What's new
By:

2010 Draft Redux

If you could go back in time, who would you draft at #9?

  • Gordon Hayward

    Votes: 34 57.6%

  • Pauk George

    Votes: 22 37.3%

  • Cole Aldrich

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Xavier Henry

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Ed Davis

    Votes: 1 1.7%

  • Patrick Patterson

    Votes: 1 1.7%

  • Larry Sanders

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Luke Babbitt

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Eric Bledsoe

    Votes: 1 1.7%

  • Other

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    59
Whatever the final poll result, I think it's safe to say that KOC had only 2 shots at getting a good player at #9 (Hayward or George) and he nailed it. I'd say he just made up for his swing and miss with Snyder. Unfortunately, Humphries was just too immature; it took him 7 years to grow up.

And I know it's way too early to judge this year's crop, but Burks is looking like a very good choice where he was taken. Kanter I'm less thrilled about; I say he becomes a good backup, but never a dominant player.
 
NUMBERICA said:
He's certainly better than anyone the Jazz could've drafted at 9 already. He's better than Wall so far, and really only bound to get better. He's not as productive as Monroe or Cousins right now but the book hasn't been written yet, especially since Cousins might just wreck teams he plays for for the foreseeable future.
Click to expand...

He has put up low numbers they are better this year, but close to identical to Haywards #'s, and Gordon is in a slump right now. As a pointgaurd Wall isn't that good, but he is still more productive then George. All I see in George is a quality role player with a good outside shot. George doesn't do near as much as G-Time does to help his club. As soon as Hayward climbs out of his slump he will take off and leave George way behind. Where are you getting best player in the draft crap from.
 
Thee jazz fan said:
He has put up low numbers they are better this year, but close to identical to Haywards #'s, and Gordon is in a slump right now. As a pointgaurd Wall isn't that good, but he is still more productive then George. All I see in George is a quality role player with a good outside shot. George doesn't do near as much as G-Time does to help his club. As soon as Hayward climbs out of his slump he will take off and leave George way behind. Where are you getting best player in the draft crap from.
Click to expand...

oh gawd
 
Thee jazz fan said:
He has put up low numbers they are better this year, but close to identical to Haywards #'s, and Gordon is in a slump right now. As a pointgaurd Wall isn't that good, but he is still more productive then George. All I see in George is a quality role player with a good outside shot. George doesn't do near as much as G-Time does to help his club. As soon as Hayward climbs out of his slump he will take off and leave George way behind. Where are you getting best player in the draft crap from.
Click to expand...
Reality is hard. George is more productive than anyone other than Cousins (piece of garbage on a bad team) and Monroe (good player on a bad team) with the time that he's been given. I'm also not sure if I've seen another player lower on substance and higher on hype and style than Wall, he's been nothing but hot garbage (on the worst team in the NBA). Hayward and George are comparable players, but Hayward has pedestrian athleticism and length while George is bigger, longer, faster, and more consistent. Do you get your goggles at Fanzzzzzzzzzzzz?
 
  • Like
Reactions: MVP
Thee jazz fan said:
He has put up low numbers they are better this year, but close to identical to Haywards #'s, and Gordon is in a slump right now. As a pointgaurd Wall isn't that good, but he is still more productive then George. All I see in George is a quality role player with a good outside shot. George doesn't do near as much as G-Time does to help his club. As soon as Hayward climbs out of his slump he will take off and leave George way behind. Where are you getting best player in the draft crap from.
Click to expand...

I would go with George right now. I do believe that Hayward will turn out to be the better player for the Jazz, but not necessarily the better player. Hayward has the skills that the Jazz need going forward. I have hope that he will turn into the player that has "heart" and "toughness" when the Jazz need it. I don't see Hayward as being a star, but I do like him.

I am not so sure that George will keep up his amazing shooting. Eventually his athleticism will decline and I hope that he will have improved in other areas. If he doesn't then at that point everyone will be on the Hayward>George bandwagon.
 
NUMBERICA said:
Reality is hard. George is more productive than anyone other than Cousins (piece of garbage on a bad team) and Monroe (good player on a bad team) with the time that he's been given. I'm also not sure if I've seen another player lower on substance and higher on hype and style than Wall, he's been nothing but hot garbage (on the worst team in the NBA). Hayward and George are comparable players, but Hayward has pedestrian athleticism and length while George is bigger, longer, faster, and more consistent. Do you get your goggles at Fanzzzzzzzzzzzz?
Click to expand...

Heres the way i see it, NUMBERICA:

If you there was a trade, and Paul George was sent to the Wizards in exchange for Wall being sent to the Pacers, how well would each player play??

I would think that the Wizards would get even worse, and George's stats would seriously lower. On the other hand, John Wall's assist numbers would go up, his shooting would go up, and he'd likely become quite a good point guard. Its always important to look at context; the Pacers are a very solid team this year. The same cannot be said about Wall's, Cousins's, or Monroe's teams. Im sure George would be produce very similarly to the three aforementioned players if he was on their respective teams.


As far as the Hayward vs George comparisons, it is much too early to say. Remember, Chris Paul grew much quicker than DWill did. However, 4 years after the draft, I would have considered Dwill as the better player. Same consideration should be taken with George and Hayward. We don't know how both of the players will pan out with even having them play 10 games into their scond season. It is much too early to judge.


PS: Labelling a player as consistent based off of a <10 game sample from the start of their second season is a bit ridiculous. He sure as hell wasn't consistent last year either, unless 29.7% from 3point range is what you like from a shooting guard.
 
NUMBERICA said:
Hayward and George are comparable players, but Hayward has pedestrian athleticism and length while George is bigger, longer, faster, and more consistent. Do you get your goggles at Fanzzzzzzzzzzzz?
Click to expand...
And Hayward is the superior playmaker.
 
Its Paul George hands down. I wanted anyone except Hayward when he was drafted, but he has impressed me. I had no idea he could handle the rock as well as he does. That being said George is still better defensively and Hayward still disappears for long streches and even games at a time.
 
I don't know who Pauk George is but a lot of people here think he is great.

Now, this Paul George guy they keep talking about looks pretty good. Not convinced he is 1,000,000,000,000,000 times better than Hayward the way some are spouting.
 
Those of you voting for George, have you seen enough Pacers games to really evaluate his skills? I'm sure some have, but I'm betting most have only seen highlights or are just feeding off the opinions of others. He is athletic and long, and developing a great jumper, but his play-making and ball-handling are mediocre. You rarely see him attack off the dribble in the half-court.

It's close, but I would take Hayward. His playmaking ability make him a better fit for the Jazz.

I see Paul George's ceiling as a slightly better version of Shaun Marion, minus the ugly jumper.
 
George's defensive prowess makes him more my kind of player. But, Hayward has better playmaking ability; and, if he develops the ability to take his man off the dribble, then he could be a markedly better offensive player.

Still... when I see George guarding Derrick Rose and then see Hayward still looking for his defensive game, I can't help but be a little jealous. Hopefully GH's defense continues to improve, I know his offense will.
 
AlaskanAssassin said:
I see Paul George's ceiling as a slightly better version of Shaun Marion, minus the ugly jumper.
Click to expand...

And yet you would take Hayward? If George becomes a better version of Marion, then he's a steal. I like Hayward, but I have no hopes for him becoming a Matrix like player.
 
To me the George love on Jazzfanz is shocking. I don't see how he is as good as some are saying. If Was was to ever to offer Wall for George straight up, ind wouldn't even hesitate to pull the trigger on that trade. More productive then Wall really!
 
dalamon said:
Heres the way i see it, NUMBERICA:

If you there was a trade, and Paul George was sent to the Wizards in exchange for Wall being sent to the Pacers, how well would each player play??

I would think that the Wizards would get even worse, and George's stats would seriously lower. On the other hand, John Wall's assist numbers would go up, his shooting would go up, and he'd likely become quite a good point guard. Its always important to look at context; the Pacers are a very solid team this year. The same cannot be said about Wall's, Cousins's, or Monroe's teams. Im sure George would be produce very similarly to the three aforementioned players if he was on their respective teams.


As far as the Hayward vs George comparisons, it is much too early to say. Remember, Chris Paul grew much quicker than DWill did. However, 4 years after the draft, I would have considered Dwill as the better player. Same consideration should be taken with George and Hayward. We don't know how both of the players will pan out with even having them play 10 games into their scond season. It is much too early to judge.


PS: Labelling a player as consistent based off of a <10 game sample from the start of their second season is a bit ridiculous. He sure as hell wasn't consistent last year either, unless 29.7% from 3point range is what you like from a shooting guard.
Click to expand...
No, I'm basing this off of last year, too. Hayward was probably the worst player in the entire NBA until February and then closed the season with a slew of incredible performances. Pair that with what we've seen this year and yeah, George is more consistent.

And just in case anyone isn't clear, I really like Hayward and yes, he is a better playmaker. I just see him as a top-shelf complimentary player at best, not an out-and-out star. George at best is a perennial all-star.

As far as George vs. Wall is concerned, Wall has been total garbage this season and wasn't that good last season either. I reject the notion that players MUST chuck because their teammates aren't good. Teams that lack talent only have a chance as a team, and Wall doesn't understand that (having Nick Young on your team doesn't help either, except that the Wizards are at their best when even he's on the floor).

Also, this is all early. This discussion carries a lot more weight after season 3.
 
Last edited:
YB85 said:
And yet you would take Hayward? If George becomes a better version of Marion, then he's a steal. I like Hayward, but I have no hopes for him becoming a Matrix like player.
Click to expand...

Marion's stats were inflated by playing on the Suns and with Nash all those years. Great player to have on your team but he could never be a #1 or #2 option on a contender. He basically lived off of broken plays, fast break points, hustling for loose balls, and offensive rebounds.
 
Thee jazz fan said:
To me the George love on Jazzfanz is shocking. I don't see how he is as good as some are saying. If Was was to ever to offer Wall for George straight up, ind wouldn't even hesitate to pull the trigger on that trade. More productive then Wall really!
Click to expand...
Wall is really talented.

Wall also has a PER of 13.45 (40th just for his position, considerably below league average) and uses a ton of possessions to get there. His TS% of .429 (god awful, 56th for point guards), 42nd in assist rate (just for his position), and 42nd in turnover rate ("). He also has the 3rd worst on/off +/- on the worst team in the NBA.

If someone is trading for him, they're doing it solely on potential, not on the player they're getting right now. Because quite frankly, he sucks right now.
 
NUMBERICA said:
Wall is really talented.

Wall also has a PER of 13.45 (40th just for his position, considerably below league average) and uses a ton of possessions to get there. His TS% of .429 (god awful, 56th for point guards), 42nd in assist rate (just for his position), and 42nd in turnover rate ("). He also has the 3rd worst on/off +/- on the worst team in the NBA.

If someone is trading for him, they're doing it solely on potential, not on the player they're getting right now. Because quite frankly, he sucks right now.
Click to expand...

but, but, but, but, he's real fast and was drafted #1 kthx
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top