Around The NBA

[cjbulls]

Well first it's simple math. 205 compared to 76.

Second, Griffin is better if he's healthy and would be a very dynamic duo with Mitchell.

Mitchell and Gobert impact winning? They're 1-8 in the 2nd round.

Who do you think is getting them into the second round? They’re still young players, getting better.

Blake isn’t the same player now, unfortunately. I don’t know if you’ve been following the Pistons but they aren’t winning anything with Blake. Not only that, but his trajectory is downward while Gobert is mid prime.

Before he got injured before this past year, he was playing at a really high level and willed that pathetic team into the playoffs.

And then you can flip him and other assets for someone better if you like. No one is touching that terrible gobert deal.

Blake’s big problem is his injury history. Why would you rely on that when you’re trying to contend for a title and keep Mitchell happy? Plus you’re taking any chance on a 31 yo guy that relies on athleticism for your big deal. That’s dangerous on its own, even before factoring in the injuries.

You could flip Gobert tomorrow, that’s the whole reason he was signed, because someone else would have paid him anyways.

[TheStig]

Who do you think is getting them into the second round? They’re still young players, getting better.

Blake isn’t the same player now, unfortunately. I don’t know if you’ve been following the Pistons but they aren’t winning anything with Blake. Not only that, but his trajectory is downward while Gobert is mid prime.

Before he got injured before this past year, he was playing at a really high level and willed that pathetic team into the playoffs.

And then you can flip him and other assets for someone better if you like. No one is touching that terrible gobert deal.

Blake’s big problem is his injury history. Why would you rely on that when you’re trying to contend for a title and keep Mitchell happy? Plus you’re taking any chance on a 31 yo guy that relies on athleticism for your big deal. That’s dangerous on its own, even before factoring in the injuries.

You could flip Gobert tomorrow, that’s the whole reason he was signed, because someone else would have paid him anyways.

Blake was a random example. But he is actually very skilled. Don't get caught up in the lob city days when CP3 pounded the air out of the ball. But if healthy, Griffin is a better player. You could trade him for other people as a 26m expiring.

And what are they contending for? They are 1-8 in the 2nd round. That's no contender.

Doubtful. No one wants to pay a defensive center 40+ mill a year.

[TheStig]

I guess PG13 shouldn't be paid either.

He's a 2 way star that had a bad series. I think it's a fair deal or maybe a slight overpay.

[MrFortune3]

WOW Gobert got that 200 million dollar deal.

I mean I like Gobert, but that is ridiculous in this day and age.

Honestly, would you rather pay Gobert 200 mil or pay Whiteside 2mil. Or Howard 2 mil or Mcgee 2 mill on 1 year deals. I can go on and on.

Supermax is for the best of the best. A league wide franchise player type. What Utah has done is like paying Andre Drummond 200 million. You can do it but most likely regret it.

Gobert is a constant threat to win DPOY and he is the key to their defensive scheme.
People need to stop parroting the "bigs who cannot score heavily on offensive have no place in today's game" nonsense.
As much as people don't want to hear it, Gobert is just as important to the Jazz as Mitchell. You take Gobert off that team and it won't matter what Mitchell does, they will sink. The same is true with taking Mitchell off the team. They need one another and the Jazz had to keep him.

Whiteside isn't near the defender that Gobert is. Saving money does not help make the Jazz better in that much of a downgrade.

Also, the Supermax is 228, he signed for 205. 23 mil less than the supermax.

This is a silly statement. Take Mitchell off the team and they are in contention for the #1 draft pick. Trying to equate the two is silly. Every team in the league would take Mitchell over Gobert.

This move basically caps them into being a 1st round team. They don't have any flexibility to improve and Gobert will decline as this deal happens. I will agree he's a excellent defensive C. But he's the only defensive specialist in the league making 40 mill a year........

He's a good player on a great players contract in a small market.

It's not silly at all. You take Gobert off that team and they have no defensive anchor, lose his rebounding and overall impact.
That team will look a hell of a lot worse just like if you take Mitchell's scoring off the team.

Fans are way too obsessed with the narrative of not paying defensive players. It needs to stop. Gobert is a great defensive player and he sacrifices on offense to let Mitchell eat. He is dynamic in his role and was paid accordingly for it.

[R3AL1TY]

Gobert almost getting Giannis money

He's a good interior big, but I wouldn't pay him that much. But it probably won't affect them much since the only other player that will make big money on their team is Murray. It will just be harder for them to sign a good FA role player or star from the outside, but there aren't much available right now anyway.

Murray ??

Not saying he should get $200M too, but he's going to get paid.

Edit: Oops. I don't know why I had Jamal Murray's name in my head this whole time lol

I meant to say Donovan Mitchell.

[the ultimates]

Gobert is a constant threat to win DPOY and he is the key to their defensive scheme.
People need to stop parroting the "bigs who cannot score heavily on offensive have no place in today's game" nonsense.
As much as people don't want to hear it, Gobert is just as important to the Jazz as Mitchell. You take Gobert off that team and it won't matter what Mitchell does, they will sink. The same is true with taking Mitchell off the team. They need one another and the Jazz had to keep him.

Whiteside isn't near the defender that Gobert is. Saving money does not help make the Jazz better in that much of a downgrade.

Also, the Supermax is 228, he signed for 205. 23 mil less than the supermax.

This is a silly statement. Take Mitchell off the team and they are in contention for the #1 draft pick. Trying to equate the two is silly. Every team in the league would take Mitchell over Gobert.

This move basically caps them into being a 1st round team. They don't have any flexibility to improve and Gobert will decline as this deal happens. I will agree he's a excellent defensive C. But he's the only defensive specialist in the league making 40 mill a year........

He's a good player on a great players contract in a small market.

It's not silly at all. You take Gobert off that team and they have no defensive anchor, lose his rebounding and overall impact.
That team will look a hell of a lot worse just like if you take Mitchell's scoring off the team.

Fans are way too obsessed with the narrative of not paying defensive players. It needs to stop. Gobert is a great defensive player and he sacrifices on offense to let Mitchell eat. He is dynamic in his role and was paid accordingly for it.

What is Gobert sacrificing offensively for Mitchell? Gobert has no range and shows flashes of an occasional jump hook but it's nothing you can make a major part of your offense.

[dice]

This is a silly statement. Take Mitchell off the team and they are in contention for the #1 draft pick. Trying to equate the two is silly. Every team in the league would take Mitchell over Gobert.

This move basically caps them into being a 1st round team. They don't have any flexibility to improve and Gobert will decline as this deal happens. I will agree he's a excellent defensive C. But he's the only defensive specialist in the league making 40 mill a year........

He's a good player on a great players contract in a small market.

It's not silly at all. You take Gobert off that team and they have no defensive anchor, lose his rebounding and overall impact.
That team will look a hell of a lot worse just like if you take Mitchell's scoring off the team.

Fans are way too obsessed with the narrative of not paying defensive players. It needs to stop. Gobert is a great defensive player and he sacrifices on offense to let Mitchell eat. He is dynamic in his role and was paid accordingly for it.

What is Gobert sacrificing offensively for Mitchell? Gobert has no range and shows flashes of an occasional jump hook but it's nothing you can make a major part of your offense.

i don't agree that gobert is particularly sacrificing an offensive role for mitchell. he's an elite garbage man with ability in the open floor and some post ability. and you can make an argument that gobert isn't worth the max. but this idea that mitchell is some elite offensive player simply isn't true. average team ranks since mitchell has been there:

offense 14th
defense 6th

mitchell so far is a modest efficiency volume scorer. the kind of player who limits the potential of your offense if you're paying him big bucks to be its #1

[bulls_troy]

So Kuzma 3yr, $40m hey. Kinda sets the value on Lauri??

[the ultimates]

It's not silly at all. You take Gobert off that team and they have no defensive anchor, lose his rebounding and overall impact.
That team will look a hell of a lot worse just like if you take Mitchell's scoring off the team.

Fans are way too obsessed with the narrative of not paying defensive players. It needs to stop. Gobert is a great defensive player and he sacrifices on offense to let Mitchell eat. He is dynamic in his role and was paid accordingly for it.

What is Gobert sacrificing offensively for Mitchell? Gobert has no range and shows flashes of an occasional jump hook but it's nothing you can make a major part of your offense.

i don't agree that gobert is particularly sacrificing an offensive role for mitchell. he's an elite garbage man with ability in the open floor and some post ability. and you can make an argument that gobert isn't worth the max. but this idea that mitchell is some elite offensive player simply isn't true. average team ranks since mitchell has been there:

offense 14th
defense 6th

mitchell so far is a modest efficiency volume scorer. the kind of player who limits the potential of your offense if you're paying him big bucks to be its #1

If the Jazz are 14th with Mitchell since he's been there where would they be without him?

Wizards offensive rating with Beal last three seasons 14th, 14th, 15th.
Suns offensive rating with Booker last three seasons 30th, 28th, 12th.

Mithcell like Booker and Beal made a large jump in efficiency his third year, if he maintains that or betters it as the other two have that doesn't in any way limit your offensive potential.

[TheStig]

Gobert is a constant threat to win DPOY and he is the key to their defensive scheme.
People need to stop parroting the "bigs who cannot score heavily on offensive have no place in today's game" nonsense.
As much as people don't want to hear it, Gobert is just as important to the Jazz as Mitchell. You take Gobert off that team and it won't matter what Mitchell does, they will sink. The same is true with taking Mitchell off the team. They need one another and the Jazz had to keep him.

Whiteside isn't near the defender that Gobert is. Saving money does not help make the Jazz better in that much of a downgrade.

Also, the Supermax is 228, he signed for 205. 23 mil less than the supermax.

This is a silly statement. Take Mitchell off the team and they are in contention for the #1 draft pick. Trying to equate the two is silly. Every team in the league would take Mitchell over Gobert.

This move basically caps them into being a 1st round team. They don't have any flexibility to improve and Gobert will decline as this deal happens. I will agree he's a excellent defensive C. But he's the only defensive specialist in the league making 40 mill a year........

He's a good player on a great players contract in a small market.

It's not silly at all. You take Gobert off that team and they have no defensive anchor, lose his rebounding and overall impact.
That team will look a hell of a lot worse just like if you take Mitchell's scoring off the team.

Fans are way too obsessed with the narrative of not paying defensive players. It needs to stop. Gobert is a great defensive player and he sacrifices on offense to let Mitchell eat. He is dynamic in his role and was paid accordingly for it.

He is a very good defensive player. But the league is going away from defensive specialist centers. You don't pay one 40+ mill a year.

But Mitchell means far more to them and they'd still be in playoff contention without Gobert. This isn't the 1980's when everyone is trying to drive past the center in the paint.

He's not sacrificing his offense. He has no offensive game outside of putbacks and layups/dunks.

It's just a bad deal. Sometime you just have to let someone walk or trade them when the salary is insane. They're team is hamstrung as a perennial 1st round team.

[cjbulls]

I generally dislike team-based advanced stats, but Gobert's name is consistently among the top players in the NBA by those metrics. The sheer number of consistent results leads me to believe he is being a bit underrated.

ESPN RPM - #10
Win Shares - #5
DRtg - #8
Basic Plus/Minus - #20
VORP - #12
82games Simple Rating - #19
RAPTOR - #7
BPM - #26
RPM - #12
PIPM - #8

[TheStig]

It's not silly at all. You take Gobert off that team and they have no defensive anchor, lose his rebounding and overall impact.
That team will look a hell of a lot worse just like if you take Mitchell's scoring off the team.

Fans are way too obsessed with the narrative of not paying defensive players. It needs to stop. Gobert is a great defensive player and he sacrifices on offense to let Mitchell eat. He is dynamic in his role and was paid accordingly for it.

What is Gobert sacrificing offensively for Mitchell? Gobert has no range and shows flashes of an occasional jump hook but it's nothing you can make a major part of your offense.

i don't agree that gobert is particularly sacrificing an offensive role for mitchell. he's an elite garbage man with ability in the open floor and some post ability. and you can make an argument that gobert isn't worth the max. but this idea that mitchell is some elite offensive player simply isn't true. average team ranks since mitchell has been there:

offense 14th
defense 6th

mitchell so far is a modest efficiency volume scorer. the kind of player who limits the potential of your offense if you're paying him big bucks to be its #1

Or his offense is limited because there is a big camping out in the lane because his center can only do lobs/layups and put backs.

[DASMACKDOWN]

Read on Twitter

[dice]

What is Gobert sacrificing offensively for Mitchell? Gobert has no range and shows flashes of an occasional jump hook but it's nothing you can make a major part of your offense.

i don't agree that gobert is particularly sacrificing an offensive role for mitchell. he's an elite garbage man with ability in the open floor and some post ability. and you can make an argument that gobert isn't worth the max. but this idea that mitchell is some elite offensive player simply isn't true. average team ranks since mitchell has been there:

offense 14th
defense 6th

mitchell so far is a modest efficiency volume scorer. the kind of player who limits the potential of your offense if you're paying him big bucks to be its #1

If the Jazz are 14th with Mitchell since he's been there where would they be without him?

and their defense w/o gobert? which side of the ball has been more fundamental to their success?

Wizards offensive rating with Beal last three seasons 14th, 14th, 15th.

another guy who's not super efficient. you're making my point for me

Suns offensive rating with Booker last three seasons 30th, 28th, 12th.

Mithcell like Booker and Beal made a large jump in efficiency his third year, if he maintains that or betters it as the other two have that doesn't in any way limit your offensive potential.

i dunno if i'd call a 2 point jump a large one, but certainly he can continue to improve

[dice]

What is Gobert sacrificing offensively for Mitchell? Gobert has no range and shows flashes of an occasional jump hook but it's nothing you can make a major part of your offense.

i don't agree that gobert is particularly sacrificing an offensive role for mitchell. he's an elite garbage man with ability in the open floor and some post ability. and you can make an argument that gobert isn't worth the max. but this idea that mitchell is some elite offensive player simply isn't true. average team ranks since mitchell has been there:

offense 14th
defense 6th

mitchell so far is a modest efficiency volume scorer. the kind of player who limits the potential of your offense if you're paying him big bucks to be its #1

Or his offense is limited because there is a big camping out in the lane because his center can only do lobs/layups and put backs.

or that helps mitchell's offense because the opposing big can't leave his man to help w/o getting burned badly

[MrFortune3]

This is a silly statement. Take Mitchell off the team and they are in contention for the #1 draft pick. Trying to equate the two is silly. Every team in the league would take Mitchell over Gobert.

This move basically caps them into being a 1st round team. They don't have any flexibility to improve and Gobert will decline as this deal happens. I will agree he's a excellent defensive C. But he's the only defensive specialist in the league making 40 mill a year........

He's a good player on a great players contract in a small market.

It's not silly at all. You take Gobert off that team and they have no defensive anchor, lose his rebounding and overall impact.
That team will look a hell of a lot worse just like if you take Mitchell's scoring off the team.

Fans are way too obsessed with the narrative of not paying defensive players. It needs to stop. Gobert is a great defensive player and he sacrifices on offense to let Mitchell eat. He is dynamic in his role and was paid accordingly for it.

What is Gobert sacrificing offensively for Mitchell? Gobert has no range and shows flashes of an occasional jump hook but it's nothing you can make a major part of your offense.

Sacrificing might have been the wrong term for it. But if you remember, it came out later on that the real issue between Rudy and Donovan was more related to Rudy wanting more touches on offense and had been trying to be more vocal about it than COVID-19 since they were not sure who contracted it first and who gave it to whom.

Rudy only takes just over 8 shots a game. Mitchell isn't the most efficient star player in the league so if you give Gobert a few more touches he can give you 17-19 a game instead of 15.9

[MrFortune3]

This is a silly statement. Take Mitchell off the team and they are in contention for the #1 draft pick. Trying to equate the two is silly. Every team in the league would take Mitchell over Gobert.

This move basically caps them into being a 1st round team. They don't have any flexibility to improve and Gobert will decline as this deal happens. I will agree he's a excellent defensive C. But he's the only defensive specialist in the league making 40 mill a year........

He's a good player on a great players contract in a small market.

It's not silly at all. You take Gobert off that team and they have no defensive anchor, lose his rebounding and overall impact.
That team will look a hell of a lot worse just like if you take Mitchell's scoring off the team.

Fans are way too obsessed with the narrative of not paying defensive players. It needs to stop. Gobert is a great defensive player and he sacrifices on offense to let Mitchell eat. He is dynamic in his role and was paid accordingly for it.

He is a very good defensive player. But the league is going away from defensive specialist centers. You don't pay one 40+ mill a year.

But Mitchell means far more to them and they'd still be in playoff contention without Gobert. This isn't the 1980's when everyone is trying to drive past the center in the paint.

He's not sacrificing his offense. He has no offensive game outside of putbacks and layups/dunks.

It's just a bad deal. Sometime you just have to let someone walk or trade them when the salary is insane. They're team is hamstrung as a perennial 1st round team.

Maybe they'd still be in contention but they wouldn't likely be making the playoffs consecutively.

The Blazers have 2 studs on offense before their WCF run they were 2-8 in the 2nd round of the playoffs, similar to the Jazz who are 1-8.

You need offense and defense to win in the NBA, especially in the playoffs. You don't take a defensive player like Gobert off the Jazz and there not be a significant drop off.

It's one thing to say you dislike the contract but Gobert is a franchise player for the Jazz and you retain franchise players. Letting them walk tends to make your team worse and rebuilding a big pain.

[DASMACKDOWN]

Read on Twitter

[MrFortune3]

Read on Twitter

20 mil? For what? He better go HAM if he wants 20 mil.

[DASMACKDOWN]

That has to be his agent spewing for 20 mil. Lauri clearly is at a 16mil rate or less right now. Thats even based on his peers or players who have similar playing traits. Geesh Sabonis got a 4/77mil deal which isnt 20 mil. And Sabonis is clearly much better than Lauri right now. Sabonis was a freaking allstar last year.