Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
Pretty crazy to think that we got nothing for our star player, and yet a viable case can be made that we came out the winner.That injury was a freak accident and gruesome.
Also it wasn’t a trade.
Pretty crazy to think that we got nothing for our star player, and yet a viable case can be made that we came out the winner.That injury was a freak accident and gruesome.
Also it wasn’t a trade.
This is true, but it is debatable whether Mitchell would have become what he has if Hayward had been here.Eh, if Mitchell has exploded like he had we wouldn’t be talking about needing that third player. We’d have him
The Hayward hate is certainly justifiable but he became a legit all star here. Dude would have been great on this team.
This is true, but it is debatable whether Mitchell would have become what he has if Hayward had been here.
yeah the Jazz are the big winners of the Hayward situation.... u cant be serious.. Clearly;Boris Diaw was the big winner. Joe Johnson too.. these guys who were overpaid in a desperate failed attempt to appease him
I actually was keeping track on how many games JJ won us that year. It was close to 9-10 including the Clippers game. He was very clutch for us that yearJoe Johnson putting away the Clippers was one of my favorite recent Jazz memories. Well worth whatever we paid. Also, off court Diaw was pretty cool as well.
Joe Jesus was a ****ing star for the Jazz that first season. Too bad he got hurt in a larger role and it made more sense to trade him than it did to keep him.I actually was keeping track on how many games JJ won us that year. It was close to 9-10 including the Clippers game. He was very clutch for us that year
Nobody thinks Hayward is that alpha that would put a rookie in his place. At least not anymore. I think the main presumption is that there would have been some silence, pouting, and vague distortion. And I don't think there's any question that Hayward's absence made things easier on Mitchell: the void was glaring, and we were ready to adapt to however he was able to fill it. This is not the case if Haywood were still on the team.It’s certainly debatable, but for me nothing Hayward has ever done has shown me he’s that alpha that would put a rookie in their place. I think Mitchell would have rode right over him.
Oh well, onto bigger and better.
Nobody thinks Hayward is that alpha that would put a rookie in his place. At least not anymore. I think the main presumption is that there would have been some silence, pouting, and vague distortion. And I don't think there's any question that Hayward's absence made things easier on Mitchell: the void was glaring, and we were ready to adapt to however he was able to fill it. This is not the case if Haywood were still on the team.
But, yeah, over this.
I don’t fault Hayward for the decision he made. I absolutely fault him for how he made it.
Jazz with haywood Mitchell Gobert would be great.