Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Utah Jazz' started by franklin, Jan 2, 2013.
Seriously Millsap, stfu before you ruin your legacy.
Uh...why is this a problem? Should the guy shrug his shoulders, passively accepting that he's not playing well enough to warrant 4th quarter minutes? Dude's a competitor, and is probably just as frustrated with his own play as anyone else is.
I've been saying for the past year that Paul should be the one traded. I'm sure Al would have said the same thing but I believe Paul's doesn't have the team attitude Al has.
Say we resign Paul (not Al), I don't see him openly accepting to be the 3rd big if Kanter/Favors start to develop 2 years from now. I do see Al willing to such a thing!
I agree. Paul's answer to the question didn't bother me at all.
Frank and his crew of reality-TV-watching, mush-for-brains dullards see drama everywhere.
I don't disagree with you guys, but at the same time, we got after Boozer for the same thing, a while back when he finally got back from a long injury, he wasn't playing in the 4th either, and we got all over him for saying he was a "starter". So as I do understand his reaction, he might want to suck it up and at least sound like a team player. Also have the feeling that if Al wasn't playing in the 4th and he had the same comments we'd be all in his grill about it like we were with Boozer.
Maybe he's sick of answering stupid-obvious questions.
Mods, please change the title to "Is Millsap whining again?" so GVC will stop whining.
Regardless of whether he meant anything or not, Sap should give more pc answers to these kinds of questions and take his concerns to management the right way.
I was much more troubled by this quote from him on April 17th, 2011:
Right or wrong that sounded as ME talk instead of US talk in my point of view.
How is what Millsap said the same as what Boozer said?
It's easy to see what he meant, and it sounds a lot like Boozer.
Now you resort to name calling because he's right and there is no good argument to this.
It's a joke. Relax.
And no, the two statements aren't at all the same. One guy flatly stated that he's a starter, the other stated that he's frustrated he's not playing during crunch time. Paul should be frustrated; he's playing poorly, and watching from the bench as his team loses close games. Boozer's statement was made while he was injured, his replacement was playing well, and the team was doing ok without him.
Frustration (Millsap) does not imply a sense of entitlement (Boozer). Wake the **** up.
his answer didn't bother me... but i will admit that i knew as soon as i read it that it would bother some people.
the dude's a competitor, and he has carried the jazz on his back far more than anybody on this team other than al. what's more, he has frequently shown a willingness to do the less glamorous things like defend and set screens. so i can imagine the guy doesn't like feeling even further marginalized despite the fact that he has better PPP stats AND better defense than the guy who almost automatically plays more minutes than him every single night.
but fwiw (and i hope this isn't just wishful thinking) - the fact that paul's on the shelf late and al is in there playing probably doesn't mean paul's on the trade block. if the jazz were really trying to dangle paul right now, they wouldn't be lowering his value intentionally by sitting him late so that al jefferson could use even MORE of the team's late-game possessions. his sitting probably means nothing, but if it means anything, it's that al is the guy whose value they're trying to protect.
i'm with you in this thread in overall terms, but i'm not sure i can endorse "he's playing poorly." in the last 5 games, he has 54 points on 47 shots (1.15 pps) and has played far better defense than al and even better than derrick has been in certain long stretches where he got exposed, particularly in the home-and-home with the clippers. he also grabbed a rebound every 4 minutes in december and had an assist for every 3.8 shot attempts with an assist-to-TO ratio of 2.9.
(for comparison's sake, al's PPS over those 5 games was actually about the same because of his 30-points-on-22-shots explosion in LA. his rebounding was a hair better, but he only had an assist for every 7.4 attempts with a 2.1 A/TO ratio. so if you're corbin how do you explain to paul why al is better except in terms of sheer volume of shots? how do you explain to paul how al is more important to the team when you've played every bit as good as him on one end of the floor, and a hell of a lot better at the other end?)
You're creating your own context here to defend the argument you made. Millsap could very well be saying that he's frustrated because he isn't getting the crunch time minutes that he deserves. I'm not saying he is, but it is one way of interpreting the quote. But you're right about blowing something out of proportion for the sake of drama. It sounds trivial either way.
The trib has a good article on why Corbin is letting Favors start to see more time at clutch time.
Corbin said one of the reasons he has been more comfortable with Favors late in games is the big man’s improved free-throw shooting.
Sure, he could be. I never said or implied otherwise.
I'm usually all for players speaking their minds and being real human beings. I'm a big fan of the DMC antics. On the other hand, that isn't Millsap's thing and he's in a contract year where he's most likely not in Utah gear for more than 50 games. I like Millsap & would hate to see him sour fans like Raja did, or even Watson.