every player earn the extra 5 or 10 every night. By halftime or so, a good coach has an idea what's working in a given game.

And no way Favors gets 30+ if Kanter is getting <10 (unless the former is tearing it up or the latter is really stinking it up). We've been through this before with an entitled rotation and time-deprived young bigs; it shouldn't be an issue for Kanter to get double-digit minutes regularly because he has some basic skills already and seems like he has decent work ethic.

 

[Ben10]

Ack- I'm on meds, normally I would not have asked that. Friendly ribbing is nice actually, IDK- just forget it.

I like Patrick Patterson a good deal- I think he has a big future, Davis is a little undersized for the pivot but effective and maybe he'll fill out. For me it's not just a Favors vs Cousins competition, those other cats can ball!.

If we are talking about future all star players then I think it is just a Favors vs Cousins debate. Davis is a little small and Patterson is a lot small for the PF position. Patterson is listed at 6-9 but is smaller than that. He is more of a Millsap size player and well have the same struggles in the post that Sap has. I like Patterson alot but I don't think he has the potential of a Favors or Cousins. Well have to see how it plays out over the next 3 years.

 

[billyshelby]

Ack- I'm on meds, normally I would not have asked that. Friendly ribbing is nice actually, IDK- just forget it.

I like Patrick Patterson a good deal- I think he has a big future, Davis is a little undersized for the pivot but effective and maybe he'll fill out. For me it's not just a Favors vs Cousins competition, those other cats can ball!.

Quit being a Sally and throw a little sand. And don't apologize (unless you say something really stupid.) It's simple in here. You say certain things, you'll get attacked by the lobbies. You say other things, you get attacked by the other lobbies. Don't overthink it. It is the internet after all.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

If we are talking about future all star players then I think it is just a Favors vs Cousins debate. Davis is a little small and Patterson is a lot small for the PF position. Patterson is listed at 6-9 but is smaller than that. He is more of a Millsap size player and well have the same struggles in the post that Sap has. I like Patterson alot but I don't think he has the potential of a Favors or Cousins. Well have to see how it plays out over the next 3 years.

https://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Patrick-Patterson-1225/

Patterson measured at 6'9.25 in shoes dude. I would say he is a pretty average sized PF.

 

[BYE]

With the depth of Utah's frontcourt, nobody "must have" 30 minutes, especially to develop.

A player can develop plenty well with 20 to 25 MPG--or half that much (just more slowly).

Whoever busts his can out there and produces gets >30 minutes. I would put everyone's minimum (including Al's and Paperboy's) below 30 minutes and let every player earn the extra 5 or 10 every night. By halftime or so, a good coach has an idea what's working in a given game.

And no way Favors gets 30+ if Kanter is getting <10 (unless the former is tearing it up or the latter is really stinking it up). We've been through this before with an entitled rotation and time-deprived young bigs; it shouldn't be an issue for Kanter to get double-digit minutes regularly because he has some basic skills already and seems like he has decent work ethic.

I hold to my original statement that he needs at least 30 minutes per game. What’s the point of giving him another 20 minutes a game over the next season? He is developing yes, but he is already just as good if not better than the other players at his position. Favors was an elite defender on the Jazz via Synergy (although limited sample), and his numbers per 36 min. were comparable to any player on the team, even though he didn’t score quite as much as some. Playing him will not hurt the team in any way. I have posted these numbers already, but these are Howard’s and Favor’s rookie numbers per 36 post All Star game. Favor’s was third overall among rookies for player efficiency per 48 as well.

DH: 15.5, 11.2, 1.1 ast, 1.2 st., 1.9 blk, 2.5 TO, 3.4 fls (33.7 actual minutes)
DF: 14.75, 9.4, 1.4 ast, .9 st., 2.15 blk, 1.8 TO, 5.2 fls (20.2 actual minutes)

Dwight Howard averaged these minutes in his first three years (32, 37, 38). Let’s say we play Favors 20, 25, 30 over his first three years. This is how many more minutes Dwight will have played: 1,033 (20), (25) 984, (30) 656 for a total of 2,673 more minutes over three years. That’s the equivalent of more than a full season at 30 minutes per game (2460). Favors has 4 more years on his contract, we should not fuss about by giving him less minutes. He has the numbers and skill to be an elite player. He needs the minutes, period. Here is an article that discusses the dangers of not jumping into rebuild mode and trying to pussyfoot around. Although I don’t agree with everything the article says, it demonstrates that the result of pussyfooting equals perpetual mediocrity.https://www.slcdunk.com/2011/4/15/2113035/lessons-from-the-past-eyes-to-the-future

 

[InGameStrategy]

I hold to my original statement that he needs at least 30 minutes per game. What’s the point of giving him another 20 minutes a game over the next season?

It appears that you did not catch the crux of my post. Let me spell it out to you again.
1. Giving Favors (or any other player) extra minutes should not come at the expense of the development of another player who is also potentially crucial to the team's success (i.e., Kanter, who is a legit center).
2. It is very possible to allocate the scarce resource of playing time across players so that everyone develops. By contrast, giving Favors >30 minutes and Kanter <10 minutes would not likely optimize the development of these two players.
3. An underused method of deciding the playing time of these players (and every other Jazz player) is performance. The individual players and combination of players that is most effective at any given time toward winning should be playing the most, while also allowing for the development of the younger players (e.g., Burks, Kanter, Favors) and hopefully not sacrificing (many) wins in the process.

He is developing yes, but he is already just as good if not better than the other players at his position.

OK, then, he doesn't need as many minutes to develop <<rolleyes>>

Favors was an elite defender on the Jazz via Synergy (although limited sample), and his numbers per 36 min. were comparable to any player on the team, even though he didn’t score quite as much as some. Playing him will not hurt the team in any way.

Unless it's taking away crucial development minutes from other players, namely Kanter.

I have posted these numbers already, but these are Howard’s and Favor’s rookie numbers per 36 post All Star game. Favor’s was third overall among rookies for player efficiency per 48 as well.

DH: 15.5, 11.2, 1.1 ast, 1.2 st., 1.9 blk, 2.5 TO, 3.4 fls (33.7 actual minutes)
DF: 14.75, 9.4, 1.4 ast, .9 st., 2.15 blk, 1.8 TO, 5.2 fls (20.2 actual minutes)

Dwight Howard averaged these minutes in his first three years (32, 37, 38). Let’s say we play Favors 20, 25, 30 over his first three years. This is how many more minutes Dwight will have played: 1,033 (20), (25) 984, (30) 656 for a total of 2,673 more minutes over three years. That’s the equivalent of more than a full season at 30 minutes per game (2460). Favors has 4 more years on his contract, we should not fuss about by giving him less minutes. He has the numbers and skill to be an elite player. He needs the minutes, period. Here is an article that discusses the dangers of not jumping into rebuild mode and trying to pussyfoot around. Although I don’t agree with everything the article says, it demonstrates that the result of pussyfooting equals perpetual mediocrity.https://www.slcdunk.com/2011/4/15/2113035/lessons-from-the-past-eyes-to-the-future

Your comparison of Dwight vs. Derrick is exactly why it is optimal to make sure all key players get the development minutes: Orlando Magic is Exhibit A of a one-dimensional team with a superstar (or two) but nobody else around them. Meanwhile, Utah's best way to maximize its team is to have a deep, seasoned bench, especially given that attracting superstars to Utah is hard to do. This maxim is something that Sloan either ignored or wasn't aware of, and it hurt the Jazz especially in his last years before, um, retiring.

Assuming that the outcome of the game is the same, the incremental benefit of Kanter getting 10 minutes in a game instead of 5 (or even 15 minutes instead of 10) is higher than the incremental benefit of Favors getting 35 minutes instead of 30 (or 30 minutes instead of 25).

 

[freakazoid]

don't apologize (unless you say something really stupid.) It's simple in here. You say certain things, you'll get attacked by the lobbies. You say other things, you get attacked by the other lobbies.

Screw that. I don't belong to the lobbies OR the other lobbies. Nobody tells ME when to attack. I attack at random.

What a stupid thing to say. Now apologize.