What's new
By:

Is Derrick Favors the best player on this team?

Right now, I'd say yes. He's been the leading scorer in 5 of our 10 games, and was sick for 3 of them.

Really, though, I feel like we'll have a different "best player" on the team every few weeks. I'm sure there will be stretches where Hayward is the best, where Burks is the best, where Gobert is the best, where Hood is the best.

We've got a good balance, here, and all of these guys are capable of going on a mean streak.
 
Xsy said:
Right now, I'd say yes. He's been the leading scorer in 5 of our 10 games, and was sick for 3 of them.

Really, though, I feel like we'll have a different "best player" on the team every few weeks. I'm sure there will be stretches where Hayward is the best, where Burks is the best, where Gobert is the best, where Hood is the best.

We've got a good balance, here, and all of these guys are capable of going on a mean streak.
Click to expand...

If we can just get them all going at once...
 
fishonjazz said:
It's simple really. You can be more important due to who is backing you up, even if you are not the best.

In other words let's just say that Hayward is the best player on the team. Even if that is the case, he is still not as important as Gobert or favors because without Hayward you still have Burks and hood. Without Gobert you have withey. Without favors you have Booker.
Click to expand...
See, this is an explanation. But it's placing the entire value of a player's "importance" based on who their back up is, instead of on the player in discussion. "Importance" of a player then becomes a critique of depth; it really has nothing to do with the actual player, which is pretty silly. It just goes back to my point that discussing who the most "important" player is isn't a worth while discussion. Let's talk about who the best player on the team is. Period. If people want to say the depth at a certain position sucks, then just say that. What's the point of these mental semantics?

Of course, this is just one attempt at defining "importance." I think most people really have no idea what they mean by it when they use it as some sort of opposition to the word "best."

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk
 
Ellis269 said:
Derrick Favors has the opportunity to set the tone offensively for the Jazz with his versatility of skills. Combine that with the roles he has on defense and he's the most important player currently on the Jazz.

The fact that he's starting to play to his potential offensively and is consistently playing well both ways AND evolving into a team leader makes him the best player for the Jazz.
Click to expand...
"Best" and "important" are completely interchangeable in these sentences.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk
 
Ellis269 said:
Hayward will be fine and Rudy will find his rhythm, but Derrick Favors is elevating his offensive game right before our eyes. Similar to Rudy's rise on defense last year, everyone will stop and notice before long.

By the end of the year, he's the guy that the offense will revolve around. His ability to move his shot out AND still play dominant in the post will be critical. He's abused Whiteside at C and Millsap at PF just in the past week. Crazy versatility. . . AND he's an elite defender.

PLUS, he's been acting like the veteran leader that this young team needs on and off the court. He's the real deal. SO excited!
Click to expand...

His %'s are actually down from last season. Pretty much across the board. I still want him to get more touches.
 
Sirkickyass said:
Favors has certainly been our most consistent player this year. If that's a bellweather of quality then I think you'd have to say he's been the best this season.
Click to expand...

VINYLONE said:
Good post and I agree with it. Consistency is the attribute that most young teams miss and need in order to win.
Click to expand...


He's had 3 monster games (26, 25, 23) and 3 horrible games (6,6,5) out of 10. How's that consistent?
 
franklin said:
He's had 3 monster games (26, 25, 23) and 3 horrible games (6,6,5) out of 10. How's that consistent?
Click to expand...

Let's ignore the fact that he was repeatedly mentioned as suffering from the flu for two of those games. Why else would he get benched after 15 minutes of play? #franklin
 
spycam1 said:
See, this is an explanation. But it's placing the entire value of a player's "importance" based on who their back up is, instead of on the player in discussion. "Importance" of a player then becomes a critique of depth; it really has nothing to do with the actual player, which is pretty silly. It just goes back to my point that discussing who the most "important" player is isn't a worth while discussion. Let's talk about who the best player on the team is. Period. If people want to say the depth at a certain position sucks, then just say that. What's the point of these mental semantics?

Of course, this is just one attempt at defining "importance." I think most people really have no idea what they mean by it when they use it as some sort of opposition to the word "best."

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

It's not silly-- our assessment of players don't always have to be reflective of their inner talents. It's a forum, dog. Gobert is as important as **** because our big-situation would become a ****ing nightmare if he left. I guess you could argue the same with Fav, but maybe you could make Hayward a small-ball PF.
 
franklin said:
His %'s are actually down from last season. Pretty much across the board. I still want him to get more touches.
Click to expand...

He's shooting .512 this year and shot .525 last year. In terms of FTs, last year he shot .669, compared to .667 this year. These numbers are nearly identical.

Someone recently posted his %s on midrange jumpers season by season, and it's noticeably higher (I wanna say it's a jump from about 42% to 47%, IIRC).

But yes, I want him to get more touches, too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top