Shooting Extends one Career...So Gobert...
- Thread starter whatthe
- Start date
bjwsan
Well-Known Member
Okay, agree with that point... but I don't think Rudy's value would improve for ANY team, therefor his value (yes, in $) if he worked on a mid-range vs working on his footwork, body conditioning and free throw %...
Size and shooting extend one’s career. Gobert has size and the entire strength of his game relies on that and staying close to the rim. He isn’t a shooter AND it takes from his unique strength. When he’s too slow to play, he will be too slow to play.
I’m probably the biggest spacing hawk on this site, but this idea is straight up stupid.
I’m probably the biggest spacing hawk on this site, but this idea is straight up stupid.
Tyson Chandler had been able to maintain staying somewhat relevant even into mid-30s.
Him shooting would not create an advantage. It would take away from his strength. Gobert is the reason you need spacing, it isn’t the other way around.
TheStormofWar
Well-Known Member
This is false to a degree.
Rudy isn't a shooter yet, but there are dozens of examples where players who weren't shooters added one later. Malone was deadly with his mid-range game later in his career and Horford's career (and latest contract) doesn't come about as it has without him developing an outside jimmy.
Adding a shot doesn't takeaway from a player. It never has. Rather, it simply adds to their offensive arsenal and gives the defense more to worry about. Rudy adding something reliable out to 15 or better makes him so much more deadly in offensive sets where he can roll outside, sit at the top of the key, or take a shot when he's out of his normal position and the play breaks down.
Aside from that, Rudy has the unique physical attributes to remain in the league as his game relies as much on timing, anticipation, intelligence, and instincts as his athleticism. Granted, he will age, but his decline probably won't be as bad as others I think. Mutombo played until he was 42 and still had massive defensive value until he was 35.
It takes away from a player - necessarily - when their gravity is in the paint, when they’re a top-flight offensive rebounder, and the best garbage man in the league by a light year. All of those make him one of the most efficient players in the NBA and it creates shots for players when he can clean up after misses.
His mid-range jumper would NEVER be as valuable as what he does around the basket, and he’d have to have an absolutely elite 3P% to even consider giving up the benefits of what he does around the basket.
The list of players that shouldn’t use resources to improve their jumper is incredibly short, but Gobert’s at the top of that list.
Last edited:
framer
Well-Known Member
He just really needs a hook shot. He needs to be setting screens 10 feet out from the basket than rolling. That puts far more pressure on a defense than him standing out there taking midrange shots. Back when the Jazz would whoop San Antonio, that was the gameplan, to goad their big men into taking 10-15 foot jumpers, and they were GOOD at making that shot. It was a lower percentage shot and diminished the chance of an offensive rebound by the big.
Agreed. He needs to make his strength stronger, not change course. Right now, he doesn’t have a way to attack a mismatch (a hook shot, for example) which will be critical against switching defenses and he could improve his non-dunk conversion around the rim. Maybe adding a shot worth taking (and worth guarding) is worth it in a few years.
Kyoto
Well-Known Member
What? Yes it does. How many old *** no defense shooters are in the league just because they can spread out the defense for 10 minutes a night?
Sent from my SM-G965U using JazzFanz mobile app
