What's new
By:

So, I've criticized Hayward for not producing when we need him to...

jope said:
Keep in mind that some of those 0 pt 4th quarters were the result of little or no playing time due to being pulled out since the score was so ridiculous.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...

schneider said:
I find it basically impossible to criticize Hayward so far. The guy right now is far and away the best passer on the team. I thought he would have a hard time shooting 40% from the floor this season, and yet he's shooting a respectable 45%. He still is a decent defender and he has improved his defensive rebounding a lot. I'm pretty sure his FT and 3 point percentage will improve. He could get to the line a little more, but aside from that, I don't think he can do much more.
Kanter and Favors, on the other hand, seem exactly the same players they were last season, with more playing time, touches on offense and worse defense.
Click to expand...

these
 
I think I get what he is talking about. I have noticed it too over the years. Hayward never seems to hit the big shots often. When the game is close, he more often than not misses. It seems like he plays better when the game is not on the line.
 
theonlyone said:
I think I get what he is talking about. I have noticed it too over the years. Hayward never seems to hit the big shots often. When the game is close, he more often than not misses. It seems like he plays better when the game is not on the line.
Click to expand...

That data doesn't really show though. Maybe if field goal percentages were used for each quarter. Or last 5 minutes stats.
 
theonlyone said:
I think I get what he is talking about. I have noticed it too over the years. Hayward never seems to hit the big shots often. When the game is close, he more often than not misses. It seems like he plays better when the game is not on the line.
Click to expand...

Doublea said:
That data doesn't really show though. Maybe if field goal percentages were used for each quarter. Or last 5 minutes stats.
Click to expand...

Stop with the spoilers already. Green is coming back for the big reveal.
 
Doublea said:
That data doesn't really show though. Maybe if field goal percentages were used for each quarter. Or last 5 minutes stats.
Click to expand...

I am not familiar with the data, so perhaps it does not. It is just the impression I have from watching every game for the past few years. He just does not seem to be clutch when the score is close, but then again no one else on the team currently is clutch either.
 
theonlyone said:
I am not familiar with the data, so perhaps it does not. It is just the impression I have from watching every game for the past few years. He just does not seem to be clutch when the score is close, but then again no one else on the team currently is clutch either.
Click to expand...

Did you look at the first post?
 
theonlyone said:
I am not familiar with the data, so perhaps it does not. It is just the impression I have from watching every game for the past few years. He just does not seem to be clutch when the score is close, but then again no one else on the team currently is clutch either.
Click to expand...

Clutch is a myth...

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/923262-debunking-the-myth-of-clutch-in-the-nba-once-and-for-all

Jordan was not "clutch." Kobe is not "clutch." Hayward isn't "clutch" either.
 
Gameface said:
Clutch is a myth...

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/923262-debunking-the-myth-of-clutch-in-the-nba-once-and-for-all

Jordan was not "clutch." Kobe is not "clutch." Hayward isn't "clutch" either.
Click to expand...
A couple large problems with that article:

1. ESPN's "In the last 24 seconds" includes all sorts of ridiculous shots with little/no time on the game/shot clock from all over the court. Comparing the field goal percentage of those shots to regular shots is meaningless.

2. The 82games.com stats may also be misleading, as clutch FG% should be compared relative to the change in league average field goal percentage in close games (relative to the rest of the time). That is, at the end of close games, when defenses tighten and more low percentage buzzer beaters are shot, team field goal percentage undoubtedly goes down. Based on the analysis, if a player's field goal percentage decreases by less than league average in clutch situations, he's not clutch, even if, as stated in point 1, he's taking a bunch of deep, well defended buzzer beaters. The analysis has been rigged to produce the desired result.


To correct the study, you need to define clutch possessions, and then look at league average expected points by possession type on those possessions (possession type would include scoring margin, time remaining on shot/game clock when the player receives the ball, where the player receives the ball and what play type is used). Do the same for non-clutch possessions. Then, calculate how each player does (points per possession) in both their clutch and non-clutch possessions (for each possession type already mentioned). How does the player do relative to league average? How does his performance drop-off relative to league average?

It might also be worthwhile to look at team performance with certain players on/off court in clutch v. non-clutch situations.
 
theonlyone said:
I am not familiar with the data, so perhaps it does not. It is just the impression I have from watching every game for the past few years. He just does not seem to be clutch when the score is close, but then again no one else on the team currently is clutch either.
Click to expand...
Totally agree. Sometimes you don't always need to rely on stats, the eyeball test on Hayward tells me he is not a clutch player.
.
That being said, it appears that Hayward shoots poorly in close games and better in blowout losses, but his rebounding/passing/steals are better in close games: (for this comparison, I'm considering a close game any game decided by single digits)
.
Close games: 15 ppg, 33% FG, 45%3PT, 63%FT, 7 rpg, 6.5 apg, 2 stpg, 3.5 TO/gm
Blowouts: 20.8 ppg, 49%FG, 24%3PT, 80%FT, 6.4 rpg, 4 apg, 1 stpg, 1.8 TO/gm
 
GVC said:
A couple large problems with that article:

1. ESPN's "In the last 24 seconds" includes all sorts of ridiculous shots with little/no time on the game/shot clock from all over the court. Comparing the field goal percentage of those shots to regular shots is meaningless.

2. The 82games.com stats may also be misleading, as clutch FG% should be compared relative to the change in league average field goal percentage in close games (relative to the rest of the time). That is, at the end of close games, when defenses tighten and more low percentage buzzer beaters are shot, team field goal percentage undoubtedly goes down. Based on the analysis, if a player's field goal percentage decreases by less than league average in clutch situations, he's not clutch, even if, as stated in point 1, he's taking a bunch of deep, well defended buzzer beaters. The analysis has been rigged to produce the desired result.


To correct the study, you need to define clutch possessions, and then look at league average expected points by possession type on those possessions (possession type would include scoring margin, time remaining on shot/game clock when the player receives the ball, where the player receives the ball and what play type is used). Do the same for non-clutch possessions. Then, calculate how each player does (points per possession) in both their clutch and non-clutch possessions (for each possession type already mentioned). How does the player do relative to league average? How does his performance drop-off relative to league average?

It might also be worthwhile to look at team performance with certain players on/off court in clutch v. non-clutch situations.
Click to expand...

So you think an MJ becomes a better player than his normal self "in the clutch"? What magical force creates these super human abilities, I wonder?
 
akirac73 said:
Totally agree. Sometimes you don't always need to rely on stats, the eyeball test on Hayward tells me he is not a clutch player.
.
That being said, it appears that Hayward shoots poorly in close games and better in blowout losses, but his rebounding/passing/steals are better in close games: (for this comparison, I'm considering a close game any game decided by single digits)
.
Close games: 15 ppg, 33% FG, 45%3PT, 63%FT, 7 rpg, 6.5 apg, 2 stpg, 3.5 TO/gm
Blowouts: 20.8 ppg, 49%FG, 24%3PT, 80%FT, 6.4 rpg, 4 apg, 1 stpg, 1.8 TO/gm
Click to expand...
Don't think poor shooting in 2 games is enough to say he's not clutch.
 
Gameface said:
So you think an MJ becomes a better player than his normal self "in the clutch"? What magical force creates these super human abilities, I wonder?
Click to expand...
I didn't say that at all. I explicitly said that offense is likely harder to come by in high leverage situations, and efficiency almost certainly goes down for most players. It's entirely possible that some players respond better to high leverage situations than others. I'm sure you can think of people who deal with deadlines/tough situations/anxiety/competition better than others. It's not magic.
 
In most games he starts off pretty strong, but quickly fades. Not sure if that is the defense collapsing on him, fatigue and conditioning, the coach calling different plays as the game goes, or Hayward getting in his own way. maybe all of the above. This is the first year where he has had to be consistent for 35 minutes plus per night and he might just be struggling in that area.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top