What's new
By:

Gobert should start

GVC said:
Maybe you can explain the point of your post then. As far as I can tell, it added exactly nothing to the discussion.
Click to expand...

Providing some context for some of the posters who found your posts completely off. Every single post on Jazzfanz doesn't need to progress a discussion.

Not sure you've kept up, but there was plenty of intelligent back and forth by a number of posters on this particular subject. Glad you're here to try and **** it up.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't consider my observation 'unintelligent'. I suppose that's your opinion. Not trying to **** anything up. Of course, maybe I am in your perspective, because my post brings up a point you cannot deny.
 
dalamon said:
Providing some context for some of the posters who found your posts completely off. Every single post on Jazzfanz doesn't need to progress a discussion.
Click to expand...
Calling into question my credibility is providing context? There was an actual discussion about how the game has changed, and how different players/skillsets suit different eras. You, or anyone else, could have just asked me how much Eaton game film I've watched. I don't think it's a coincidence you didn't go that route (especially since you've posted in similar fashion in the past...). Is it?

FWIW, I wasn't a Jazz fan when Eaton played. I've watched some highlights, digested some stats, and put together a rough player profile based on this information. I've watched enough 1980s and early 1990s NBA basketball, and read about rule changes over that time, to understand a little bit about how the game has changed and how different physical/athletic and skill profiles work in different eras. Granted, a lot of the old posters on this board have watched a lot of Mark Eaton, but distance provides a different and relevant perspective as well. It's probably also worth pointing out that I backed off my "scrub" comment pretty early in the discussion, and focused on how a player like Eaton would fit in today's NBA.
 
BrosChill.gif
 
fishonjazz said:
No need for the snarky sarcasm.... I was just telling you that you misunderstood numbs question.


That's an appropriate response though
Click to expand...
Sorry if you misunderstood my response. I quoted you for context - i.e. that my reply was in response to misunderstanding numb's question. Sorry if it appeared I was getting "snarky" with YOU. My response was intended at Numberica, answering why we might expect Favors to get better.
 
Core4 said:
Sorry if you misunderstood my response. I quoted you for context - i.e. that my reply was in response to misunderstanding numb's question. Sorry if it appeared I was getting "snarky" with YOU. My response was intended at Numberica, answering why we might expect Favors to get better.
Click to expand...
My bad, I have had an attitude all day today.
 
NUMBERICA said:
Why?
Click to expand...

It's mostly just a hunch. One of my least favorite things about Favors is his tendency to check out... I think the new culture that Quin is installing (not to mention that the games will start counting toward something) will really help. I also think you'll see Favors getting offense in better ways (high screen-roll + dump offs). And, I think his iso skills have been getting better each year.
 
[size/HUGE] fixed [/size];889071 said:
It's mostly just a hunch. One of my least favorite things about Favors is his tendency to check out... I think the new culture that Quin is installing (not to mention that the games will start counting toward something) will really help. I also think you'll see Favors getting offense in better ways (high screen-roll + dump offs). And, I think his iso skills have been getting better each year.
Click to expand...

I think favors is going to benefit hugely from the new coach. He's gonna be a borderline all star for a while.
 
b_line said:
I thought it was pretty clear that moving the three point line back provided more spacing for the offense? That would seem pretty beneficial to me.
Click to expand...
Yeah, because they couldn't possibly have stood that far back on their own with no line as a marker. It's clearly a benefit for the offence to turn some shots that were previously worth three points into shots that are only worth two, right?
 
I want to see what Snyder can do with these guys before commenting on any of this. If he can make things work without low post dominance then Gobert is my guy for defensive presence. If he cannot run the 4-1/empty post and HORNS all night long then Kanter will need big minutes and everyone will bitch about stagnant offense. Personally, I don't see how they run empty post all night long without bigs who can stretch the floor. Kanter is the only one capable, but he's not very competent (yet) out very far. Most the other plays available don't really matter if they're run with Kanter, Favors, or Gobert receiving off the pnr or dumping down to the baseline blind spot.

*Edit*

Spurs run a 4 out 1 in that works with Splitter/Duncan/Blair optioning the high or low based on rebounding and floor running. I'm not sure the Jazz can run a lot of that, but I'm not ruling out that they aren't smart enough BBIQ passers just yet.
 
bumping this again on Day 1. Let's see Favors and Gobert work it out.

Favors looks comfortable at the high post and on the baselines... maybe that's enough spacing for cutters?
Also, Favs and Gobert had some nice interior passes to one another this preseason.

It's the future. Let's have it.
 
Rudys passing is very encouraging for sure.

I still think kanter is going to be really good from the outside and space the floor for our offense.
 
Fish, I'm really losing confidence in Kanter. He may have good shooting form but he can only shoot his jumper when he's wide open and it seems whenever there's someone contesting it, it alters the way he shoots and it's off the mark. His inability to play help D tonight also was part of the reason they were getting all those open 3's. Both Rudy and Booker make the Jazz a better team right now. I don't know if Kanter is ever going to turn it around.
 
If Gobert starts we are still going have the same problems if a team goes small and spreads the floor with shooters. Booker should start.
 
I'd at least like to see the Jazz try Gobert and Favors together, but I agree that it looks like Booker is going to earn EVERY penny of that contract.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top