What's new
By:

Rudy Gobert has got to go

fishonjazz said: ↑
You first post talks about cards and stuff.... talks about how people should respond to the op..... talks about how you would rather keep gobert than favors..... talks about how the jazz are better without gobert on the court with favors in his place.

Then you have a more posts throughout the thread about trading gobert. And other posts that kinda confuse what your original point was which seems to be that the jazz are better without gobert and he should be traded but that you would rather keep gobert.

Anywho, this isn't why I come to this site (wastes to much of my time. I would rather be reading my book before bed than having this stupid convo with you) so I think I will just put you on ignore at this point.


Archie Moses said:
Thank you. Not going to lose sleep over a dude that gets confused, but can spell it out, but is still confused and type lol @.

Good night, sir.


Hehepeepeecaca
Click to expand...

I told you before, Pee-Pee Man, Fish hit the nail on the head: You need to learn how to write, and probably think. You're full of Caca.
 
I think it's something we definitely should consider. Gobert is our most valuable player and has the ability to defer opponents away from the rim by simply standing around the rim. Gobert being able to do that alone makes a better player than Favors who is a better passer, finisher and can shoot while playing good defense, so the idea of trading Gobert does sound stupid. But the player Utah could pick up in return for Gobert may make Utah a better team than simply having Gobert and not getting full return of value from Favors or letting him walk. Which if we did trade Gobert I'm very confident we could get Favors to re-sign and would get him on a good deal.

Lets say we trade Gobert for CJ McCollum. Gobert is the more impactful player but McCollum under contract along with Favors under contract and playing the five makes us a better team than simply having Gobert. Which team would you rather to start next season?

Exum-Mitchell-Hood-Jerekbo-Gobert
- with Ingles, Burks, Thabo, Ekpe off the bench

or

McCollum-Mitchell-Hood-Jerkbo-Favors
- with Exum-Ingles-Burks-Thabo-Ekpe off the bench.
 
fishonjazz said:
I doubt it

It’s interesting that you often have to tell people repeatedly what you mean in what you post. I often see you telling people things like “reading comprehension matters” and things like that. Or saying things like “I never said that” or “that’s not what I meant”

Maybe you need to do a better job making your point clear when you post.

I have no idea what point you are trying to make in this particular discussion. That happens a lot with you.
Click to expand...

he likes to hedge his bets and obfuscate so that he can claim to not be wrong when things change
Ron Mexico said:
It looks like Boston really really needs another good big that can defend. They have an all-star level players that they dont need and isnt a part of their future sitting on the bench out for the year with an injury.

Would you trade Favors for their injured SF Haywood? I think I would ask for a pick as well but I might do that trade straight up. That could be good for both teams? It would hurt us a little this year but if he comes back that could give us a big three.
Click to expand...


I would totally do that purely for the pleasure of then trading him to the Kings or some other hell hole
 
Eenie-Meenie said:
fishonjazz said: ↑
You first post talks about cards and stuff.... talks about how people should respond to the op..... talks about how you would rather keep gobert than favors..... talks about how the jazz are better without gobert on the court with favors in his place.

Then you have a more posts throughout the thread about trading gobert. And other posts that kinda confuse what your original point was which seems to be that the jazz are better without gobert and he should be traded but that you would rather keep gobert.

Anywho, this isn't why I come to this site (wastes to much of my time. I would rather be reading my book before bed than having this stupid convo with you) so I think I will just put you on ignore at this point.




I told you before, Pee-Pee Man, Fish hit the nail on the head: You need to learn how to write, and probably think. You're full of Caca.
Click to expand...
When have you told me fish hit the nail on the head before?

And you have the audacity to lecture me on learning to write, Mr. Gobbledygook?

Can't wait til they bring negs back. That train is gonna hit you like the lil engine that could. Choo choo
 
Piso said:
Stats +/- (82 games.com) (only the 20 most used compositions) (november 12) :
Rubio-Favors-Gobert : 203 min ; rating : -69 disastrous
Rubio-Favors : 163 min ; rating : -33 bad
Rubio-Gobert : 68 min ; rating : +34 very good
Favors-Gobert : 21 min ; rating : +6 average
Only Rubio : 21 min ; rating : +25 excellent
Only Favors : 78 min ; rating : +15 average
Only Gobert : 13 min ; rating : +4 average
Sans Rubio/Favors/Gobert : 49 min ; rating : +45 excellent
Click to expand...
So it looks like, according to the stats, that rubio, favors, gobert is the worst grouping.
Rubio and favors (without gobert) is the next worst.
Rubio and gobert is the second best.

Looks like some people have some crow to eat in this thread since they stated so adamantly that it was fact, not opinion, that the jazz are worse with gobert and gobert is the problem.
Im certain they won't admit they were wrong though.
 
fishonjazz said:
So it looks like, according to the stats, that rubio, favors, gobert is the worst grouping.
Rubio and favors (without gobert) is the next worst.
Rubio and gobert is the second best.

Looks like some people have some crow to eat in this thread since they stated so adamantly that it was fact, not opinion, that the jazz are worse with gobert and gobert is the problem.
Im certain they won't admit they were wrong though.
Click to expand...
Rubio-Favors-Gobert : 203 min ; rating : -69 disastrous.

Favors and Gobert on the court with our starting PG is almost unwatchable whether you accept that or not. When they are on the court together without Rubio, in the small sample size of 21 minutes, they are an average +6.


If we were going by this chart, it shows the Jazz are + 15 with only Favors on the court and only + 4 with Gobert on the court. This backups the OP call to trade Gobert.

There is no crow to be eaten. You continue to show you can not read or do not understand basketball.

Gobert and Favors do not work with Rubio. Without Rubio on the court, or on the team, at best they'd be average because of spacing issues between them. It's not hard to understand. Go back to reading Dr. Seuss.[/QUOTE]
 
Its funny how in archies first post in this thread he says no one should talk **** to the OP (or something like that) for starting a thread called Rudy Gobert Has Got To Go (not maybe the jazz should consider trading rudy for the right offer) and then in that same post archie says that he would keep gobert. Lol.
 
fishonjazz said:
Its funny how in archies first post in this thread he says no one should talk **** to the OP (or something like that) for starting a thread called Rudy Gobert Has Got To Go (not maybe the jazz should consider trading rudy for the right offer) and then in that same post archie says that he would keep gobert. Lol.
Click to expand...
I would keep Gobert. I'm also aware that trading him could benefit the Jazz if the right pieces were offered. Favors or Gobert and/or Rubio need to be moved to improve the Jazz.

I don't think it's funny to you. You just keep typing cliches to rebuttal. It's not working.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top