Will Burks and Kanter get contract extensions?

[Stifle Tower]

Can someone explain to me wtf we didn't re-sign Demarre Carroll?

In his last season with the Jazz, Carroll shot 46%/29%. Great hustle, but just an average player. He's 27 yrs. old, so it's not like he has a ton of upside. He shot better this year with Atlanta, but he's not really an impact player. He's a fill-in starter or an energy guy off the bench.

Atlanta went 38-44 in a weak EC. It's not like Millsap, Carroll and Jefferson led their team to AMAZING records. Carroll is very replaceable by any number of players, whether it be a 1-yr "tank" option like RJ, or a young guy with upside at #23 or #35 or some other free agent. And if the Jazz get Wiggins? Then all the better with a wing rotation of Wiggins, Hayward and Burks.

 

[Deleted member 848]

Then why pop into the thread at all? I explained that it was a matter of being able to carry bulk/weight/strength. Do you pride yourself on being pedantic? Willfully ignorant (since you apparently read my explanatory post)?

I popped in to make two points:

I'd argue the reverse-- I'd say it's mostly motivation and scheme, and less-so foot speed.

which I would consider a worthy contribution for an internet forum; and

yeah GVC's use of 'bigger' is hilariously ambiguous. You've been pretty fair in your posts, Fish.

Just use a different word, and carry on bro (talking to GVC here).

now if you consider this excessively pedantic, then you really need to calm down, and get your panties out of a not. This is Jazzfanz, guy. Most normal people would be like "yeah I used bigger in this context, I'm probably better off explaining it in this way from now on". But that's your prerogative.

Would be awesome if you actually had something substantive to contribute.

I did contribute (see above)--genuinely do not care whether you find it substantive or not. Would be awesome if you weren't perpetually PMSing.

Wouldn't it be great if Thibs brought his grand defense to Utah so we could watch a team that is dead last in offense? That would be super.

Did I make a post in this thread clamouring for Thibs? Nope. My point was that defensive rankings arent a direct correlation of player personnel.

Recently, he made a bold, second-round prediction about the Portland Trailblazers.

I did, and it's safe to say that I've been proven wrong by the Spurs so far. Though, I wouldn't say that it's purely because of their inability to contain Tony Parker-- it's mostly because of the disparity in bench production. Mo Williams being out with injury didn't help.

I'm glad that you've showed evidence of me being wrong before. Not sure what that has to do with this thread tho-- are you suggesting that I don't regularly make substantive contributions on this forum?

 

[Deleted member 848]

In his last season with the Jazz, Carroll shot 46%/29%. Great hustle, but just an average player. He's 27 yrs. old, so it's not like he has a ton of upside. He shot better this year with Atlanta, but he's not really an impact player. He's a fill-in starter or an energy guy off the bench.

Atlanta went 38-44 in a weak EC. It's not like Millsap, Carroll and Jefferson led their team to AMAZING records. Carroll is very replaceable by any number of players, whether it be a 1-yr "tank" option like RJ, or a young guy with upside at #23 or #35 or some other free agent. And if the Jazz get Wiggins? Then all the better with a wing rotation of Wiggins, Hayward and Burks.

I think you took my point a little too far. I'm not suggesting that Carroll is a game-changer, but I'm not sure what more could have been asked from a player with his contract, playing the role that he played. He's quite competent as a 5th starter, and he wouldn't have demanded a lot of money contract-wise. I made no reference to Millsap and Jefferson.

Only reason that it'd be nice, is because this draft isn't really filled with potential 3andD candidates, except for that one dude in the 2nd round from France I think. Forget his name. 6'9", long wingspan.

 

[fishonjazz]

Would be awesome if you weren't perpetually PMSing.

Truth.

Never heard a nice thing from the dude.... and thats ok i guess

 

[ncoloradojazz]

kanter is garbage

 

[[size/HUGE] fixed [/size]]

I popped in to make two points:




which I would consider a worthy contribution for an internet forum; and



now if you consider this excessively pedantic, then you really need to calm down, and get your panties out of a not. This is Jazzfanz, guy. Most normal people would be like "yeah I used bigger in this context, I'm probably better off explaining it in this way from now on". But that's your prerogative.



I did contribute (see above)--genuinely do not care whether you find it substantive or not. Would be awesome if you weren't perpetually PMSing.



Did I make a post in this thread clamouring for Thibs? Nope. My point was that defensive rankings arent a direct correlation of player personnel.



I did, and it's safe to say that I've been proven wrong by the Spurs so far. Though, I wouldn't say that it's purely because of their inability to contain Tony Parker-- it's mostly because of the disparity in bench production. Mo Williams being out with injury didn't help.

I'm glad that you've showed evidence of me being wrong before. Not sure what that has to do with this thread tho-- are you suggesting that I don't regularly make substantive contributions on this forum?

#diaryqueened

 

[Hantlers]

Beal has a bigger frame and more bulk/strength. Alec weighs more because of his length (if he actually weighs more).

Just to give you an idea, at their respective pre-draft combines, Alec had a standing reach of 8'7.5'', weighed 193 lbs, and did 5 bench press reps. Beal had a standing reach of 8'4'', weighed 202, and did 8 bench press reps.

You are of course aware that having longer arms makes it more difficult to bench, right?

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

Then why pop into the thread at all? I explained that it was a matter of being able to carry bulk/weight/strength. Do you pride yourself on being pedantic? Willfully ignorant (since you apparently read my explanatory post)?

Would be awesome if you actually had something substantive to contribute.

There's a school of thought that using the word 'pedantic' is itself pedantic.