What's new

Rubio traded to Jazz

has played just 70 or more games three times in his six NBA seasons due to injuries.
Lots of players like that tbh.
 
More fun? What are we, 8 years old? I want to win and to do that, Hayward needs to ****ing stay.

And trading a non lottery pick next year for a good productive player makes us a worse option for Hayward? Alright.

No one try to argue that we just got worse. Hill was not currently part of the roster. So he either wasn't coming anyway or wanted an insane contract.

OR

He was willing to come back for a good deal and Hayward also agreed to come back if Hill did. And Lindsey said "nah **** that we want Rubio more" bye Hayward.

You tell me what's more likely.
 
That was back at the contract extension talks when they thought there would be a bigger FA PG market. So many PG's have changed teams it shrunk it a lot.
I see. I was wrong then.
 
Rubio getting a coach who's actually good offensively might help a bit.

I know I'm in the minority here, but I prefer Rubio to Hil, and I said that months ago. I have real faith in hm,

Like I said earlier today, I can see a reality where the Jazz are better with Rubio over Hill, I just don't think it's likely.

This feels like the last T'Wolves trade for Al Jefferson. Talented player, but bringing him (a square peg) into a round hole. The fit feels wonky unless the Jazz change how they play or that Rubio 2nd half shooting is now the norm.
 
Reaction in this thread reminds me a lot of last year, when everybody assumed Hill was a below-average PG and the Jazz were making a horrible mistake.

The metrics on Rubio all tell the same story: All else equal, the Wolves were quite damn good when he was on the court, and fell to pieces without him.



The pick is top 14 protected.

What's your point? If they trade westbrook and go into a rebuild, it turns into 2 2nd rounders in 3 years.
 
Back
Top