What's new
By:

Zach Lowe 'Wingspan and a Prayer' Rudy Gobert Article

Twin Towers said:
Rudy Gobert can easily average 10 points 10 rebounds and 2 blocks per game.

The problem is everyone is stat whores now days and they don't think that is good enough. And big guys don't get the credit they deserve anymore. The late 90's & early 2000's is where it started to change.

Guys like Ben Wallace, Dennis Rodman, Luc Longley, Bill Laimbeer etc etc wouldn't even play in todays game because these stupid GM's are looking for complete players who can do everything at he PF and C positions.

Which is ridiculous. Great defenses have GREAT role players who can do the little things that never show up in the box score. But GM's are lazy and don't know basketball anymore and they just look at numbers.

Gobert needs to bulk up a little bit and he needs to learn to play within himself. He should get his points off passes under the basket and offensive rebounds. You don't go to him in the post. If he learns that he can be an amazing center. But he needs playing time to develop.
Click to expand...

It seems to me like defensive centers have been getting a lot of credit pretty much since Dallas won the championship with Tyson Chandler. Now guys like Hibbert, Noah, Lopez, etc are being valued more properly.
 
To me the question of the article was who is the next Tyson Chandler?

After going through the usual suspects Lowe mentions Gobert. Lowe is focusing on him as a intriguing player who is playing in the FIBA championships who most people haven't heard of.
 
Qman said:
And all historical precedents are void if Corbin was the coach. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

How many NBA coaches would play the rookie Gobert major minutes with Jefferson, Millsap, Favors, and Kanter on the team? I agree the historic precedence does not apply due to the depth of the competition, but I don't think Corbin is the reason.
 
One Brow said:
How many NBA coaches would play the rookie Gobert major minutes with Jefferson, Millsap, Favors, and Kanter on the team? I agree the historic precedence does not apply due to the depth of the competition, but I don't think Corbin is the reason.
Click to expand...

Did you miss last season? Rudy didn't have to compete for time with Jefferson and Millsap, as they weren't on our team.

Gobert rarely played, and Kanter only saw 26 mins (in a very jerked around fashion) because Corbin decided to play Marvin 25.4 minutes a night as a PF, because of "spacing" that we never really had (despite defense and rebounds) because RJ was logging 27 mins a night as an SF, so Marv couldn't play there. The other bigs minutes went to Jeremy at the tune of 18.3 a night, despite the fact that Jeremy was as close to as raw as Gobert as a big man, but without the potential and upside for the position.

Those decisions were Corbin's. Not hate, just facts.
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
Rudy has a very good shot of being an exception to this arbitrary rule.
Click to expand...

Why? I understand 500 minutes is a number that seems arbitrary, but it's not totally arbitrary since it does measure how much playing time a guy earned. Given that the failure rate is greater than 98% under that threshold, and it seems safe to say that the failure rate is not that high above the 500 minute mark, I don't think the conclusion is arbitrarily derived.

As a result, I think in order to say he's got a very good shot you'd have to figure out what makes Gobert closer to the exceptions than to the norm for that group.

Twin Towers said:
Rudy Gobert can easily average 10 points 10 rebounds and 2 blocks per game.

The problem is everyone is stat whores now days and they don't think that is good enough. And big guys don't get the credit they deserve anymore. The late 90's & early 2000's is where it started to change.

Guys like Ben Wallace, Dennis Rodman, Luc Longley, Bill Laimbeer etc etc wouldn't even play in todays game because these stupid GM's are looking for complete players who can do everything at he PF and C positions.
Click to expand...

I think this is very misinformed. Ben Wallace was one of the original poster children for a nascent +/- argument in the early 2000s during his original Detroit run when he put up a couple scoreless triple/doubles. Bill Laimbeer would have rated as above league average for a power forward in PER nearly every season he was in the league, including when he was 36. The Dennis Rodman assertion is ridiculous on face. The article itself posits how valuable everyone understands that Tyson Chandler is and we've all seen how valuable guys like Omer Asik are regarded around the league when they are essentially this generation's version of the player you are mentioning.

Advanced stats, particularly RPM, help bolster effective non-scorers. Not the other way around.
 
Sirkickyass said:
Why? I understand 500 minutes is a number that seems arbitrary, but it's not totally arbitrary since it does measure how much playing time a guy earned. Given that the failure rate is greater than 98% under that threshold, and it seems safe to say that the failure rate is not that high above the 500 minute mark, I don't think the conclusion is arbitrarily derived.

As a result, I think in order to say he's got a very good shot you'd have to figure out what makes Gobert closer to the exceptions than to the norm for that group.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's Gobert's fault that he got less than 500 minutes. His effort, energy, attitude and results should have resulted in more time than that.
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
I don't think it's Gobert's fault that he got less than 500 minutes. His effort, energy, attitude and results should have resulted in more time than that.
Click to expand...
I agree
 
Yeah, he should have gotten more minutes. I do remember being incredibly frustrated by Gobert's inability to finish with contact or catch passes in traffic. That is probably why Corbin played him so few minutes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top