What's new
By:

Hayward/Manu; Favors/Howard.

B

BYE

Well-Known Member
I was curious to see how they compared as sophomores (/36) in the fourth month of the season or about 14 games at the same point in time (that’s what month our sophomores are in). It’s a bit misleading, but interesting to see. They’re fairly comparable except Manu was 26 to Gordon’s 21, and Manu had a bunch more steals than Hayward (which is an area I’d like him to improve a bit). Howard had a ton of minutes, and Favors must have minutes next year, and then both he and Hayward have to show that they can put together an entire season of stellar play. Read, ignore, or other. Present & Future is bright!

***Points, Rebounds, Assists, Steals, Blocks (2%, 3%, FT%)

Hayward (age 21); (36.9):
16.1, 3.7, 3.5, .9, .3 (50.7%; 49%, 87.5%)

Manu Ginobili (age 26); (/36):
16.9, 4.5, 3.9, 3.1, .1 (45%, 36%, 83%)

Favors (age 20); (/36):
14, 12, 1.3, .72, 2.15 (57%, 71%)

Dwight Howard (age 20); (/36):
16, 11.4, 1.3, .56, 1.2 (52%, 62%)
 
Favors/Howard is a discussion. Hayward has miles to go before he's in Ginobili's class. I don't see him ever being the driver Ginobili is, but that's not a knock -- Ginobili is a world class player. Hayward's numbers look a lot like Dunleavy's when he came into the league. Pre-injury, Dunleavy's trajectory was good to very good, never great. That's likely where Hayward slots in, but I love his intangibles.

The biggest irony about Hayward is he looks astonishingly like AK: Both good defenders (AK slightly better); both excellent passers; neither great shooters (edge to Hayward); both stat sheet fillers; both do the little things that don't show up on a stat sheet.
 
billyshelby said:
Favors/Howard is a discussion. Hayward has miles to go before he's in Ginobili's class. I don't see him ever being the driver Ginobili is, but that's not a knock -- Ginobili is a world class player. Hayward's numbers look a lot like Dunleavy's when he came into the league. Pre-injury, Dunleavy's trajectory was good to very good, never great. That's likely where Hayward slots in, but I love his intangibles.

The biggest irony about Hayward is he looks astonishingly like AK: Both good defenders (AK slightly better); both excellent passers; neither great shooters (edge to Hayward); both stat sheet fillers; both do the little things that don't show up on a stat sheet.
Click to expand...

Neither great shooters? A career rating of 38.6% from deep, and 46.5% from the field isn't considered great shooting? I'm not saying that he's steve Nash, but he is averaging some great numbers for a second year player. Ginobili, at the age of 27, shot 41.8% from the field, and 35.9% from 3 in his second season. Haywards numbers at the end of the second season of both of their careers, is more impressive.

Don't get me wrong, Hayward will probably become a poor mans Manu. BUT, throwing descriptions of him as not a great shooter, or never becoming a great driver, is a bit premature to say at this point in his career. Especially seeing as Manu wasn't much more impressive in his sec on year, despite being 27 at the time.
 
billyshelby said:
Favors/Howard is a discussion. Hayward has miles to go before he's in Ginobili's class. I don't see him ever being the driver Ginobili is, but that's not a knock -- Ginobili is a world class player. Hayward's numbers look a lot like Dunleavy's when he came into the league. Pre-injury, Dunleavy's trajectory was good to very good, never great. That's likely where Hayward slots in, but I love his intangibles.

The biggest irony about Hayward is he looks astonishingly like AK: Both good defenders (AK slightly better); both excellent passers; neither great shooters (edge to Hayward); both stat sheet fillers; both do the little things that don't show up on a stat sheet.
Click to expand...

AK's got much more length of course and I agree with you on the defense. I'm still not convinced that Hayward isn't a great shooter even though he had his horrid month in February, but I think that's nerves and confidence. At this point, he's a career 39% 3 point shooter. I also see much more driving and facilitating than AK. Hayward does not have Ginobili's finishing ability, but Manu entered the league at 25, and I don't think we've seen all of Hayward's game yet. I don't think that he will ever average the steals of Ginobili or be as prolific a flopper (he could surprise me and he already pisses people off). Gordon's actually done the stats, which is more than we can say for Favors, so hopefully next hear they both take big steps again. I don't know how good these guys will be, but it's interesting to compare to relatively similar players statistically speaking.
 
Wes Mantooth said:
Minutes too would have been nice. Pretty important.
Click to expand...

I assume you're talking Favors, and I think we're all on board with this. Dwight had played an enormous amount of minutes in his first and second year. There is no question Favors needs at least 30 minutes next year. He's ready for the next level. What an absolute disaster if he doesn't get big minutes next year. We also have to think about how he'll feel when it comes to contract time and he hasn't had enough minutes to develop and is pissed at this organization for playing him 22 minutes a night, thus, not allowing him to make more money on his contract.
 
Hayward was a bad shooter most of this year. He had a terrific March/April. We don't know what kind of shooter he will ultimately be, and I do think he will be a better 3 point shooter than AK long term, but I'm not sure he's ever going to be a great shooter. I give all very young players like Hayward lots of leeway to improve, but my observation is he doesn't have a killer instinct on offense.

We'll see what happens. I thinks he's a feast/famine player as far as points, streaky, but he'll always be valuable on the floor for his passing ability and the little things -- kind of like AK. The kid has a ton of upside but next year will be key to figuring out what his longterm potential is. Even if he's only a young AK or Dunleavy, we have an excellent player on our hands.
 
billyshelby said:
Hayward was a bad shooter most of this year. He had a terrific March/April. We don't know what kind of shooter he will ultimately be, and I do think he will be a better 3 point shooter than AK long term, but I'm not sure he's ever going to be a great shooter. I give all very young players like Hayward lots of leeway to improve, but my observation is he doesn't have a killer instinct on offense.

We'll see what happens. I thinks he's a feast/famine player as far as points, streaky, but he'll always be valuable on the floor for his passing ability and the little things -- kind of like AK. The kid has a ton of upside but next year will be key to figuring out what his longterm potential is. Even if he's only a young AK or Dunleavy, we have an excellent player on our hands.
Click to expand...

I think being a streaky shooter thus far is a compliment. His improvement in shooting has come at the end of the season, which is also a very positive sign. Streakiness comes from overall body conditioning - and you can't even get to "streaky" if you don't at least have the hand-eye coordination. So, i'm of the belief that hayward will become a good shooter - based on what he's shown. I'm hopeful but not confident he'll even flirt with 50/40/90 type percentages.

Additionally, but this is a bigger stretch (pardon the upcoming pun) is that he is a "long stepper" like Manu and does stretch out those last steps to the hoop somewhat naturally. Now whether Hayward can actually add that to is game is debatable in my mind, but he does seem to have the physical attributes to accomplish it.
 
I don't see how his streakiness is a product of body conditioning since he was in fine shape all year. And I'm not totally sure how streaky he is since he was a bad shooter most of the year and very good for the last month.

Personally, I don't really care about his percentages that much (within reason.) I care about his aggressiveness, his ability to draw fouls. I question his ability to be better than he already is. Or maybe I should say, how much better he can be than he already is. I like him a lot, almost as much as I liked AK (though I don't think he's as good as young AK). I love him as a third option on offense. I just doubt that he really has it in him to become more than that.

I don't see Manu in him ever, but next season is a big year for him.
 
billyshelby said:
I don't see how his streakiness is a product of body conditioning since he was in fine shape all year. And I'm not totally sure how streaky he is since he was a bad shooter most of the year and very good for the last month.

Personally, I don't really care about his percentages that much (within reason.) I care about his aggressiveness, his ability to draw fouls. I question his ability to be better than he already is. Or maybe I should say, how much better he can be than he already is. I like him a lot, almost as much as I liked AK (though I don't think he's as good as young AK). I love him as a third option on offense. I just doubt that he really has it in him to become more than that.

I don't see Manu in him ever, but next season is a big year for him.
Click to expand...

From my experience and seeing how difficult it is to be "consistent" as an NBA player, i'm quite convinced that streakiness is partially caused by imperfections in overall body conditioning. The top distance runners in the world are 30+. This points to the fact that to be ULTIMATELY conditioned takes years. There is the reality of "perfect skill set" which precludes conditioning, but for everyone that is not Hornacek, Durrant, you have to have all things be in place physically for you to remain consistent. Okur was significantly worse on the road as he was at home percentage wise and this i think is because he probably couldn't get decent sleep as a 7footer on airplane and hotel environments.
 
Saying neither AK nor Hayward are great shooters is akin to saying neither Jeff Hornacek nor Ben Wallace were great scorers. While yes they are both technically correct, the picture paints them as if they were somehow comparable because they're not "great" at the particular thing.
 
I think Haywards poor shooting at the beginning of the year partially about his conditioning - he was not in the same shape at the beginning of the year as he is now. But a lot of the early season wo's were due to him simply being not that good yet, and part was due to his confidence. His shooting form, position, etc now is notably better. He sets up better and anticipates the catch and shoot situations well. I think he will be a good shooter. I think he'll be the sort of guy that is well conditioned in the off-season, and practice well in the offseason. He'll be a good-to-great shooter. His last 10 games he's 50/51/88 over 36mins/game. If that's any indication of who he is/gonna be, he's in the 'great' category.
 
Hotttnickkk said:
Hahaha.. thought this tweet by Locke was funny:


LOL..
Click to expand...

Funny stuff! Hayward gets his first four Playoff games (at least) at 22, Favors 20, Kanter 19, Burks 20. If Locke's prediction holds true about the Jazz winning 50 games every year from here on out if Favors plays big minutes, then they'll have a lot of Playoff games under their belt by the time they're 29.
 
I'm really excited to see how Hayward does in the playoffs. He needs to play loose and with confidence, hope he doesn't get all 1st part of the season on us.
 
sec24row7 said:
Manu does so much more than his stats indicate...
Click to expand...

Manu really has no holes to his game at all. I guess he could be taller and a tad more explosive, but a healthy Manu Ginobili is a top three SG in the NBA and may actually be the most important for his team to win. Kobe and he both have the championships to prove it, and I've always hated Ginobili (because he's so damn good at everything). Would love him on the Jazz, or would have loved.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top