What's new

Why wouldn't you start Trey Burke?

Due to teh suckiness
 
Apparently the author of that decided to just ignore the defensive impact that Exum had on a team known for its defensive identity. I don't know how some of these people actually get paid to write this crap.
 
One line answers the question the writer poses in his headline:

"The beauty of Burke's 12.8 points per game is that he shot 36% from the floor."

Great...let's find the players with the lowest shooting percentages over a 2-yr period and trade for all of them. That way we just need to hope they can improve their shooting by 8-10%. What a brilliant idea!

Then the writer makes the astute observation that "if Burke can get his shooting percentage near the mid-40's then he'll be averaging close to 16 points a night."

Yep, just what we want...a vertically-challenged chucker who freezes out the Jazz' best player when he's in the game. Exum may/may not be a bust. That has yet to be determined. But what I think what HAS been determined is Trey is not going to be the starting PG on a contending team. DL made a huge mistake in drafting him. AT least he has the good sense to acknowledge his error by trying to trade him.
 
Apparently the author of that decided to just ignore the defensive impact that Exum had on a team known for its defensive identity. I don't know how some of these people actually get paid to write this crap.

Sometimes it's all about who you know.
 
Wow that guy is clueless. It is kind of funny to read though. The reason they aren't starting Burke is they are afraid of being embarrassed that they made a mistake. Yeah, that's it. Good call.
 
Wow!! Lol. Love how he spins the fact Trey shot 36% as something good, and no mention of how many offensive possessions the Jazz waste thanks to Burke.
 
The Jazz have enough talent in their starting lineup they would be better off starting me at pg than a chucker. I'd probably just stand around and smoke cigarettes but at least I wouldn't be taking shots away from legit studs.
 
One line answers the question the writer poses in his headline:

"The beauty of Burke's 12.8 points per game is that he shot 36% from the floor."

Great...let's find the players with the lowest shooting percentages over a 2-yr period and trade for all of them. That way we just need to hope they can improve their shooting by 8-10%. What a brilliant idea!

Then the writer makes the astute observation that "if Burke can get his shooting percentage near the mid-40's then he'll be averaging close to 16 points a night."

Yep, just what we want...a vertically-challenged chucker who freezes out the Jazz' best player when he's in the game. Exum may/may not be a bust. That has yet to be determined. But what I think what HAS been determined is Trey is not going to be the starting PG on a contending team. DL made a huge mistake in drafting him. AT least he has the good sense to acknowledge his error by trying to trade him.

Regardless how people feel about the article his point was that if Burke was scoring 12.8 on such a low shooting percentage if he improves than it'll be far more higher on a similar amount of attempts. Which is common sense. He wasn't trying to claim 36% is an acceptable average.
 
Regardless how people feel about the article his point was that if Burke was scoring 12.8 on such a low shooting percentage if he improves than it'll be far more higher on a similar amount of attempts. Which is common sense. He wasn't trying to claim 36% is an acceptable average.

Everybody understands what his point was. It's just a very stupid point. If Trey Burke improves his FG%, I'm guessing it will be in large part because he takes smarter (and therefore, fewer) shots.
 
Written by a guy who it seems likely never watched a Jazz game last year. If only Trey could shoot in the mid-40s, LOL. If only Trey could grow 3 inches and get a lot faster and leap a lot higher too, then he would REALLY be something.
 
this guy probably thinks Rudy should be demoted back to the bench due to low offensive production and the superstar Enes Kanter brought back to start.
 
Top