What's new
By:

Royce to Brooklyn for a first rounder

One Brow said:
Capablanca: ten years without a loss (although, WWI was a factor there).

You have to wonder how good Morphy/Steinitz/Lasker/Capablanca/Fischer/Kasparov would have been with modern computers to help them prepare. It's probably a bigger advantage than modern NBA players have over the ones in the '60s.
Click to expand...
There are definitely moves in even classical positions and openings that are played now primarily due to chess engine preparation. As in from a mere human standpoint it doesn't look like a good move, and might look backward or strange, but is actually the best move in the position. I watch agadmator on youtube and he points this out from time to time. I imagine Fischer and Morphy would have been devastating with this level of prep. Hell Morphy would likely be the best of all time if he had just taken the game a little more seriously. He played far more for fun than for accolades, and it shows in some wild positions he put on the board, but he still overcame and won most of the time. Might have been the most gifted chess mind of all time. Played a blindfold simul against 8 other players at once. And frankly both Fischer and Morphy dealt with mental health issues that stunted their playing time and caused both men problems at one point or another in their lives. More examples that there is a fine line between "genius" and "madness". Another "if" to add to the story.

For my money the best ever have been Fischer, Kasparov, Carlsen, Morphy and Capablanca. But give many of the old school chess masters a modern chess engine and a full team of consultants to train and prepare and many would be at this same level.
 
I love Royce, He is worth a first round pick to Brooklyn. He does need some new scenery though. I think that the curse of Rudy Gobert is that every one of his teammates gets worse defensively the more they play with him, because it is easier to get lazy. This was the first year I ever saw an effort issue with Royce. It is time to try something new for everyone.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
Nah man... ryan keeping the bag.
Click to expand...
So for the first time in Jazz history, Ryan has paid luxury tax and done it two years in a row. But you are sure he isnt going to do it next year? You may be right that for some reason he has decided to not pay any tax but he easily could have avoided it the two years he paid it. And no need to repeat the oft quoted examples of Favs etc. Clearly we have made moves that were financially motivated but also ones that did nothing to hurt our immediate basketball output. I am sure there are limits for Ryan but so far he has been willing to pay. I suppose what happened this last year could convince him to get out but I doubt Ryan is done paying tax as an owner.
 
gomretat said:
So for the first time in Jazz history, Ryan has paid luxury tax and done it two years in a row. But you are sure he isnt going to do it next year? You may be right that for some reason he has decided to not pay any tax but he easily could have avoided it the two years he paid it. And no need to repeat the oft quoted examples of Favs etc. Clearly we have made moves that were financially motivated but also ones that did nothing to hurt our immediate basketball output. I am sure there are limits for Ryan but so far he has been willing to pay. I suppose what happened this last year could convince him to get out but I doubt Ryan is done paying tax as an owner.
Click to expand...
I'm aware... I think he keeps the savings on this deal. I think we stay out of the tax and I have no real problem with it. There is no reason to jump into the tax right now unless something amazing comes along.

The Favs deal did hurt us because the pick could have been used to improve on our weaknesses. I no longer believe we are a second tier contender so by all means take the savings. The tax distribution will be huge this year... so getting out of the tax replaces some of the coffers.
 
I really like this TPE too. If/when the Jazz nuke it, they might actually use it to take on some salary for an asset (assuming it doesn’t push them into or further into the tax).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top