What's new
By:

Nikola Mirotic

framer said:
Or we could just start Mitchell as PG and send Rubio to the damn bench. That solves the problem quite nicely.
Click to expand...
Gobert's emergence in the absense of Derrick Favors had nothing to do with Donovan Mitchell or Rubio.

I would like to think the pairing can work, but I think we've run out of time and Favors is sick of all of this. I'm sick of trying to figure out his place on this team, too.
 
NUMBERICA said:
Gobert's emergence in the absense of Derrick Favors had nothing to do with Donovan Mitchell or Rubio.

I would like to think the pairing can work, but I think we've run out of time and Favors is sick of all of this. I'm sick of trying to figure out his place on this team, too.
Click to expand...

A Niko Gobert 4-5 pick and roll could be fun.

Team Favors fans need to realize he is gone it is over. We could survive with Ricky and Gobert if we have 3 floor spacers on the court with them. I don’t feel like we get a huge jump in defense when Gobert and Favs are on the court versus just Gobert.

I’m coming around to we should give a protected first for him. Top 16 this year, lotto the next year, top 10 the following year or it goes to two second rounders.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
The whole thing with Favors, the older he gets, the less of a 4 and more of a 5 he becomes.
Click to expand...

And the myth that he protects the rim is a problem if he is a 5.

Don't tell other teams until we trade him okay?
 
LoPo said:
I'm with you Numberica. I'm completely done with Favors "what-ifs." Its unfair to our franchise and to him.

He has been a good pro and loyal servant, but time to head our separate ways.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...

Locke made a good point about this today - due to the Sepien rule, we're hamstrung from dealing another first round pick until the year after the one we would owe to Chicago issues - and the uncertainty with the protections could hinder us in future deals.

He made some allusions to Cleveland's roster and struggles ... I wouldn't be surprised if that Jae Crowder / Favors based deal I suggested ends up happening or Favors otherwise ends up in Cleveland.
 
Sneakers said:
Locke made a good point about this today - due to the Sepien rule, we're hamstrung from dealing another first round pick until the year after the one we would owe to Chicago issues - and the uncertainty with the protections could hinder us in future deals.

He made some allusions to Cleveland's roster and struggles ... I wouldn't be surprised if that Jae Crowder / Favors based deal I suggested ends up happening or Favors otherwise ends up in Cleveland.
Click to expand...

We should not trade anymore picks anyway so I don’t care much about the Stepien issue. I want to keep our pick this year because it will be lotto or mid first and getting a prospect in now has more value to DM’s window.
 
Sneakers said:
Locke made a good point about this today - due to the Sepien rule, we're hamstrung from dealing another first round pick until the year after the one we would owe to Chicago issues - and the uncertainty with the protections could hinder us in future deals.

He made some allusions to Cleveland's roster and struggles ... I wouldn't be surprised if that Jae Crowder / Favors based deal I suggested ends up happening or Favors otherwise ends up in Cleveland.
Click to expand...
I’m very down for a Favors/Crowder swap. Chicago not really want Favors anyway, give them JJ and cough up a first rounder.
 
infection said:
I’m very down for a Favors/Crowder swap. Chicago not really want Favors anyway, give them JJ and cough up a first rounder.
Click to expand...
Or if we give them a first we could force Burks.
 
infection said:
Or if we give them a first we could force Burks.
Click to expand...

I agree but I think Favs would have to be moved either way. Maybe we could send both back. Bulls are way under the cap right now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top