Bill Simmons Jazz.....love?

[anonymous832]

Closer to the playoffs he admitted that Dwill is the top PG in the league after they beat Denver. After the C's took down the Cavs he made an argument for Rondo.. which I can't deny (are we talking about winning games that matter. . Rondo has all the "top PGs" beat in that category)

Yes, he made an argument for Rondo, but didn't flat-out say he was definitely the best PG in the league. And even if he DID hand Rondo the conch during that series, he EMPHATICALLY took it away after the Finals.

And please, don't bring the "winning games" argument into it. Please. He was surrounded by three Hall of Famers when he won a title, and he was godawful in the Finals last year.

 

[Inn Dawn]

I love how some of you get so bent out of shape over a writer's opinion.

It's called Jazz FANZ. You love how people are adamant about certain things related to their passion on a site devoted to said passion? Nice observation. Congrats.

 

[Nate505]

Bill Simmons can slob on my knob. Can't stand the ******. This little blurb doesn't change anything. Makes me loathe the ******* even more, in fact.

Same here. Then again, I don't know a Colts fan who likes the guy.

 

[anonymous832]

https://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/100208/two

Simmons doesn't rank Rondo higher than DWill (as of Feb '10)
His top four:
1.CP3
2.Rose - Mostly because of his rookie deal compared to DWill's max deal...
3.DWill
4.Rondo

Did you even read the article? That's not his ranking of the best point guards in the league - he's talking about value there. Saying he'd rather have Rose at 1/3 the price of Williams - and even THEN, he had to think it over.

 

[Urzajazz]

Yes, he made an argument for Rondo, but didn't flat-out say he was definitely the best PG in the league. And even if he DID hand Rondo the conch during that series, he EMPHATICALLY took it away after the Finals.

And please, don't bring the "winning games" argument into it. Please. He was surrounded by three Hall of Famers when he won a title, and he was godawful in the Finals last year.

IMO the C's don't get to the finals without Rondo.. stick any other PG in there and I'm not sure you get there. I'm not saying the team wasn't stacked. A lot of people go around here and say Dwill is better than Paul just because of winning, so yeah it is a valuable argument. The last I read, he said Dwill was the clear front runner for best PG in the league. It'll be hard to argue against that. However, saying that Rondo doesn't deserve to be in the conversation is ludicrous.

 

[anonymous832]

IMO the C's don't get to the finals without Rondo.. stick any other PG in there and I'm not sure you get there. I'm not saying the team wasn't stacked. A lot of people go around here and say Dwill is better than Paul just because of winning, so yeah it is a valuable argument. The last I read, he said Dwill was the clear front runner for best PG in the league. It'll be hard to argue against that. However, saying that Rondo doesn't deserve to be in the conversation is ludicrous.

Yeah, and you're gonna be the guy next June saying, "Yeah, I just don't think the Heat get to the Finals without Carlos Arroyo (or Mario Chalmers, or whatever)." Sorry, but no - Rondo does not deserve to be in the conversation. He's definitely a great point guard. Fourth-best in the league, IMO. But until he can A) learn how to shoot; and B) be able to consistently control the floor from night to night with the same remarkable consistency as the truly great point guards do - the way Deron does, the way Paul does, the way Nash does - he won't be in the conversation. Amusingly, you really didn't even provide a counter to the "he's playing with three future Hall of Famers" argument - you just said "winning is a valuable part of the argument." Which I won't argue with, but "winning" has to be put into context, too. Any reasonable person who watches the NBA would have to conclude that with Deron on the Celtics, yes, they still would have gotten to the Finals. I just think it's silly to argue otherwise. Just as it would be silly to argue that Rondo would have anywhere near his current level of hype if he didn't play with Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen every night - even the aging versions we see now. I'll admit that, at this point, Rondo is the Celtics' best player. Quite clearly, in fact. But we've seen Deron/Paul/Nash become significantly better players than Rondo WITHOUT the benefit of three selfless Hall of Famers facilitating everything they do.

 

[JJ Rage]

Everything Simmons writes is irrelevant. Forget where he has Deron ranked. The fact that he considers Rose and Rondo higher on the list of top PGs before Steve Nash is all you need to see to know he's a windbag.

 

[anonymous832]

Everything Simmons writes is irrelevant. Forget where he has Deron ranked. The fact that he considers Rose and Rondo higher on the list of top PGs before Steve Nash is all you need to see to know he's a windbag.

Do I have to explain this again? Christ. OK, pay attention this time. He did NOT have Rose higher on his list of point guards than Nash (or Deron, for that matter). That was his trade value column - he was talking about VALUE, not current level of quality. Age and salary were determining factors. I mean, do you even TRY to understand what you're discussing before you post something on a message board?

 

[Stifle Tower]

Wait. Two pages defending Deron after an apparent dis by Simmons claiming he's only a top-4 PG?
When is someone going to defend good ol' Jer'? He said the same thing about Sloan - that he's a top-4 coach

 

[Urzajazz]

Yeah, and you're gonna be the guy next June saying, "Yeah, I just don't think the Heat get to the Finals without Carlos Arroyo (or Mario Chalmers, or whatever)." Sorry, but no - Rondo does not deserve to be in the conversation. He's definitely a great point guard. Fourth-best in the league, IMO. But until he can A) learn how to shoot; and B) be able to consistently control the floor from night to night with the same remarkable consistency as the truly great point guards do - the way Deron does, the way Paul does, the way Nash does - he won't be in the conversation. Amusingly, you really didn't even provide a counter to the "he's playing with three future Hall of Famers" argument - you just said "winning is a valuable part of the argument." Which I won't argue with, but "winning" has to be put into context, too. Any reasonable person who watches the NBA would have to conclude that with Deron on the Celtics, yes, they still would have gotten to the Finals. I just think it's silly to argue otherwise. Just as it would be silly to argue that Rondo would have anywhere near his current level of hype if he didn't play with Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen every night - even the aging versions we see now. I'll admit that, at this point, Rondo is the Celtics' best player. Quite clearly, in fact. But we've seen Deron/Paul/Nash become significantly better players than Rondo WITHOUT the benefit of three selfless Hall of Famers facilitating everything they do.

I was just saying, that some people on this board have said in the past that "deron is better because of a better win percentage." He had a better line up than Paul, no one will argue that. Yes, he has 3 future HOFs on the team, yeah the team is stacked not only in great veteran talent but also younger role player guys, theres a reason the Celtics are so good and they won a title. But saying that Rondo isn't a factor in that is crazy. Yeah you stick any of the top PGs in the NBA on that Celtics team and they go to the finals, but if you stick Devin Harris on that team? I'm not so sure. Raymond Felton, who is a decent PG, I don't think you get to the finals with that team.

 

[JJ Rage]

Do I have to explain this again? Christ. OK, pay attention this time. He did NOT have Rose higher on his list of point guards than Nash (or Deron, for that matter). That was his trade value column - he was talking about VALUE, not current level of quality. Age and salary were determining factors. I mean, do you even TRY to understand what you're discussing before you post something on a message board?

Calm down, bro. I missed your post clarifying the Simmons article.

Settle down.

 

[anonymous832]

I was just saying, that some people on this board have said in the past that "deron is better because of a better win percentage." He had a better line up than Paul, no one will argue that. Yes, he has 3 future HOFs on the team, yeah the team is stacked not only in great veteran talent but also younger role player guys, theres a reason the Celtics are so good and they won a title. But saying that Rondo isn't a factor in that is crazy. Yeah you stick any of the top PGs in the NBA on that Celtics team and they go to the finals, but if you stick Devin Harris on that team? I'm not so sure. Raymond Felton, who is a decent PG, I don't think you get to the finals with that team.

And what does that have to do with anything?

Nobody said Devin Harris was better than Rondo. Nobody said Raymond Felton was better than Rondo. I said Rondo isn't in the conversation for best PG in the league - because Deron, Paul and Nash are all clearly better, IMO. Personally, I'd rank him fourth behind those three. With Westbrook, Billups and Rose (unless I'm forgetting someone) behind him.

 

[craig2112]

Simmons has had a major burr up his arse for years about the jazz. I don't know where it came from, but it's obvious. He hated Stock and Malone so much and still enjoys dissing them. Just read his basketball book. It's a good read, but his bias takes away a lot of his cred. he even admits that he has biases and then tries to point out where he is being unbiased.

Simmons is a fan who gets to write for ESPN. That's really all he is.

 

[Inn Dawn]

Simmons has had a major burr up his arse for years about the jazz. I don't know where it came from, but it's obvious. He hated Stock and Malone so much and still enjoys dissing them. Just read his basketball book. It's a good read, but his bias takes away a lot of his cred. he even admits that he has biases and then tries to point out where he is being unbiased.

Simmons is a fan who gets to write for ESPN. That's really all he is.

Hey it's craig2112 from the ESPN boards c. early 2000s.

 

[Urzajazz]

Simmons has had a major burr up his arse for years about the jazz. I don't know where it came from, but it's obvious. He hated Stock and Malone so much and still enjoys dissing them. Just read his basketball book. It's a good read, but his bias takes away a lot of his cred. he even admits that he has biases and then tries to point out where he is being unbiased.

Simmons is a fan who gets to write for ESPN. That's really all he is.

I think he gives pretty much everyone a fair shake. Now that he mentioned some of that stuff, there is no reason why Jordan shouldn't have won all the MVP awards from 88 to 98. Seriously, Jordan was unreal those years. I didn't think he showed any real biased towards any players or teams he judged them fairly. He really judges the Jazz fairly too. It's fun to make fun of the Jazz because they usually draft "White and Slow" But he has always praised Sloan for his coaching, he even praises Stockton all the time, especially when comparing players.

I thought his book accurately rated Malone and Stockton, although I think Stockton should have been just a few spots higher, but he made some valid arguments about his position.

 

[gomretat]

This is fans looking for a reason to be offended. Nothing wrong at all with saying Deron is top 4. In fact, it is a nice compliment given the quality of PG's in the league.

 

[tatermoog]

...bump for no good reason.

 

[Ben10]

This is fans looking for a reason to be offended. Nothing wrong at all with saying Deron is top 4. In fact, it is a nice compliment given the quality of PG's in the league.

Well the way Deron has played so far in the first to games this writer is off his block. Deron isn't top 20 at the moment.

But of course that well change and he well get back to being the D-Will we love

 

[Guitaro]

#1 is still in the top 4.

I like the way you think, good sir.

I also agree, that it's more about giving love to Jefferson than anything else. The rest seems like he's trying to be politically correct by being somewhat vague. Calling Deron and Sloan "top 4" leaves more wiggle room down the line.

 

[Guitaro]

Well the way Deron has played so far in the first to games this writer is off his block. Deron isn't top 20 at the moment.

But of course that well change and he well get back to being the D-Will we love

I have to wonder how much of his poor shooting has to do with his being frustrated with his teammates? On another team, it's not as big a problem. However, on one of the few teams with a structured offense, it becomes a much bigger problem.

On other other hand, we just played 2 of the best offenses in the league on back-to-back nights. I have a hard time thinking we'd win both of those games even if we knew the offense better. Both those teams have been together for several years now. PHX only added a couple key players. They were already used to playing without Amare for stretches. It's the same for us. We have been used to playing without Boozer and even AK. However, I think the Jazz really miss Memo out there. Yes, he's a little slow but he's the guy that picks up the scoring load when other guys don't seem to have it. It's going to be rough until he gets back or we find a little more rhythm. On the positive side, I do think we'll be much more competitive and aggressive.