What's new
By:

Rudy Gobert has got to go

OP probably should have looked something like: Rubio has got to go
and the jazz should also try to trade favors to help spacing.
If a perfect offer came along for Gobert then maybe the jazz should considering trading him and trying to keep favors.
 
Tom349 said:
I think it's something we definitely should consider. Gobert is our most valuable player and has the ability to defer opponents away from the rim by simply standing around the rim. Gobert being able to do that alone makes a better player than Favors who is a better passer, finisher and can shoot while playing good defense, so the idea of trading Gobert does sound stupid. But the player Utah could pick up in return for Gobert may make Utah a better team than simply having Gobert and not getting full return of value from Favors or letting him walk. Which if we did trade Gobert I'm very confident we could get Favors to re-sign and would get him on a good deal.

Lets say we trade Gobert for CJ McCollum. Gobert is the more impactful player but McCollum under contract along with Favors under contract and playing the five makes us a better team than simply having Gobert. Which team would you rather to start next season?

Exum-Mitchell-Hood-Jerekbo-Gobert
- with Ingles, Burks, Thabo, Ekpe off the bench

or

McCollum-Mitchell-Hood-Jerkbo-Favors
- with Exum-Ingles-Burks-Thabo-Ekpe off the bench.
Click to expand...

That' something to consider at least, but in this league in you don't win a championship with Favors/McCollum. You win it by bucking the trend and winning it with Gobert.
 
I understand offering counter viewpoints to the OP. What I don't understand is why you feel the need to tell him what he should have wrote or said. I don't understand why someone would be a pompous ******* to him, belittle him, call him names, say that he should be ignored and mock him. Especially when he actually makes a fair point.

You might call my responses "a trainwreck" and act all amused about my responses in a condescending fasion too, NAOS. However, you haven't offered anything of substance. Imo, people, all to often, are closed minded with the idea of it has to be "this or that" when in reality it could be this and that or that or this. Dat partisan opinion though.
 
sahlensguy said:
That' something to consider at least, but in this league in you don't win a championship with Favors/McCollum. You win it by bucking the trend and winning it with Gobert.
Click to expand...
The last time, I can think of, a team won a championship with a dominant, defensive minded center, it was with Timmy. With all do respect to Gobert, he's certainly no Timmy. Before Timmy it was with Garnett and Big Ben. The crazy thing is though, in the relative short time since they won, the game has changed so much. This is not to say it's impossible though. I'd love to see a championship with him. I'd build around Mitchell at this point though followed closely by Gobert and future draft picks.
 
Archie Moses said:
When have you told me fish hit the nail on the head before?

And you have the audacity to lecture me on learning to write, Mr. Gobbledygook?

Can't wait til they bring negs back. That train is gonna hit you like the lil engine that could. Choo choo
Click to expand...

What I told you before was that you need to improve your writing because it is often confusing, and Fish, as I said, hit the nail on the head, by giving you examples of this. I am very qualified to lecture you on writing, as I have been a college English teacher in addition to having been a professional writer for 30 plus years. I do like your hahapeepeecaca signature, however, as it does show imagination, something all good writers need.

One other thing, until you make some improvements, you get a grade of CaCa.
 
Last edited:
Gobert has fire, you don't just get that with every player that comes along in the NBA.
You don't trade that, or get rid of that.

I like Favors too, he has worked on his game, worked through injuries, and has given his all to win and improve. Injuries happen, and I still think it a good idea to have both around.

I do like the way the team played when Gobert was out. It was mostly at home, and against lesser opponents for the most part. I don't think I'll be reading too much into what happened then, especially with it being a small sample size.

For me the bottom line is, you don't trade Gobert, you don't trade DM, and you only trade one of the better pieces if you are definitely getting someone as good that's a better fit, or a better player back.

As to the troll job with the "Gobert has to go", well done, you got a response. I completely disagree.
 
Archie Moses said:
The last time, I can think of, a team won a championship with a dominant, defensive minded center, it was with Timmy. With all do respect to Gobert, he's certainly no Timmy. Before Timmy it was with Garnett and Big Ben. The crazy thing is though, in the relative short time since they won, the game has changed so much. This is not to say it's impossible though. I'd love to see a championship with him. I'd build around Mitchell at this point though followed closely by Gobert and future draft picks.
Click to expand...

The game has changed. Our offense was killing it in November, but our defense is what put the rest of the league on notice the last couple of years. I get that Hayward was a big part on both ends of the court in the low possession, "Jazz" style of play. Replicating that style with 3 and D players could be a way to take on the super teams of today. We can't beat the best of the league if we try to form a team to match them shot for shot. I think that's what was proposed in a Gobert team vs a Favors/McCullen team of the earlier post.
 
Eenie-Meenie said:
What I told you before was that you need to improve your writing because it is often confusing, and Fish, as I said, hit the nail on the head, by giving you examples of this. I am very qualified to lecture you on writing, as I have been a college English teacher in addition to having been a professional writer for 30 plus years. I do like your hahapeepeecaca signature, however, as it does show imagination, something all good writers need.
Click to expand...
What I've written in this thread is really not that hard to understand unless you want it to be. If it's confusing to someone that I want the Jazz to keep Gobert over Favors but still recognize they could also be better off without Gobert then people are short circuiting over a simplistic concept.

There were people that understood my original post. Those who say they didn't are the same ones that flaunt their opinions while putting others down without providing any substance or rebuttals. It's not shocking or new.
 
Archie Moses said:
What I've written in this thread is really not that hard to understand unless you want it to be. If it's confusing to someone that I want the Jazz to keep Gobert over Favors but still recognize they could also be better off without Gobert then people are short circuiting over a simplistic concept.

There were people that understood my original post. Those who say they didn't are the same ones that flaunt their opinions while putting others down without providing any substance or rebuttals. It's not shocking or new.
Click to expand...

HaHaPeePeeCaCa -- at times you make good points and you are comprehensible, but other times you can be confusing. I tried to tell you this before, but take it with a grain of salt and maybe you will get better.
 
LoPo said:
Good lord the bickering.

We just lost a good player who was an unrestricted free agent. Why the hell trade Gobert then risk losing Favors for nothing.

Just. Trade. Favors.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...

I agree that you can't trade Gobert unless you are 100% sure you can resign Favs. But with that said, Gobert gets us more in trade than Favs does. And if it makes the team better, you have to consider it. But only if you can resign Favs. And I don't think that will happen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top