Douchebag K
Well-Known Member
lol DeMarcus Cousins team lost 49 games last year = fact Everything else is opinion. Don't take yourself so seriously
Rumor: Jazz and DeMarcus Cousins
- Thread starter Mithrandir
- Start date
lol DeMarcus Cousins team lost 49 games last year = fact Everything else is opinion. Don't take yourself so seriously
Douchebag K
Well-Known Member
sorry if i realised we were playing a game of state the obvious i would have joined in !!! You're pretty good at maths !
Douchebag K
Well-Known Member
lol i thought you were better than resorting to petty insults ....
Sometimes you'd be right. But not often.
Douchebag K
Well-Known Member
nope just the 38% who think Donald Trump is actually a viable political candidate ...
Your country polls this kind of thing?
You people must be real poll lovers... or lovers of poll? (I have a hard time remembering the correct wording for 3rd world English-speaking countries.)
Douchebag K
Well-Known Member
just a wild stab in the dark .. I'd say there's at least that many of us that are pretty dim
nbd imo. Cousins even shoots a higher percentage than that.
#trumped
Douchebag K
Well-Known Member
lol nice one !
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
Are you guys wanting to bet on which team wins more games this season? The team with the star being discussed (kings), or the team without the star (jazz).
I will take the jazz.
[MENTION=2203]LazyD[/MENTION] I have already asked you if you would take the bet. Strangely, I have received no answer. It's almost like you think the team without the star player will be better or something.
Of course not.
The argument isn't that one star is better than anything else.
Jazz will be better because it's a better organization, better management, better coaching, and more above average players.
Lazy's argument (if I understand it) is it's easier to build a contender if you have a star to build around than if you don't. (The argument is not that having a star auto makes you a better team than all others without one.)
But maybe I haven't been reading closely enough (entirely likely).
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
I don't think anyone has been arguing that not having a star player is preferable to having a star player. That would be an idiotic stance to take.
Lazy has been saying that the kings are better off than the jazz and in a better position than the jazz simply because they have cousins.
Myself and others have been arguing that it's better to be in the jazz position (lots of good players, cap flexibility, good coach and management, lots of future picks) than the kings (cousins going for them, but nothing else really).
There is more to having a good team than simply having a star player.
I stand by that.
Btw, I'm one of the posters that is always saying that the jazz need a star to truly contend and that they should be doing anything and everything to try to get a star. But the kings having cousins and the jazz not having him does not mean kings > jazz imo
gregbroncs
Well-Known Member
Star with a bad attitude is <<<no star at all. That's what I'm debating. Because a star with a bad attitude can completely ruin a franchise for years.
Chargers Jazz Angels
Well-Known Member
A jazz team with cousins on it would be the anti-golden state death line up.
Chargers Jazz Angels
Well-Known Member
6-6 exum vs 6-3 curry
6-8 hood vs 6-5 thompson
6-8 hayward vs 6-6 igudala
6-8 johnson vs 6-10 durrant
6-11 cousins vs 6-7 green
Johnson could be diaw or lyles
Green cousins is a mismatch both ways. Cousins couldnt hang with green cutting but there is no way green could handle cousins in the post. If exum can hit the 3 at a respectable percent this year then cousins would have 4 players that can spread the floor or cut to the basket.
That line up would be murder and if cousins dialed in his defense holy crap.
6-8 hood vs 6-5 thompson
6-8 hayward vs 6-6 igudala
6-8 johnson vs 6-10 durrant
6-11 cousins vs 6-7 green
Johnson could be diaw or lyles
Green cousins is a mismatch both ways. Cousins couldnt hang with green cutting but there is no way green could handle cousins in the post. If exum can hit the 3 at a respectable percent this year then cousins would have 4 players that can spread the floor or cut to the basket.
That line up would be murder and if cousins dialed in his defense holy crap.
Of course the Kings are better off, they have a star and can just build around him now. How they made such a great decision in picking Cousins and have blown all their lottery picks since is beyond me tho.
The Jazz thus far have assembled a mediocre team. They have a nice collection of role players and zero allstars. They don't have a guy like Cousins to be a mismatch every time down the floor in every single game. It's very unlikely they'll get a guy like that picking in the late lottery like they have in recent years, and their chances are even less if, God forbid, they actually make the playoffs and miss the lottery this season. Who cares how many okay pieces and how much roster flexibility they have? You know why they have it, because they haven't used it to get a guy like Cousins on their team. They've taken on salary dumps and leftovers from other teams so that other guys can go and try and get some stars to compete and win titles. What's the point of continuing to stockpile all these mediocre assets? They got some decent players and a good cap situation because they are going nowhere and don't have the guts to make an extreme move one way or the other. If all their assets and roster flexibility is as good as you say then they should make a move, that way they can reassess their roster and get to work to building around their newly acquired star (Cousins in this case).
Try to remeber that the team would look completely different and would need some serious work if the Jazz used their pile of C level assets for a legitimate star like Cousins. Whatever a homer on the Jazz board thinks is a good deal to get him is definitely not enough. That is why it is definitely better to be in the Kings spot - already having a guy to build around. Cuz the Jazz will have to do it again if they trade for one anyway, or they'll have to make their team so ****ty that they can get some really high picks for a couple years.
Miggs
Well-Known Member
Rofl. 45% is awful for a center. And sure, it's lower because he shoots so many threes. But he was still just 47+% from 2. So yeah, his percentage blows for a center.
Please examine what you just said. All you said was that a 'non-ruined' franchise >>>>>>> a 'ruined' franchise. Whatever those things mean.
Your topic of debate is nonsensical. Do you really want me to list a bunch of 'wholesome' allstars who failed to make the playoffs some seasons? Do you want me to talk about the Allen Iversons of the world who win MVP and carry teams to the finals?
Cousins is most definitely not the Kings problem. How can the lone redeeming quality of their team - their lone key to relevancy - be bad for them? This is a franchise that drafted Jimmer in the lottery. What are their best organizational moves since drafting Cousins? Semi-revitalization of a point guard that Rick Carlisle shunned? Getting Rudy Gay? No, that's like getting Jeff Green.
Cousins appears to have a wonderful attitude considering how poorly the Kings have built a team around him. He should have had a nervous breakdown by now. The Jazz would be idiots to not take a shot at acquiring him. Hopefully, they'd be able to build a better product around him. As of now, the Jazz appear to be content being okay, and never getting a piece they need to put them over the top someday.