What's new
By:

BasketballInsiders: Rudy Gobert is Ahead of Schedule

fishonjazz said:
#TheReturn
##10
#slickpimp

Really doe, in quins offense im not sure we need this type of player. I think he wants ball movement, obvious unselfishness, and very balanced scoring. I look at the current atl hawks. They don't have any truly elite scorers or superstars. Lots of guys that can play and fit in together. (This is why kanter must go, he does not really fit in)

If we see improvement from Burks, Hayward, gobert, favors, exum, trey, hood, ingles, etc and improvement from snyder + a few more good players in the draft that fit the system then we might have pretty much all we need
Click to expand...

We could be like the Hawks we are just missing a Teague, a Horford, and a Korver.

:^O

If that's what Quin wants than Burke is a goner.

Edit: And you know i'm right next to you on dat Burks train. But WTF happened this year? Decided he was a good a shooter as Curry and he was driving to the basket like freakin Exum. Not as excited about Burks anymore, tbh.
 
Nate505 said:
I also think the Jazz are pretty deep now, but still need that first option. Unfortunately that's the hardest piece to get. Maybe they'll luck out and Exum will be it, but a James Harden type would be just what the doctor ordered here.
Click to expand...

I think with the draft and making Burks the 6th man our bench will be average to good. But is that enough? Don't we want a legitimate championship contender? If so than while I like the guys the Jazz have on the bench I am not sure they have the right talent mix to get the Jazz to that title. Woefully short on shooters and a decent backup PG and C are needed as I think Burke and Kanter are gone. Ingles is a good hustle and glue guy and Booker could be the backup PF and Burks the 6th man. They need a PG, C and shooter.

So I sitll say that the Jazz need

Back up C
Exum to fullfill is potential as starting PG
Backup PG
Starting SG who can shoot well enough to free Hayward and defend
3 and D guy off the bench

Gobert/Backup C
Favors/Booker
Hayward/3&D/Ingles
SG shooter/Burks/Hood
Exum/back up PG

Could Hood develop into that SG shooter?
 
I wonder how bad Lawson wants out of Denver. I'll give ya Kanter and Exum for him.


Idk why I said this. I just want a PG who knows how to drive to the basket and pass the ball.
 
Stoked said:
I think with the draft and making Burks the 6th man our bench will be average to good. But is that enough? Don't we want a legitimate championship contender? If so than while I like the guys the Jazz have on the bench I am not sure they have the right talent mix to get the Jazz to that title. Woefully short on shooters and a decent backup PG and C are needed as I think Burke and Kanter are gone. Ingles is a good hustle and glue guy and Booker could be the backup PF and Burks the 6th man. They need a PG, C and shooter.

So I sitll say that the Jazz need

Back up C
Exum to fullfill is potential as starting PG
Backup PG
Starting SG who can shoot well enough to free Hayward and defend
3 and D guy off the bench

Gobert/Backup C
Favors/Booker
Hayward/3&D/Ingles
SG shooter/Burks/Hood
Exum/back up PG

Could Hood develop into that SG shooter?
Click to expand...

Neto and Tomic?

I know, I know... I'll see myself out.
 
They are pretty close. I think if Hayward, Favors, Gobert, Exum, and Hood all improve a little and we are able to add a solid vet like DMC we could be in playoff contention as soon as next season.
 
mhindy said:
They are pretty close. I think if Hayward, Favors, Gobert, Exum, and Hood all improve a little and we are able to add a solid vet like DMC we could be in playoff contention as soon as next season.
Click to expand...

In my dream scenario Exum and Hood develop enough to be our starting PG and SG. Then the Jazz simply need to address some reserve roles and this team could be good.
 
Is there anyone who doesn't think Rudy is going to roll out a 10 foot jumper by the start of next season?
Click to expand...

There should not be anyone? I will state that I believe he will eventually be very good at up to 15-17 ft. out. With the ability to stick the occasional three. Right now they don't even attempt to guard him out there. Being really tall does not preclude learning to be a good jump shooter. Nowitzki-like is probably not in the cards.
 
If Gobert keeps his style of play and adds the hook and that 10 foot jumper to his game then that would be huge. If he does that I could see a 15 ppg, 10 rpg, 2 apg, 1.5 spg, 3 bpg on 55% shooting and 70% FT in about 35 mpg while limiting opponents to under 40% at the rim against him and altering who knows how many shots.

I'd be over the moon with that.
 
I don't want Gobert 15-17 feet from the basket except to set screens before rolling to the basket. He's a good offensive rebounder now - but his successes are mostly due to his sheer size and good sense of timing. When he gains some hand strength and learns about positioning he's going to be an offensive rebounding machine.
 
Basically what everyone is saying is that we need to tank for D'Angelo.
Click to expand...

Really! I get really weary of "Tank for player X" If you will all just re-read or remember all the posts about "tank for this guy, or tank for that guy" and realize that you were all wrong. Tanking is a state of mind that exists in the minds of average fans who are without any real talent for improving an NBA team. The Jazz players of last year and this year were not tanking nor will they be. When a team gets so bad that they lose any competitive edge or desire then the fans jump up and say they are tanking! Its a myth! And the league would frown upon such a thing if it could be proven, as they should.
 
D'angelo is looking more and more like the guy we need to add to this team.

That and I really have high hopes for Hood being a really important part of this team going forward. Whether off the bench or starting.
 
Grandpa Jazz said:
Really! I get really weary of "Tank for player X" If you will all just re-read or remember all the posts about "tank for this guy, or tank for that guy" and realize that you were all wrong. Tanking is a state of mind that exists in the minds of average fans who are without any real talent for improving an NBA team. The Jazz players of last year and this year were not tanking nor will they be. When a team gets so bad that they lose any competitive edge or desire then the fans jump up and say they are tanking! Its a myth! And the league would frown upon such a thing if it could be proven, as they should.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Duh. No one ever said that the players should try to lose.

This is a common misconception anti-tankers have about the meaning of the word "tank". Look at Philly. The players aren't going out there and saying, "Let's get this L, guiz", yet it's still one of the biggest tank jobs in history.

And your point about how we were all wrong about tanking for player X. Umm...pretty sure we'd all be pretty happy if we had Wiggins like we all originally wanted, and I'm pretty sure we're all happy we have Exum now (yes, we got him by tanking, whether you like it or not). And adding another player like Russell to the team would help us become contenders down the line, too.
 
Grandpa Jazz said:
Really! I get really weary of "Tank for player X" If you will all just re-read or remember all the posts about "tank for this guy, or tank for that guy" and realize that you were all wrong. Tanking is a state of mind that exists in the minds of average fans who are without any real talent for improving an NBA team. The Jazz players of last year and this year were not tanking nor will they be. When a team gets so bad that they lose any competitive edge or desire then the fans jump up and say they are tanking! Its a myth! And the league would frown upon such a thing if it could be proven, as they should.
Click to expand...

Never could have said it better Grandpa
 
spycam1 said:
Yeah. Duh. No one ever said that the players should try to lose.

This is a common misconception anti-tankers have about the meaning of the word "tank". Look at Philly. The players aren't going out there and saying, "Let's get this L, guiz", yet it's still one of the biggest tank jobs in history.

And your point about how we were all wrong about tanking for player X. Umm...pretty sure we'd all be pretty happy if we had Wiggins like we all originally wanted, and I'm pretty sure we're all happy we have Exum now (yes, we got him by tanking, whether you like it or not). And adding another player like Russell to the team would help us become contenders down the line, too.
Click to expand...

Please refer to us as pro-winning culture fans instead please.
Thank you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top