What's new
By:

Gobert should start

LogGrad98 said:
The thing Eaton had that really made him the player he was was a very good sense of timing and good reaction times. He could recover and block multiple shots, he followed the ball well and knew when to make the move for the block. Not easy for any big to duplicate. That would still translate into today's NBA and he would be a paint enforcer especially with a zone.
Click to expand...

And he was ****ing 7'4".

Eaton would do just fine in today's NBA, good lord.
 
GVC said:
How did changing the illegal defense rule and moving the 3-point line back favor the offense?
Click to expand...

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.
 
Not 100% sure how Eaton would do in today's NBA, but I am sure that he would have been able to hold down a job.

I have always thought that if Eaton was 7 or 8 years younger, the Jazz would have been a dynasty in the mid 90's, and people would be talking about one of the greatest teams ever when they talked about Malone, Stock and Eaton.
 
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...
Teams still had the option to take 3s from further back when the line was closer, preserving the spacing of the deeper line. They also had the option of taking closer 3-point shots. This benefits the offense.
 
seattlejazzfan said:
It's always funny to me when people act like there was defense being played in the 80s. Nobody played a lick of defense until Detroit showed that by playing defense you could beat more talented teams like the Lakers and Celtics - teams that had always been able to win by just out-scoring everybody. The Bulls, with Jordan and Pippen knew they had to defend in order to beat the Pistons and by the time the Bulls beat the Lakers in 91, NBA teams knew they'd better figure it out and that is what led to the mid-90s ugliness you mention above.
Click to expand...
In 1984/85, teams scored 110.1 points per game on 102.1 possessions per 48 minutes on average. In 2003/04, the season before the league changed the hand checking rules, teams scored 93.4 points per game on 90.1 possessions per 48 minutes on average (scoring and pace was even lower during the lockout season of 98/99).
 
[size/HUGE] fixed [/size];888053 said:
The workability of a Favors-Gobert frontline has as much to do with Favors' improvement as it does with Rudy's. If Favors takes a step forward offensively, which I think he will
Click to expand...
Why?
 
NUMBERICA said:
Why?
Click to expand...

Because if Favors can't hit shots outside of 10-ft, all you're doing is clogging the inside offensively. Does no good for Exum to drive if no one can hit a shot if he has to kick it outside.

I'm actually looking forward to seeing a second unit featuring Exum, Gobert, Hood, Novak. Hood and Novak are going to get a ton of 3's.
 
I am as big a Gobert fan as anyone but Rudy still needs to show he can handle the physicality of the NBA game. I certainly think he can be a starter in this league but everyone needs to realize that summer league and even the World Cup are worlds away from being a starter in the NBA. Unless Kanter comes to camp in poor shape or something I don't see Rudy starting just yet. The Jazz need offense and Kanter is our best big offensively.

However, I can see why everyone is excited and the idea is not far-fetched. I just like our bench right now with Exum, Booker, Hood, and Rudy etc.
 
cowhide said:
However, I can see why everyone is excited and the idea is not far-fetched. I just like our bench right now with Exum, Booker, Hood, and Rudy etc.
Click to expand...
It'll be interesting to see how Hayward and Burks shoot and defend to start the season. If they struggle, I wouldn't mind Hood starting for a little extra size and shooting, with Burks coming in as an early sub.
 
Core4 said:
Because if Favors can't hit shots outside of 10-ft, all you're doing is clogging the inside offensively. Does no good for Exum to drive if no one can hit a shot if he has to kick it outside.

I'm actually looking forward to seeing a second unit featuring Exum, Gobert, Hood, Novak. Hood and Novak are going to get a ton of 3's.
Click to expand...

Why does he or anyone think that Favors will suddenly become a player he's never been is what I was asking. I literally have no idea why you thought I or anyone could've been asking why being good at basketball could be important for playing good basketball. But please, elaborate more on how being good at basketball could help being good at basketball.
 
Core4 said:
Because if Favors can't hit shots outside of 10-ft, all you're doing is clogging the inside offensively. Does no good for Exum to drive if no one can hit a shot if he has to kick it outside.

I'm actually looking forward to seeing a second unit featuring Exum, Gobert, Hood, Novak. Hood and Novak are going to get a ton of 3's.
Click to expand...
You didn't understand the question.
Numb didn't ask why it's important for favors to improve his offense/jumpshot, he asked why the poster thinks he will improve it
 
You have to start Kanter this year. You sunk a #3 pick into him. You have him coming up for a deal this next summer. You do not have a PF on the team right now you want long term. You have to find out what you have. You are desperately hoping that he can become your stretch 4, because if he can't, you have nothing. You let someone else overpay him this summer, knowing that he will go Al Jefferson on you and put up 18 and 9 somewhere else on a losing team and dumb fans will whine about how you let him walk.

Kanter will get a ton of minutes this year, because we so desperately need him to become our starting stretch 4.
 
NUMBERICA said:
Why does he or anyone think that Favors will suddenly become a player he's never been is what I was asking. I literally have no idea why you thought I or anyone could've been asking why being good at basketball could be important for playing good basketball. But please, elaborate more on how being good at basketball could help being good at basketball.
Click to expand...

I think Favors has a mid range game that is pretty decent. The reason I think he will show a better offensive game this year is because the coach will be able to see what situations he will excel in, and put him in those situations. I think Favors/Exum can be decent in pick and roll situations. The other thing that kind of depends on Hayward/Burks/Hood is will Favors have improved space to work with? Will the wings and guards shoot well enough to give him or Kanter any room?

If you look at Favors game, he has potential in the post, and potential out to about 15 feet. I think he can definitely get better, but it will take someone coaching him into using like 3-4 specific things that he is good at, and building from there.
 
fishonjazz said:
You didn't understand the question.
Numb didn't ask why it's important for favors to improve his offense/jumpshot, he asked why the poster thinks he will improve it
Click to expand...
Oh. Well, obviously Favors at 23 years old is a finished product. No way does he improve at all. NBA coaches/GM's were 100% wrong when they used to say it took 3-5 years for bigs to develop (and that was back in the days when they all had 4 years of college).

Derrick DID show some decent improvement on offense last year. Will he ever become Karl Malone? No. But the eye test (I'm too lazy to look up charts) showed he extended his range. He's increased his scoring and rebounding every year. I see no reason to believe he can't and won't continue to improve. I'd be VERY happy with him around 15/10 in 30 mins/per.
 
GVC said:
Says the guy who grew his first pube last year...
Click to expand...

Notice how I'm not making definitive statements about a player I did not watch.


Maybe you should follow suit. Or, you know, just make fun of my age, cuz, you know, that makes you seem so much older + mature than me.
 
Core4 said:
Oh. Well, obviously Favors at 23 years old is a finished product. No way does he improve at all. NBA coaches/GM's were 100% wrong when they used to say it took 3-5 years for bigs to develop (and that was back in the days when they all had 4 years of college).

Derrick DID show some decent improvement on offense last year. Will he ever become Karl Malone? No. But the eye test (I'm too lazy to look up charts) showed he extended his range. He's increased his scoring and rebounding every year. I see no reason to believe he can't and won't continue to improve. I'd be VERY happy with him around 15/10 in 30 mins/per.
Click to expand...

I still think Favors ceiling is an 18/12 with a couple of blocks guy.
 
dalamon said:
Notice how I'm not making definitive statements about a player I did not watch.
Click to expand...
Maybe you can explain the point of your post then. As far as I can tell, it added exactly nothing to the 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.
 
Core4 said:
Oh. Well, obviously Favors at 23 years old is a finished product. No way does he improve at all. NBA coaches/GM's were 100% wrong when they used to say it took 3-5 years for bigs to develop (and that was back in the days when they all had 4 years of college).
Click to expand...
No need for the snarky sarcasm.... I was just telling you that you misunderstood numbs question.
Core4 said:
Derrick DID show some decent improvement on offense last year. Will he ever become Karl Malone? No. But the eye test (I'm too lazy to look up charts) showed he extended his range. He's increased his scoring and rebounding every year. I see no reason to believe he can't and won't continue to improve. I'd be VERY happy with him around 15/10 in 30 mins/per.
Click to expand...

That's an appropriate response though
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top