What's new
By:

Big Al on Millsap

sepanol said:
So ? I don't understand your point, i didn't say Millsap can't be 6th man which it is the best think he can do, being the 6th man. But it would be awkward if he starts at SF like ginobili starts as pg. If Millsap is gonna be starting SF in a team, it means that team has no SF on the roster
Click to expand...

You've completely misaddressed his point, and turned it into your stupid "players can't grow into other positions" argument. He is saying that if a player plays as a 6th man, it does not mean that he cannot start at his respective position. Ginobli is one of the best SGs of the last ten years, yet he doesn't start. Hence, you can't call a 6th man "barely a starter" because last time I checked, 17/8 on 53 Fg% is more than adequate as far as starting PFs go. Lets not forget how badly he destroyed Scola last season, a player you seem to have an undeniable hard on for.
 
dalamon said:
Okay, Ill bite.

How on earth will trading Big Al make everyones duties more clear? Will it improve our logjam at PF, seeing as Kanter, Favors, and Millsap all "naturally" play at that position? Wont it be "hard" of for Kanter to adopt another position, and play Center? After all, you said not every player can, Sepanol. Even if Kanter does, who will start at PF between him and Favors? The only thing that trading Big Al would affect, is the amount of playing time that KANTER and OKUR receives. Hmmm, surprise surprise. Sepanol looking out for his countrymen yet again.

As you can see, the second we got Favors was the instant Millsap's security on this team was removed. I cannot think of many players I like more in the NBA, but quite frankly, their ceilings differ. So unless, Favors plays center and Millsap starts at PF over the next few years until we see how Kanter becomes, there aren't many other possibilities for him, unless he is either traded away, or works towards becoming an SF. Or he could be a 6th man, but hey if the guy hates being benched then right on. Let him work hard to avoid it.
Click to expand...

Memo and Millsap will start, Favors and Kanter will be the second team. So they will all get almost same mins, and it may fluctuate game to game, depending on their performances
 
dalamon said:
You've completely misaddressed his point, and turned it into your stupid "players can't grow into other positions" argument. He is saying that if a player plays as a 6th man, it does not mean that he cannot start at his respective position. Ginobli is one of the best SGs of the last ten years, yet he doesn't start. Hence, you can't call a 6th man "barely a starter" because last time I checked, 17/8 on 53 Fg% is more than adequate as far as starting PFs go. Lets not forget how badly he destroyed Scola last season, a player you seem to have an undeniable hard on for.
Click to expand...

Only guys like you rely their opinions only on stats and only one game. Everyone can destroy someone just in 1 game, thats not the point. But i watch them and thats how i have ideas about players. Also you continue manipulating my posts by missing some words, i told, not all players can grow in all positions. So Kanter, he is already playing both positions, if you ask my opinion i would say he is PF like Jefferson, but since he has size to play center, like as Jefferson, he can grow as a center. But millsap , he is already undersized for Center so he can't play a Center, and from what i saw earlier he can't play SF as good as PF.

Ginobili is a very good player no doubt, but he can't be a starting PG in any nba team like Millsap can't be a starting SF in any nba team. That's my idea, and i am pretty adamant on it. It is different to play some mins in a different position and to be a consistent player in that position. That's what i am saying. And i am not really stuck on this PF-C comparison. This positions, you can see it like a pair, and the players playing in these positions should be good pair rather than being who is PF who is C indeed. Obviously Millsap- Jefferson wasn't good pair. But i think, Favors and Kanter have complemantary skills and they can be good big man pair no matter who is PF who is C. And they match up with the players more suitable for them physically
 
sepanol said:
Only guys like you rely their opinions only on stats and only one game. Everyone can destroy someone just in 1 game, thats not the point. But i watch them and thats how i have ideas about players. Also you continue manipulating my posts by missing some words, i told, not all players can grow in all positions. So Kanter, he is already playing both positions, if you ask my opinion i would say he is PF like Jefferson, but since he has size to play center, like as Jefferson, he can grow as a center. But millsap , he is already undersized for Center so he can't play a Center, and from what i saw earlier he can't play SF as good as PF.

Ginobili is a very good player no doubt, but he can't be a starting PG in any nba team like Millsap can't be a starting SF in any nba team. That's my idea, and i am pretty adamant on it. It is different to play some mins in a different position and to be a consistent player in that position. That's what i am saying. And i am not really stuck on this PF-C comparison. This positions, you can see it like a pair, and the players playing in these positions should be good pair rather than being who is PF who is C indeed. Obviously Millsap- Jefferson wasn't good pair. But i think, Favors and Kanter have complemantary skills and they can be good big man pair no matter who is PF who is C. And they match up with the players more suitable for them physically
Click to expand...
Ok.... Ok.... Thanks once again you've maneged to completely twist my words. I will dumb it up for you so even you can understand!

You said Millsap was barely a starting pf. I disagree with that, so to prove my point I said Ginobili is not a starter, but he could start for 90% of the teams in the league. Millsap would start on more teams than not in the NBA.
 
Thee jazz fan said:
Ok.... Ok.... Thanks once again you've maneged to completely twist my words. I will dumb it up for you so even you can understand!

You said Millsap was barely a starting pf. I disagree with that, so to prove my point I said Ginobili is not a starter, but he could start for 90% of the teams in the league. Millsap would start on more teams than not in the NBA.
Click to expand...

Millsap is a starter, maybe i used that word wrong, but he is not like the main starter in a contending team in my opinion, i would rather to have him as a 6th man.
And ginobili of course is a starter, just because he was 6th man 1-2 season shouldn't neglect what he did for the rest of the seasons he was in nba. Although i don't like his fake gestures when he is fouled, i appreciate his professionalism, he is a great player
 
sepanol said:
Millsap is a starter, maybe i used that word wrong, but he is not like the main starter in a contending team in my opinion, i would rather to have him as a 6th man.
And ginobili of course is a starter, just because he was 6th man 1-2 season shouldn't neglect what he did for the rest of the seasons he was in nba. Although i don't like his fake gestures when he is fouled, i appreciate his professionalism, he is a great player
Click to expand...
A main starter on a contending team? Sorry, I cannot understand you. What is your definition of a "main starter" on a contending team? do you mean a main contributor? Because we definitely don't need Millsap to be a main contributor at 4, just like Joel Anthony wasn't a main contributor at the 5 all season long last year, or Fisher with the lakers, or Fernandez with the Mavericks, or Ben Wallace (offensively) with the 2004 Pistons team you seem to love so much. Name the past 10 NBA champions; I guarantee you I can find a starter on each team that is worse than Millsap (at their respective position, relative to other NBA players).
 
dalamon said:
A main starter on a contending team? Sorry, I cannot understand you. What is your definition of a "main starter" on a contending team? do you mean a main contributor? Because we definitely don't need Millsap to be a main contributor at 4, just like Joel Anthony wasn't a main contributor at the 5 all season long last year, or Fisher with the lakers, or Fernandez with the Mavericks, or Ben Wallace (offensively) with the 2004 Pistons team you seem to love so much. Name the past 10 NBA champions; I guarantee you I can find a starter on each team that is worse than Millsap (at their respective position, relative to other NBA players).
Click to expand...

Main contributor yes, he can be the 6th man in a contender but not the one of main 2 contributors. So if we have billups, hamilton, prince and rasheed of course millsap could be the starter but apparently we dont have it right now. Miami have 2 of best 4-5 players in the league plus another franchise player, so even i can contribute instead of joel anthony.
That fisher you underestimate scored many critical 3s in finals against orlando and you don't really need a pg like deron or paul when you have kobe.
Also dallas had a couple of guys rotating in fernandez' position and terry seemed like the main guy.

So i think the main roles are more important rather than starting, i used that word wrong, not a starter, should be main contributor better.
Also
 
Millsap is a main contributor. As of now the Jazz don't have any stars like D-Will Kobe LeBron James. Make no mistake Millsap is as big a contributor to winning games as anyone on this team. I like you would like to see Millsap in the 6th man role, assuming Favors is ready to start.

I would like to see Favors start at pf and rotate with Jefferson at C, and have Kanter playing here and there at both positions. I'm very high on Kanter, but I don't think he is ready for big minutes just yet. What I want to see is for Kanter to learn for a year allow favors to grow into a star player give Millsap plenty of minutes to compile big numbers. My hope is that Kanter shows the same tile of improvement by years end that Favors and Hayward showed at the end of last year, so we can trade Millsap to upgrade our draft position in what is supposed to be a strong and deep draft class.
 
Thee jazz fan said:
Millsap is a main contributor. As of now the Jazz don't have any stars like D-Will Kobe LeBron James. Make no mistake Millsap is as big a contributor to winning games as anyone on this team. I like you would like to see Millsap in the 6th man role, assuming Favors is ready to start.

I would like to see Favors start at pf and rotate with Jefferson at C, and have Kanter playing here and there at both positions. I'm very high on Kanter, but I don't think he is ready for big minutes just yet. What I want to see is for Kanter to learn for a year allow favors to grow into a star player give Millsap plenty of minutes to compile big numbers. My hope is that Kanter shows the same tile of improvement by years end that Favors and Hayward showed at the end of last year, so we can trade Millsap to upgrade our draft position in what is supposed to be a strong and deep draft class.
Click to expand...

Yeah i generally agree, for sure now millsap is a main contributor, but thats because lack of star in our team, Millsap should have the role of a 6th man in a contending team rather than a main contributor in my opinion.

And of course Favors should be ready to start right now, he was 3rd draft pick, he had an ok rookie year but he has lots of talent, so at some point he must be ready.
Kanter is maybe one of the most unlucky guys among the drafted players this year. He couldn't play any official games last 2 years, only euro cup this summer. And now it will be worse for him if the nba is canceled whole year. I am sure he will have some troubles at first, but i think he is a fast learner, and he will be better by playing lots of games, so to get some experience he has to find some mins. Maybe it will be better for him to start his career in the bench instead of getting 30 min per game, but it is also not good if he will get only 10-15 min behind Memo, Millsap, Favors , Big Al.

Anyway if he is that good as i say, he should grab his spot by himself. But thats not the biggest problem right now. Lets see if there is gonna be a season at all, and then we will discuss these things better
 
I could be wrong, but Kobe couldn't get off the bench his first two years. The reallity is we are stacked with above average bigs. I like Kanter and said many times I would've drafted him #1 overall, and think he will be a fantastic player he will have to earn his minutes. Coach will play the players that give the team the best chance to win now, because he wants to keep his job.

Look at Hayward he didn't play more then garbage minutes the first half of the season, and it didn't seem to hurt his progression by years end Hayward earned his minutes, and I have no doubt at some point Kanter will to. Again I'm not a Kanter hater I'm a fan of his. I'm just a realist.
 
Thee jazz fan said:
I could be wrong, but Kobe couldn't get off the bench his first two years.
Click to expand...
Yes, you could be.

Depends on your definition of "couldn't get off the bench," but your errant thinking is the same as what Sloan had about player development. Players from Kobe on down need on-court playing time to develop. Kobe averaged 15.5 MPG across 71 games in his first year and 26 MPG in his second year. Bryant shot less than 42% in his first year and less than 43% in his second year. Then, in his third year, after more than 1000 minutes of court time, his shooting started being legit, never returning below 43% in any year.

Bigs are also very in need of playing time, and I am optimistic that this coaching staff (if there ever is a coaching staff again) will do better at understanding that than the Sloan regime--not that the bar has been placed very high.


The reallity is we are stacked with above average bigs. I like Kanter and said many times I would've drafted him #1 overall, and think he will be a fantastic player he will have to earn his minutes. Coach will play the players that give the team the best chance to win now, because he wants to keep his job.

Look at Hayward he didn't play more then garbage minutes the first half of the season, and it didn't seem to hurt his progression by years end . . .
Click to expand...
. . . unless Hayward would've developed faster if he had gotten consistent PT throughout the season (not that Raja Bell and CJ were consistently demonstrating significantly superior performance to Elder Hayward).

Hayward earned his minutes, and I have no doubt at some point Kanter will to[o].
Click to expand...
Did Hayward earn his minutes, or maybe, just maybe, did it have something to do in part with coaching philosophy, as evidenced by Hayward being granted at least 10 MPG in 11 of the first 12 games after Corbin took over, vs. a maximum of 5 ten-minute-plus games in a row under the reign of Sloan? I say the latter had something to do with it; consistent with my mantra, Hayward averaged less than 10 minutes per game (including DNPs) under Sloan and 24 MPG (including DNPs) under Corbin.

Such a leap is more than "earning" it or improvement (or the effect of losing D-Will). It is influenced by a focus on giving him the minutes (perhaps more than necessary) to develop. And in the last game of the season, he finished off with 34 points. Very reasonable to infer that he might've had more big nights (just like Fesenko holding serve vs. the Lakers in the playoffs but not having received the court time to be more of a force) if he had been given the PT earlier in the season also, especially given that he started the season with three decent games of ~15 minutes to 25 minutes and then had only two games of >10 minues in the entire month of November. Typical Sloan inconsistency in player management.

I'm glad that the future looks brighter in that regard, but the superior choice was to graciously wave Sloan goodbye years before and then hire Carlisle or Thibodeau or someone else when they were available.
 
Last edited:
InGameStrategy said:
Yes, you could be.

Depends on your definition of "couldn't get off the bench," but your errant thinking is the same as what Sloan had about player development. Players from Kobe on down need on-court playing time to develop. Kobe averaged 15.5 MPG across 71 games in his first year and 26 MPG in his second year. Bryant shot less than 42% in his first year and less than 43% in his second year. Then, in his third year, after more than 1000 minutes of court time, his shooting started being legit, never returning below 43% in any year.

Bigs are also very in need of playing time, and I am optimistic that this coaching staff (if there ever is a coaching staff again) will do better at understanding that than the Sloan regime--not that the bar has been placed very high.


. . . unless Hayward would've developed faster if he had gotten consistent PT throughout the season (not that Raja Bell and CJ were consistently demonstrating significantly superior performance to Elder Hayward).

Did Hayward earn his minutes, or maybe, just maybe, did it have something to do in part with coaching philosophy, as evidenced by Hayward being granted at least 10 MPG in 11 of the first 12 games after Corbin took over, vs. a maximum of 5 ten-minute-plus games in a row under the reign of Sloan? I say the latter had something to do with it; consistent with my mantra, Hayward averaged less than 10 minutes per game (including DNPs) under Sloan and 24 MPG (including DNPs) under Corbin.

Such a leap is more than "earning" it or improvement (or the effect of losing D-Will). It is influenced by a focus on giving him the minutes (perhaps more than necessary) to develop. And in the last game of the season, he finished off with 34 points. Very reasonable to infer that he might've had more big nights (just like Fesenko holding serve vs. the Lakers in the playoffs but not having received the court time to be more of a force) if he had been given the PT earlier in the season also, especially given that he started the season with three decent games of ~15 minutes to 25 minutes and then had only two games of >10 minues in the entire month of November. Typical Sloan inconsistency in player management.

I'm glad that the future looks brighter in that regard, but the superior choice was to graciously wave Sloan goodbye years before and then hire Carlisle or Thibodeau or someone else when they were available.
Click to expand...

Was anyone talking about playing time?? What is the purpose of your post?
 
Bigs who can hit the 3?

[/HR
JazzSpazz said:
Okur is our history of bigs stepping out to the 3 pt line.
Am I missing any others? Did Foster?
Click to expand...

Sloan tends to like C-F who can knock down the mid-range jump shots to keep opposing F-C's honest; Foster, Carr and Chambers come to mind. None had any meaningful 3-point success.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top