LOL - you honestly thought the Warriors wouldn't steamroll the Jazz?
I truly believe (yes, it's Corbin)
- Thread starter Getting Traded
- Start date
LOL - you honestly thought the Warriors wouldn't steamroll the Jazz?
b_line
Well-Known Member
So we will just forget that there are 82 games then? And then forfeit our top pick because of it?
b_line
Well-Known Member
I disagree with this whole "1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th option thing" Hayward is a damn good player at this point, and so is Favors. There is so much more to consider when you talk about the options on a team. What kind of number 1 do we have? Is he going to be dominant on the ball like Kobe, or is he going to be a facilitator like Magic? Is he going to be a all around guy like LeBron, or will he be primarily a scorer like Melo and Durant? You have to build your team according to the talent. Of course Hayward would not be as good as Westbrook, but he will definitely be better than Dwayne Wade is right now, or Ginobili has been for the last few years. It just depends on what type of other players we have. You can not just plug options 1, 2, 3 or 4 in, and build a championship contender.
Hayward and Favors would be near perfect fits around Jabari, in my opinion. Around Wiggins? Favors would be awesome, but Hayward maybe would be not as awesome as with Parker. If we get Randle, then obviously Favors would not fit super well.
candrew
Well-Known Member
Well, there is steamrolling like Utah did in the late 90's where they played 48 hard minutes and would win by 20.
And then you have games like last night (I watched the game by the way - like every other one) where GSW essentially took the 1st and most of the 3rd period off and still managed to blow out The Jazz in their own building to the point where they played a good chunk of garbage time in the 4th.
GSW could have won that game by 35 points if they wanted to.
You can frame it however you like trying to prove your point, but the bottom line is I expected the Jazz to get blown out by GS and that's exactly what happened. They are a matchup nightmare for the Jazz at all five positions, on both ends of the court. Of course they made it look easy.
b_line
Well-Known Member
but, but, but, we all expected them to have a beautiful, competitive blowout loss to one of the best teams in the NBA Frank. Don't you know we are supposed to lose tons of games with dignity and every franchise is still supposed to respect our losing ways?
This has nothing to do with the score of the game. Nice attempt though.
b_line
Well-Known Member
So you did think we would lose games with dignity then? Did you not expect having a lopsided losing record to be ugly and painful?
akirac73
Well-Known Member
Here's my take:
Fans would be more accepting of the losses if:
1. We showed we were good on defense, but lack of offensive ability (no elite shooters) and depth would be our demise.
2. We showed that we were running some sort of offensive system that led to good shots (doesn't matter if we make those shots or not)
3. We cut down on turnovers and simply lose games due to lack of offensive ability and depth.
4. Players were not quitting and giving a half-assed, tuxedo-wearing effort on the floor.
Fans would be more accepting of the losses if:
1. We showed we were good on defense, but lack of offensive ability (no elite shooters) and depth would be our demise.
2. We showed that we were running some sort of offensive system that led to good shots (doesn't matter if we make those shots or not)
3. We cut down on turnovers and simply lose games due to lack of offensive ability and depth.
4. Players were not quitting and giving a half-assed, tuxedo-wearing effort on the floor.
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
Can you imagine what Sloan would say in the post game interviews after games like the one last night? Instead we have Mr. Platitude. It doesn't surprise me one bit that the players don't respond to his leadership, because it is not leadership at all.
Again the score has nothing to do with dignity. Stop attempting to equate the two. If the Jazz play their butts off and lose by 20. That's cool, whatever. It is the losing by 20 and seeing lackluster effort and selfish ball that annoys me. It's not win or lose I am looking at. Not even the margin of victory or defeat. It is all about how they lose. If they fight till that last bell then I am satisfied. Right now I only see it about half of every game. Then they just lose themselves.
They are young and they will learn but it is hard to watch when they get like that.
LunaticWolf
Well-Known Member
Yup.
People will see what they want to see. Millsap quit amiright
You are the biggest example of this.
Millsap lost some of his fire but he still put forth effort.
b_line
Well-Known Member
If millsap quit, how the hell did he play the same exact game that he did before? He was the same player, same production, he didn't quit.
And when have you ever seen a team lose by 20 and do it looking good? Huge losses are always ugly, and the team losing always looks bad, whether they are trying to win or not. Are they supposed to be happy about getting the **** kicked out of them night after night? They always try hard, as evidenced by the first quarter runs against San Antonio, the run against golden state, etc.
Can you point to where I ever said Millsap quit? Give me just one example. In fact quite the opposite. I just said that Millsap still played with effort all last year.
That right there. No they do not play with effort all the time. Kanter on D, Favors disappearing for random games and coasting, Burks penchant for passing up the obvious team play to get his. Sure he has improved but he still does it. That is effort. If you try and fail that is fine. The fight is what is missing half the time.
Damn man, reading comprehension.
b_line
Well-Known Member
You said he lost fire.
Some of his fire while still playing with effort. Nice cherry picking.
You want effort look at Garrett, Hayward, Gobert and Harris. They try their butts off non stop. Even when getting man handled.
Who's Patrick?