What's new
By:

Is Gordon Hayward overrated?

Not over rated. Just is what he is.
 
PG_AB said:
When Hayward chokes (again) next year people are really going to be surprised/upset about it, so I'll post this now and bump it later..

Dude averaged 11 points a game vs the Spurs this season.. They were 1-2 vs the rockets with him and 1-0 without him.

this is the player thats going to lead the Jazz past the Warriors?? WTF are you smoking ??? People around here talk about him like the Jazz couldn't possibly extract equal value in return for him..

No matter how much you hope and lie to yourself about it, Hayward is not this teams Derek Jeter.. He's not even close.


He played 46 minutes in that OT loss to the Clippers backups.. What a Gamechanger!! He deserves LeBron $$$!!! He had 7 turnovers in that game..


Hayward is making the decsision to try to trade him before next years deadline an easy one.I can't wait til he's gone, wouldn't be surprised if it had a positive effect on the team, like taking the training wheels off.

lettuce not forget that the FO could potentially rip some hopeful playoff team off for Hayward next season.. To not consider that because your so smitten with his talents would be a grievous oversight.
Click to expand...

I am not a Hayward fan at all. But I don't think its fair to say that there is one of any man in the NBA that can lead their team past the Warriors. Especially after this year. With the additions of Durant and the existence of Thompson, Curry and Green, its going to be a tall order for any team. I do agree that Hayward is not the guy to be dumping our millions into. I think that given the right negotiation we could acquire some big assets from another team or two. However I also feel that the jazz front office suck at negotiating such a contract that we would be the proclaimed beneficiary of any such arrangement. More than likely, we will let him walk for nothing, or trade him for absolutely nothing. As bad as he sucks, we as fans deserve a better trade than that.
 
Broncster said:
Thats great for those people back then. Today players are moving far more miles per game. Practice is much more intense as is the weight training regime. Players are more athletic and are jumping higher and moving faster on a consistent basis. Players are fatigued and they are getting injured. It takes a lot more to keep elite athletes in shape and injury free now then it did back then, The NBA is waaayyyy more popular and pays a **** ton more, which draws much more elite athletes/players. Players often showed up very drunk in the 60s to games, didnt practice, took smoke breaks, took illegal drugs before/during games, and many other things. Should players today do those things as well since players did those things and were "fine" back then? Its a different game and a different era.

Now, back to the facts. Players injury rate greatly increases with increased minutes and goes way up when a player is fatigued and worn down and trying to keep playing. Players also shoot worse when their legs are fatigued. *slap* at least you have a catch phrase and a shtick to fall back on...

Hayward did "put his money where his mouth is" he was the best player on this team.

Being born with a penis between your legs is what makes you a man, nothing else matters or makes you more or less of a man. Sorry you feel you have to prove something to be a "man."
Click to expand...

So your telling me that today's players are moving more miles per game? Players in the 60's - 80's compared to the players of today are, and I quote you, "moving more miles per game"? How is that when they are not on the court as long? (Per comparison Player's MPG?). Second, how do you "move" more miles per game. With that I ask you this, just exactly how many "more miles" are they wiggling themselves through?

Again I quote, "they are fatigued and getting injured". Did they not go through fatigue or injury back then? If you meant to say that they are getting fatigued more frequently and injured more frequently, that just speak in terms that the educated man could understand. I don't exactly comprehend your 2nd grade worthy terminology. And to that I say that players today should be more fatigued with their in-vigorous practice, MAN UP.
I object your statement that they are "moving more miles per game". Not really sure how one moves more miles per game when the players back then averaged more minutes per game than they do today. The only way that your statement of them moving more miles per game, suggest that they are covering more and multiple miles per game than players back then, and doing it by moving their body parts moving faster other than their legs. Legs are the fastest way to move miles in the game of basketball that I watch. And players back then averaged more minutes, that is an established fact. To think that they spent that time standing around would suggest entertaining nonsense from a confused brain such as your own.

I never said that players did illegal drugs back then, you did. I said that they took shots of liquor and smoked at halftime. I said that because I have read over 20 biographies of past NBA greats where something of the norm was for the team to take shots of liquor during halftime and smoke cigarettes. This is also another fact. Illegal drugs was never once mentioned, suggested or interpreted, except for by the thoughts of your feeble mind. I never said illegal drugs, and I never said that it was a good idea. I simply said that the players back then could drink liquor and smoke cigarettes (again, not suggested, recommended, or honored, but it is a fact), then play more minutes and bitch'n'moan less than today's NBA players. = better basketball.

I am glad that you were born with a penis. Too bad that you weren't born with a brain that functioned properly. You know, one of those brains that could think of thoughts every time you wanted and tried to think of thoughts, but with a brain your thoughts come out the right way instead of making you look stupid. I am a god fearing man and pray for those that are mentally challenged (such as yourself) every Sunday, But even I know that there are people as ignorant as yourself out there, that no matter how hard I pray, there are tasks too big for even God to be able to straighten out. Report my response, it's expected and I am sure its something that your would do. Its in your character. I would expect nothing less from an idiot such as yourself.
 
Lakers_Slapper said:
So your telling me that today's players are moving more miles per game? Players in the 60's - 80's compared to the players of today are, and I quote you, "moving more miles per game"? How is that when they are not on the court as long? (Per comparison Player's MPG?). Second, how do you "move" more miles per game. With that I ask you this, just exactly how many "more miles" are they wiggling themselves through?

Again I quote, "they are fatigued and getting injured". Did they not go through fatigue or injury back then? If you meant to say that they are getting fatigued more frequently and injured more frequently, that just speak in terms that the educated man could understand. I don't exactly comprehend your 2nd grade worthy terminology. And to that I say that players today should be more fatigued with their in-vigorous practice, MAN UP.
I object your statement that they are "moving more miles per game". Not really sure how one moves more miles per game when the players back then averaged more minutes per game than they do today. The only way that your statement of them moving more miles per game, suggest that they are covering more and multiple miles per game than players back then, and doing it by moving their body parts moving faster other than their legs. Legs are the fastest way to move miles in the game of basketball that I watch. And players back then averaged more minutes, that is an established fact. To think that they spent that time standing around would suggest entertaining nonsense from a confused brain such as your own.

I never said that players did illegal drugs back then, you did. I said that they took shots of liquor and smoked at halftime. I said that because I have read over 20 biographies of past NBA greats where something of the norm was for the team to take shots of liquor during halftime and smoke cigarettes. This is also another fact. Illegal drugs was never once mentioned, suggested or interpreted, except for by the thoughts of your feeble mind. I never said illegal drugs, and I never said that it was a good idea. I simply said that the players back then could drink liquor and smoke cigarettes (again, not suggested, recommended, or honored, but it is a fact), then play more minutes and bitch'n'moan less than today's NBA players. = better basketball.

I am glad that you were born with a penis. Too bad that you weren't born with a brain that functioned properly. You know, one of those brains that could think of thoughts every time you wanted and tried to think of thoughts, but with a brain your thoughts come out the right way instead of making you look stupid. I am a god fearing man and pray for those that are mentally challenged (such as yourself) every Sunday, But even I know that there are people as ignorant as yourself out there, that no matter how hard I pray, there are tasks too big for even God to be able to straighten out. Report my response, it's expected and I am sure its something that your would do. Its in your character. I would expect nothing less from an idiot such as yourself.
Click to expand...

Easy answer, teams run more motion plays now and far less posting up plays. The players are also all faster and generally stay in motion throughout the game. Playing more minutes does not necessarily equate moving more. I can play infinite minutes and not move. Teams use less of the shot clock (wasnt always a shot clock either), games are higher scoring, players run faster, jump higher and travel up and down the court more times. I could provide data for you but if your struggling with fact that the amount of minutes played is different from distance traveled that seems pointless for me to type out.
 
He isn't a Superstar and Stars win I nthis league and he is yall best player. See why some don't think the JaZz are a top 3 or 4 seed like you knuckleheaDS AROUND HERE THINK?
 
Drugs were always in the league. You must be blind as **** if you think otherwise. Well yes you have to be because your screenname is dumb. Laker Slapper? Who the Jazz?lol yea okay look at al them lakers banners compare to the zero of the jazz. You consider them a rival but yet they don't consider you one shows what they think of the Jazz. You know your great when teams consider you their rivals but yet you don't consider them one.lol. Bush league dude


Lakers_Slapper said:
So your telling me that today's players are moving more miles per game? Players in the 60's - 80's compared to the players of today are, and I quote you, "moving more miles per game"? How is that when they are not on the court as long? (Per comparison Player's MPG?). Second, how do you "move" more miles per game. With that I ask you this, just exactly how many "more miles" are they wiggling themselves through?

Again I quote, "they are fatigued and getting injured". Did they not go through fatigue or injury back then? If you meant to say that they are getting fatigued more frequently and injured more frequently, that just speak in terms that the educated man could understand. I don't exactly comprehend your 2nd grade worthy terminology. And to that I say that players today should be more fatigued with their in-vigorous practice, MAN UP.
I object your statement that they are "moving more miles per game". Not really sure how one moves more miles per game when the players back then averaged more minutes per game than they do today. The only way that your statement of them moving more miles per game, suggest that they are covering more and multiple miles per game than players back then, and doing it by moving their body parts moving faster other than their legs. Legs are the fastest way to move miles in the game of basketball that I watch. And players back then averaged more minutes, that is an established fact. To think that they spent that time standing around would suggest entertaining nonsense from a confused brain such as your own.

I never said that players did illegal drugs back then, you did. I said that they took shots of liquor and smoked at halftime. I said that because I have read over 20 biographies of past NBA greats where something of the norm was for the team to take shots of liquor during halftime and smoke cigarettes. This is also another fact. Illegal drugs was never once mentioned, suggested or interpreted, except for by the thoughts of your feeble mind. I never said illegal drugs, and I never said that it was a good idea. I simply said that the players back then could drink liquor and smoke cigarettes (again, not suggested, recommended, or honored, but it is a fact), then play more minutes and bitch'n'moan less than today's NBA players. = better basketball.

I am glad that you were born with a penis. Too bad that you weren't born with a brain that functioned properly. You know, one of those brains that could think of thoughts every time you wanted and tried to think of thoughts, but with a brain your thoughts come out the right way instead of making you look stupid. I am a god fearing man and pray for those that are mentally challenged (such as yourself) every Sunday, But even I know that there are people as ignorant as yourself out there, that no matter how hard I pray, there are tasks too big for even God to be able to straighten out. Report my response, it's expected and I am sure its something that your would do. Its in your character. I would expect nothing less from an idiot such as yourself.
Click to expand...
 
ncoloradojazz said:
Drugs were always in the league. You must be blind as **** if you think otherwise. Well yes you have to be because your screenname is dumb. Laker Slapper? Who the Jazz?lol yea okay look at al them lakers banners compare to the zero of the jazz. You consider them a rival but yet they don't consider you one shows what they think of the Jazz. You know your great when teams consider you their rivals but yet you don't consider them one.lol. Bush league dude
Click to expand...
They now have another banner pinned up their asses when Kobe decided to give them the worst defeat against Jazz in franchise history.
 
addictionary said:
They now have another banner pinned up their asses when Kobe decided to give them the worst defeat against Jazz in franchise history.
Click to expand...
No more responding to him addy.
 
ncoloradojazz said:
He isn't a Superstar and Stars win I nthis league and he is yall best player. See why some don't think the JaZz are a top 3 or 4 seed like you knuckleheaDS AROUND HERE THINK?
Click to expand...

woah bro I don't think I can take the fire you're spitting out here
 
I would surmise someone has already suggested something similar, but I feel like this thread should have been titled Is God overrated.
 
PG_AB said:
On this board he's vastly overrated, only fans who aren;t used to watching championship level play would fail to recognize that... He's got fancy advanced stats, but they don't translate during big spots, he's hit or miss. Nickname should be Gordon "Coinflip" Hayward

He's not as valuable as DeRozan is to the Raptors, who are 60 games over .500 in the past 3 seasons. The Raptors also had a winning record vs every team in their conference this season.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yFVmW0E2pM
Click to expand...


I don't believe Derozen is better than Hayward. The difference between the Raptors and Jazz over the past 3 years is they had an allstar point guard while the Jazz have had the worst PG play in the league. Not to mention Raptors play in the eastern conference which has, at times, been quite the sh*t show.
 
lol, it's funny watching all the worst posters using each other as validation.
 
Broncster said:
Easy answer, teams run more motion plays now and far less posting up plays. The players are also all faster and generally stay in motion throughout the game. Playing more minutes does not necessarily equate moving more. I can play infinite minutes and not move. Teams use less of the shot clock (wasnt always a shot clock either), games are higher scoring, players run faster, jump higher and travel up and down the court more times. I could provide data for you but if your struggling with fact that the amount of minutes played is different from distance traveled that seems pointless for me to type out.
Click to expand...

Not getting involved in the whole minutes played vs miles moved per game, or whatever, which is really just a measure of pace, I just wanted to clear something up in this discussion.

Games are actually not higher scoring now. Not by a long shot. And the current pace is much slower. The 80's has that title.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_stats.html

Over the last 10 years the NBA has averaged 99.7 ppg, but in the top 10-game stretch in the 80's they averaged 109.4 ppg. Their pace was considerably higher as well. In fact this last season, 2015, was the fastest pace and highest scoring since 92-93 season at 102.7 ppg, well below the average from the mid-70's all through the 80's. I think it is too easy to think about the Jazz, who has really always been a slower-paced team, as opposed to, well, just about everyone else who relied a lot more on fast breaks. The showtime Lakers got that nickname from playing at such an extreme pace and using the fast break as their primary weapon with Magic's otherworldly court vision. I would guarantee those teams put WAY more miles on the court per game than teams are now.
 
One way to look at this is to look at Hayward's PER, since PER is designed to put the truly middle of the pack players firmly at 15.0. For our team last season Favors came in on top, at 23rd in the league, at 21.7, or 5th among Power Forwards, where they have him listed. Hayward came in at 8th among SF, at 18.37, which puts him at 58th in the league. I don't think that many here rate him much above where this falls, even for the flaws in the PER rating at least it is something we can use objectively. But that means that in some way there are 57 better players in the league right now. Are there 57 other players you would take over Hayward?


EDIT:

For example would you trade Hayward for Klay Thompson straight up right this second, assuming there were no differences in contracts. Just going on pure ability? Klay's PER was 18.67 vs Hayward at 18.37.

Or would you trade him for Wiggins, same scenario? Wigging PER last year was 16.61.

It is awful hard to rate a player to begin with. No matter what he has done in the past we have seen plenty of players come in the next year and way outperform and way underperform to their career stats.

I personally think we rate Hayward about right, at least from the conversations I have seen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top