Originally posted by CardiacCoug
View Post
"You Gotta Love It Baby" Official Jazz thread
Collapse
X
-
I think that's a fair point, but my eyes tell me differently. Just the other night I was telling my son that Favors is the type of player, because he lets the game come to him (doesn't demand the ball, etc), he'll have stretches where he doesn't produce a ton, but when he plays big minutes he almost always delivers big numbers. So for me, all that stat did was proved what I've seen. Again, I could be wrong and the stat could be misleading, but I don't think so.I'm like LeBron James.
-mpfunk
-
You mean the PER which is almost identical to Dwight Howard's rookie PER?Originally posted by CardiacCoug View Post
I would put more stock in Favors' PER of 16.9, decent but not spectacular.Prepare to put mustard on those words, for you will soon be consuming them, along with this slice of humble pie that comes direct from the oven of shame set at gas mark “egg on your face”! -- Moss
There's three rules that I live by: never get less than twelve hours sleep; never play cards with a guy who's got the same first name as a city; and never go near a lady's got a tattoo of a dagger on her body. Now you stick to that, everything else is cream cheese. --Coach Finstock
Comment
-
The problem in putting more stock in his per in this argument is that the big lineup has succeeded in large part on the strength of its defense. The big lineup has posted dominating defensive numbers, and the biggest difference between that lineup and the others is favors anchoring the middle. He's our best individual post defender, he's our best weakside help guy, he's our best snr guy, etc. All of that has a big impact of the big lineup's success and is not going to be captured looking at his per.Originally posted by CardiacCoug View PostTrust me I want Favors on the court more and I love that big lineup with Favors, Jefferson, and Millsap all on the court.
But that stat proves nothing, I heard Locke talking about it too and thought the same thing: very small sample size and Corbin may have kept Favors in more when the Jazz were playing well, but it's not necessarily causative.
I would put more stock in Favors' PER of 16.9, decent but not spectacular.So Russell...what do you love about music? To begin with, everything.
Comment
-
Ahearn isn't worth a sack of shit."Either evolution or intelligent design can account for the athlete, but neither can account for the sports fan." - Robert Brault
"Once I seen the trades go down and the other guys signed elsewhere," he said, "I knew it was my time now." - Derrick Favors
Comment
-
Sure that lineup works because of defense and rebounding -- also that it's putting the 5 best players on the court and avoiding putting a really weak link like Carroll/Miles/Raja out there.Originally posted by MarkGrace View PostThe problem in putting more stock in his per in this argument is that the big lineup has succeeded in large part on the strength of its defense. The big lineup has posted dominating defensive numbers, and the biggest difference between that lineup and the others is favors anchoring the middle. He's our best individual post defender, he's our best weakside help guy, he's our best snr guy, etc. All of that has a big impact of the big lineup's success and is not going to be captured looking at his per.
I'm as high on Favors as anybody and agree he needs more playing time and sure when you consider that he is statistically a well above average offensive player (despite looking a little lost and clumsy on offense at time) and then brings so much on defense he should definitely be on the court as much as possible.
Comment
-
Bump.Originally posted by Blueintheface View PostAhearn isn't worth a sack of shit."Either evolution or intelligent design can account for the athlete, but neither can account for the sports fan." - Robert Brault
"Once I seen the trades go down and the other guys signed elsewhere," he said, "I knew it was my time now." - Derrick Favors
Comment
-
-
Comment