Ricky Rubio #9

[KGdaBom]

Watched the Jazz game (will watch them all obv). Ricky is LOOKING terrible. He has a man bun and an unkempt beard and some ugly new tats. He looks just friggin terrible. And fat.

I don't care much about how he looks. How did he play?

[Klomp]

Watched the Jazz game (will watch them all obv). Ricky is LOOKING terrible. He has a man bun and an unkempt beard and some ugly new tats. He looks just friggin terrible. And fat.

I don't care much about how he looks. How did he play?

Per the Jazz board, good in fastbreak situations, but a liability in the halfcourt. So considering how much the Jazz (don't) run, not great.

[KGdaBom]

Watched the Jazz game (will watch them all obv). Ricky is LOOKING terrible. He has a man bun and an unkempt beard and some ugly new tats. He looks just friggin terrible. And fat.

I don't care much about how he looks. How did he play?

Per the Jazz board, good in fastbreak situations, but a liability in the halfcourt. So considering how much the Jazz (don't) run, not great.

Rubio took 4 shots and missed them all. Small sample size, but showing his usual shooting Woes.

[urinesane]

I don't care much about how he looks. How did he play?

Per the Jazz board, good in fastbreak situations, but a liability in the halfcourt. So considering how much the Jazz (don't) run, not great.

Rubio took 4 shots and missed them all. Small sample size, but showing his usual shooting Woes.

Watch on YouTube

Hehehe, how did he play?

Way to take one thing and not mention anything else.

He played 19 minutes had 3 points, on 0/4 shooting (2 of those were 3's), shot 3/4 at the FT line, had 1 reb, 4 ast, 2 Stl, 1 Blk and 1 TOV. +11 on the game and they won by 25.

I could think of worse 1st pre-season games for a guy who was playing all summer and is with an all new group of teammates/coach.

Though he did miss those 4 shots. Good thing we got basically nothing of value for him!

[Merc_Porto]

To be fair with Ricky, he got like 6/7 assists. Not 4.

I don't know why they only counted 4.

[Mattya]

To be fair with Ricky, he got like 6/7 assists. Not 4.

I don't know why they only counted 4.

Considering their history with inflating stats I doubt they would miss the opportunity.

[Merc_Porto]

To be fair with Ricky, he got like 6/7 assists. Not 4.

I don't know why they only counted 4.

Considering their history with inflating stats I doubt they would miss the opportunity.

That is true, but if you check the video Ricky got 4 assists in the 1st half alone. +2/3 in the 3th quarter.

No big deal tought...

[KGdaBom]

Per the Jazz board, good in fastbreak situations, but a liability in the halfcourt. So considering how much the Jazz (don't) run, not great.

Rubio took 4 shots and missed them all. Small sample size, but showing his usual shooting Woes.

Watch on YouTube

Hehehe, how did he play?

Way to take one thing and not mention anything else.

He played 19 minutes had 3 points, on 0/4 shooting (2 of those were 3's), shot 3/4 at the FT line, had 1 reb, 4 ast, 2 Stl, 1 Blk and 1 TOV. +11 on the game and they won by 25.

I could think of worse 1st pre-season games for a guy who was playing all summer and is with an all new group of teammates/coach.

Though he did miss those 4 shots. Good thing we got basically nothing of value for him!

You realize I am a big Rubio fan. I just posted what I did in response to what was reportedly the Jazz fans complaints about Rubio. He played just over half a games worth of minutes based on his getting his usual 36 MPG. So once again Rubio shot poorly which is not unordinary. One rebound would be below his expected 2 or 3. 4 assists is about right. The 2 steals would translate to 4 and the one block is just a fluke LOL. Rubio does not block shots. The one TO was very nice. They played the Sydney Kings not an NBA team so the plus/minus can pretty much be thrown out. Thanks for sharing. All in all a solid game for Ricky and a stat line that is not outside normal expectations.

[PharmD]

Ricky played okay-ish. His shot selection was terrible and his shot looked really bad. Ricky isn't really the kind of guy that's going to shine against overmatched competition.

One thing i definitely noticed was that the Jazz bigs were really slow at getting him the ball to get out and go in transition. They'll get used to playing with him quickly, i'd imagine.

[shrink]

Around what date did Thibs give Rubio the responsibilities for running the offense, and not standing in the corner?

After that date, did he have 100% responsibility in the last five seconds of the shot clock?

[Narf]

Good thing we got basically nothing of value for him!

Teague and a late 1st is not nothing.

[ace625214]

We didn't get Teague for him. Sure, moving Rubio gave the space to sign Teague, but he was not part of the deal. If you're going to include cascading effects, you could also say that we traded Rubio and Millsap for Teague, Gibson, and a first, since signing Jeff to the big deal took up extra cap room that could have made the difference in Millsap's choice.

[Klomp]

We didn't get Teague for him. Sure, moving Rubio gave the space to sign Teague, but he was not part of the deal. If you're going to include cascading effects, you could also say that we traded Rubio and Millsap for Teague, Gibson, and a first, since signing Jeff to the big deal took up extra cap room that could have made the difference in Millsap's choice.

We had cap space to sign Millsap when Rubio was on the roster?

[KGdaBom]

We didn't get Teague for him. Sure, moving Rubio gave the space to sign Teague, but he was not part of the deal. If you're going to include cascading effects, you could also say that we traded Rubio and Millsap for Teague, Gibson, and a first, since signing Jeff to the big deal took up extra cap room that could have made the difference in Millsap's choice.

Ace you are talking semantics or whatever. Teague was already in the bag to be signed when we traded Rubio. We did get Teague by trading Rubio.

[ace625214]

We didn't get Teague for him. Sure, moving Rubio gave the space to sign Teague, but he was not part of the deal. If you're going to include cascading effects, you could also say that we traded Rubio and Millsap for Teague, Gibson, and a first, since signing Jeff to the big deal took up extra cap room that could have made the difference in Millsap's choice.

We had cap space to sign Millsap when Rubio was on the roster?

No, I said could have made the difference. If they dumped Aldrich it would have been close, but not quite a max offer. Giving up a couple million is understandable to be on a contender, but giving up $7 mil+ is a lot to ask.

[Narf]

No, I said could have made the difference. If they dumped Aldrich it would have been close, but not quite a max offer. Giving up a couple million is understandable to be on a contender, but giving up $7 mil+ is a lot to ask.

Look bud, I like Teague an awful lot and still think we made the wrong trade. But we literally traded Rubio for raw cap space equal to Teague's market value and a first round pick.

That raw cap space *at the beginning of free agency* absolutely has the value of the player signed with it.

I would have rather kept Rubio, I understand going with Teague. We'll see if you and I are wrong and Teague was the better choice. But we clearly got value for Rubio.

[ace625214]

No, I said could have made the difference. If they dumped Aldrich it would have been close, but not quite a max offer. Giving up a couple million is understandable to be on a contender, but giving up $7 mil+ is a lot to ask.

Look bud, I like Teague an awful lot and still think we made the wrong trade. But we literally traded Rubio for raw cap space equal to Teague's market value and a first round pick.

That raw cap space *at the beginning of free agency* absolutely has the value of the player signed with it.

I would have rather kept Rubio, I understand going with Teague. We'll see if you and I are wrong and Teague was the better choice. But we clearly got value for Rubio.

I'm not arguing Rubio is better than Teague or that cap space has no value. My point is that we got back space for Rubio, not Jeff Teague. Ricky was traded on the 30th, two days before the Wolves were allowed to contact Jeff. It's entirely possible, though unlikely, that someone else could have offered Teague more and Thibs would have been scrambling for a PG. Look at what happened with the Rockets when they made salary dumps and Carmelo didn't sign, or any number of teams that made moves and then struck out.

If you want to say that we traded Ricky for a first and $14.1 mil in space, that's fine, but Jeff Teague was not part of the deal. We very well could have ended up having to overpay for Shaun Livingston or Patty Mills when our target signed with another team.

[KGdaBom]

No, I said could have made the difference. If they dumped Aldrich it would have been close, but not quite a max offer. Giving up a couple million is understandable to be on a contender, but giving up $7 mil+ is a lot to ask.

Look bud, I like Teague an awful lot and still think we made the wrong trade. But we literally traded Rubio for raw cap space equal to Teague's market value and a first round pick.

That raw cap space *at the beginning of free agency* absolutely has the value of the player signed with it.

I would have rather kept Rubio, I understand going with Teague. We'll see if you and I are wrong and Teague was the better choice. But we clearly got value for Rubio.

I'm not arguing Rubio is better than Teague or that cap space has no value. My point is that we got back space for Rubio, not Jeff Teague. Ricky was traded on the 30th, two days before the Wolves were allowed to contact Jeff. It's entirely possible, though unlikely, that someone else could have offered Teague more and Thibs would have been scrambling for a PG. Look at what happened with the Rockets when they made salary dumps and Carmelo didn't sign, or any number of teams that made moves and then struck out.

If you want to say that we traded Ricky for a first and $14.1 mil in space, that's fine, but Jeff Teague was not part of the deal. We very well could have ended up having to overpay for Shaun Livingston or Patty Mills when our target signed with another team.

I could have swore we got Teague the same day we traded Rubio? Am I wrong about this?
It might have been that Teague agreed to terms, but couldn't officially sign for a couple days.

[theGreatRC]

Look bud, I like Teague an awful lot and still think we made the wrong trade. But we literally traded Rubio for raw cap space equal to Teague's market value and a first round pick.

That raw cap space *at the beginning of free agency* absolutely has the value of the player signed with it.

I would have rather kept Rubio, I understand going with Teague. We'll see if you and I are wrong and Teague was the better choice. But we clearly got value for Rubio.

I'm not arguing Rubio is better than Teague or that cap space has no value. My point is that we got back space for Rubio, not Jeff Teague. Ricky was traded on the 30th, two days before the Wolves were allowed to contact Jeff. It's entirely possible, though unlikely, that someone else could have offered Teague more and Thibs would have been scrambling for a PG. Look at what happened with the Rockets when they made salary dumps and Carmelo didn't sign, or any number of teams that made moves and then struck out.

If you want to say that we traded Ricky for a first and $14.1 mil in space, that's fine, but Jeff Teague was not part of the deal. We very well could have ended up having to overpay for Shaun Livingston or Patty Mills when our target signed with another team.

I could have swore we got Teague the same day we traded Rubio? Am I wrong about this?
It might have been that Teague agreed to terms, but couldn't officially sign for a couple days.

We traded Ricky on the eve of Free Agency & there were rumblings that Teague had a deal in place to sign here.

I don't think we trade Ricky unless Teague lets Thibs know he was coming

[KGdaBom]

I'm not arguing Rubio is better than Teague or that cap space has no value. My point is that we got back space for Rubio, not Jeff Teague. Ricky was traded on the 30th, two days before the Wolves were allowed to contact Jeff. It's entirely possible, though unlikely, that someone else could have offered Teague more and Thibs would have been scrambling for a PG. Look at what happened with the Rockets when they made salary dumps and Carmelo didn't sign, or any number of teams that made moves and then struck out.

If you want to say that we traded Ricky for a first and $14.1 mil in space, that's fine, but Jeff Teague was not part of the deal. We very well could have ended up having to overpay for Shaun Livingston or Patty Mills when our target signed with another team.

I could have swore we got Teague the same day we traded Rubio? Am I wrong about this?
It might have been that Teague agreed to terms, but couldn't officially sign for a couple days.

We traded Ricky on the eve of Free Agency & there were rumblings that Teague had a deal in place to sign here.

I don't think we trade Ricky unless Teague lets Thibs know he was coming

Yeah I'm pretty sure the idea that we traded Ricky without Jeff in place is very unlikely.