ImageImageImage

Darrell Arthur

Moderator: THE J0KER

NuggetsWY
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 10,323
And1: 4,056
Joined: Oct 28, 2015
Location: Cheyenne, WY
 

Darrell Arthur 

Post#1 » by NuggetsWY » Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:30 pm

Arthur gets $7.5m this year and a player option for the same next year.
Should we be surprised he is injured to start preseason? After all, it's pretty clear they don't intend to use him. Add to that, his history. Granted not all of his missed games were due to injury, but if a player isn't playing because of an injury or because he isn't wanted, it amounts to the same thing.

He started with Memphis for four years and played 63 games, 32 games, 89 games, 59 games - not very good.
Denver signed him and he's been here four years so far; 68 games 58 games, 70 games, 41 games.

Personally I like him as a player and from what little I know, he seems like a good person as well.
But why did they sign Arthur if he had so many injuries and/or they did not plan to play him?
Powder Blue
Analyst
Posts: 3,444
And1: 642
Joined: Dec 28, 2004
   

Re: Darrell Arthur 

Post#2 » by Powder Blue » Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:33 pm

...cause he's a nice guy and an "asset" :noway:
skywalker33
Nuggets Forum Mock Draft Champ
Posts: 13,707
And1: 5,255
Joined: Jun 02, 2014
       

Re: Darrell Arthur 

Post#3 » by skywalker33 » Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:41 pm

When Arthur was signed, most here on Realgm looked at it as a positive move, especially for what was viewed upon as a hometown discount. At that time, nobody really knew about his health issues, that's where the Nuggets went wrong. The Nuggets were floundering with little direction at the time, Arthur was one of the only bright spots in the frontcourt so it was more than he's a nice guy ( although I don't totally dismiss your premise as part of a PR move made in the signing).
Texas Chuck wrote:I'd like to see Utah, and Denver lose


Exactly as I've been saying all along !!
NuggetsWY
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 10,323
And1: 4,056
Joined: Oct 28, 2015
Location: Cheyenne, WY
 

Re: Darrell Arthur 

Post#4 » by NuggetsWY » Thu Sep 28, 2017 11:38 pm

skywalker33 wrote:When Arthur was signed, most here on Realgm looked at it as a positive move, especially for what was viewed upon as a hometown discount. At that time, nobody really knew about his health issues, that's where the Nuggets went wrong. The Nuggets were floundering with little direction at the time, Arthur was one of the only bright spots in the frontcourt so it was more than he's a nice guy ( although I don't totally dismiss your premise as part of a PR move made in the signing).

You're right - I didn't mind his signing, although I thought it a little high. But at that time, our PF stable included Faried & Arthur and nobody else that we really leaned on. I had not considered his injury history - but I'm just an idiot of a fan. You would think the front office would consider his injury history. The more telling stat is that he's never averaged even 24 mpg. It just seems like his coaches aren't big fans of his. Then again, in Denver, he's had Shaw & Malone and young coaches tend to not like young players, as we have seen.
The Rebel
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 25,186
And1: 11,338
Joined: Mar 05, 2005
 

Re: Darrell Arthur 

Post#5 » by The Rebel » Fri Sep 29, 2017 12:06 am

Yes Arthur has been a little bit injury prone but at the time we were building around Gallo, Chandler, Nurkic, and he was a solid bench PF that is good in the lockerroom and a good placeholder on a team that desperately needed a PF that can shoot from outside. Nobody knew Jokic was going to be as good as he is, and change the entire complexion of the team and the offense, but even still If we are being honest we all know he would actually make the perfect backup PF with Plumlee and Mudiay projected to come off the bench. Even right now I do not mind his contract, and I do not even mind the Nuggets not trying to trade him this offseason, but I do mind the fact that he and Faried are still both with the team.

Return to Denver Nuggets