Dear FRONT OFFICE: NO ONE WANTS TO WIN GAMES WITH RJ AND MW!

[Hitman]

The core 5 are developing first and foremost, because they are playing more.

Who they play with is just as important. Compare how they played with JLIII and with Trey Burke. It's all about how well the offence runs, and the offence runs well with RJ and MW because of their skillset and attitude. Get rid of them and replace them with inferior players and the Core 5 development stops. But I don't think I can get you to understand this.

 

[Revolution 9]

How does getting rid of RJ help us know what we have in Hayward? Hayward's playing BIG minutes, playing both on- and off-ball, defending both the 2 and 3. Makes no sense.

Nothing to do with his minutes. I want to see if Hayward is enough of a shooting threat, now playing with Trey to draw out people from the paint. I don't think he is. Minor point, but keep picking GVC.

 

[GVC]

Nothing to do with his minutes. I want to see if Hayward is enough of a shooting threat, now playing with Trey to draw out people from the paint. I don't think he is. Minor point, but keep picking GVC.

How is it a minor point? It's THE "specific" reason you stated for trading RJ. Hayward is playing with Trey, and frequently playing off-ball. He also played off-ball the last two seasons, and performed quite well. I don't understand how trading Trey, and giving Hayward no additional minutes, gives the team more information about Gordo. What exactly do you have in mind? What you're saying makes absolutely no sense.

edit: No one plays more minutes per game with Burke than Hayward...What are you trying to say, Rev?

 

[Revolution 9]

Who they play with is just as important. Compare how they played with JLIII and with Trey Burke. It's all about how well the offence runs, and the offence runs well with RJ and MW because of their skillset and attitude. Get rid of them and replace them with inferior players and the Core 5 development stops. But I don't think I can get you to understand this.

You won't get me to agree with you. It's not about understanding oh great teacher you. It's difference of opinion.
They understand what wins games. It's not like they are rookies. Most of them went to the playoffs. If you put the core 5 out there together they will have to figure it out on their own. That is part of the process they can't skip. Trey, Hayward, and Kanter all have the capacity to hits shots. If they weren't relying on the vets so much we'd see how they adjust. In the meantime getting a great player in the draft. As I've said what these vets have done is debatable. Arguing this is pointless. Where we go from here is what I'm worried about.

 

[fishonjazz]

[/B].


Take away RJ, and Marvin, and we are not "back to where we were when JLIII was running the show " Hello. We have Trey Burke.
[/B]

And jeremy evans and brandon rush and diante garret.

When we were 1-14 the whole team was different, so to say losing marv and jeffy would take us back to what we were in that stretch of the season doesnt make sense.(plus we had jeffy at that point anyway).

If you took away marvin, burke, garret, evans, and rush then we might be like we were early in the season

 

[GVC]

You won't get me to agree with you. It's not about understanding oh great teacher you. It's difference of opinion.
They understand what wins games. It's not like they are rookies. Most of them went to the playoffs. If you put the core 5 out there together they will have to figure it out on their own. That is part of the process they can't skip. Trey, Hayward, and Kanter all have the capacity to hits shots. If they weren't relying on the vets so much we'd see how they adjust. In the meantime getting a great player in the draft. As I've said what these vets have done is debatable. Arguing this is pointless. Where we go from here is what I'm worried about.

In other words, playing time is the only thing that matters for development...

Don't buy it. Pretty much every coach in history doesn't buy it. Sure it's a matter of opinion, but yours is ignorant. Unless you can provide a better argument (or any argument at all), I'll stick with the opinion of experienced, successful coaches.

 

[fishonjazz]

Take out RJ and MW and we're back to where we were when JLIII was running the show -

Really?

burke jeremy evans and brandon rush and diante garret.

When we were 1-14 the whole team was different, so to say losing marv and jeffy would take us back to what we were in that stretch of the season doesnt make sense.(plus we had jeffy at that point anyway).

If you took away marvin, burke, garret, evans, and rush then we might be like we were early in the season

 

[Revolution 9]

How is it a minor point? It's THE "specific" reason you stated for trading RJ. Hayward is playing with Trey, and frequently playing off-ball. He also played off-ball the last two seasons, and performed quite well. I don't understand how trading Trey, and giving Hayward no additional minutes, gives the team more information about Gordo. What exactly do you have in mind? What you're saying makes absolutely no sense.

edit: No one plays more minutes per game with Burke than Hayward...What are you trying to say, Rev?

WOW chill the **** out. I just threw that in there. Was not important. That is not the major reason I want RJ gone. I was just curious to see if Hayward can fill that role. But I don't care about winning games this year. We disagree on what is the best way to develop this group. Are you trying to fight me? Or are you just incapable of having a discussion?

 

[Revolution 9]

In other words, playing time is the only thing that matters for development...

Don't buy it. Pretty much every coach in history doesn't buy it. Sure it's a matter of opinion, but yours is ignorant. Unless you can provide a better argument (or any argument at all), I'll stick with the opinion of experienced, successful coaches.

I guess not reading, and spouting off insults is a way to debate? Playing time is not the ONLY thing to development. Go back and read, and I'll be here when you are done.

 

[GVC]

WOW chill the **** out. I just threw that in there. Was not important. That is not the major reason I want RJ gone. I was just curious to see if Hayward can fill that role. But I don't care about winning games this year. We disagree on what is the best way to develop this group. Are you trying to fight me? Or are you just incapable of having a discussion?

I'm chill, just trying to understand what you're trying to say.

Specifically, what role are you talking about?

Also:

I'm saying it's time to get rid of them, in the least RJ, so we know what we have in Hayward specifically.

Did I misread this?

I guess not reading, and spouting off insults is a way to debate? Playing time is not the ONLY thing to development. Go back and read, and I'll be here when you are done.

I don't see an insult in that post. I don't understand what exactly Hayward is going to do differently if RJ isn't on the team.

 

[GVC]

So you neg me because you can't explain yourself. Grow up.

 

[GVC]

Just so we're clear, Hayward is second on the team in catch and shoot field goal attempts per game, and first in minutes per game playing with Trey.

Is it fair to say you think Ty should take the ball out of Hayward's hands, and use him exclusively as a spot up shooter now? Haven't we already seen Hayward filling that role well the last couple seasons? Don't you think it might be more valuable to see if he can handle on-ball duties this season?