****ing terrible argument. The second unit's offense was run through him pretty consistently, and he grabbed a lot of O-boards playing on a terrible offensive team. His grasp of 5-man basketball and defensive effort/focus was poor for most of the season. Do you really think his play should have landed him better than 106th in the league in minutes?
You're a decent poster, so I apologize for sounding a little more confrontational than I should have been. Guess I'm just tired of seeing blanket statements such as we could have gotten "this" or Lindsey should do whatever it takes, etc. AS you said, we don't know the details. But given the fact that Turner and Hawes fetched nothing more than 2nd's, I think it's likely a first round pick would have required taking on a contract with at least another year left. Otherwise, I think DL would have jumped on it; he likes to accumulate assets.
1. He was out there. 27 minutes per game. Those are starter minutes. Enes's play warranted less. I can't imagine giving unwarranted minutes to players incentivizes playing hard to earn a greater role and more minutes very well. "Entitled".
Production? Enes doesn't know how to play 5-man basketball. Those guys do.
So the Jazz had 5 young players in the top 106 in minutes played. All 5 of them averaged 10+ field goal attempts per game (IIRC this is the first team in decades to have 5 players under 24 average 10+ field goal attempts). And we're celebrating one of these players whining about minutes? And we're stating that all 5 of them should have been in the top 20 in the league in minutes per game? It's ****ing ludicrous.
