What's new
By:

For those of you doubting Gordon Hayward...

AKMVP said:
Posts like that are such a typical display of homerism on this site. Hayward is not a better passer or ball handler. George averages more assists per game and per 36 min and has higher AST%.

https://www.basketball-reference.co...m=0&p1=georgpa01&y1=2013&p2=haywago01&y2=2013

Please explain to me by what undocumented stats or criteria Hayward is better passer?
Click to expand...


George was the team's primary ball handler and facilitator while Hayward played more off-the-ball and shared playmaking.

What is the Assist to Usage Ratio? Also have to consider Turnovers.

You can't just look at assist and say that player is the better passer. Hayward played with Jefferson, who has to be one of the least assisted big men due to his style of scoring.
 
Cyrone Torbin said:
George was the team's primary ball handler and facilitator while Hayward played more off-the-ball and shared playmaking.

What is the Assist to Usage Ratio?
.
Click to expand...

You grabbing straws my friend. George still beats Hayward in usage to assist ratio ( 23.5% usage and 4.1 asists vs 22.1% usage and 3.0 assists as you can see their usage % is very similar ).. Lets just agree for once without any excuses. It used to make me sick when people where arguing that Deron was better PG then Paul while he was still Jazzman based on few head to head matchups.
That player A plays for Jazz but has worse stats then player B does not give player A any home discount or advantage, lets be objective here.
 
My 2 cents.... I think its l pretty obvious that george is better right now. (Every gm In the league would rather have geoerge than hayward I think)
But.... I think hayward was in a worse situation than george, so george had an advantage. (More responsibility, better coach, better supporting cast, weaker conference, more minutes)

I think next year haywards number will be as good as, and probably better than, george.
 
ncoloradojazz said:
stats are what nerds look at who don't play the game. Trying to say he is even to paul George is laughable... Just watch paul George play and then watch Gordon play ... Gordon on most teams is a 6th man and paul is a flat out stud.,Laughable trying to compare them. This place cracks me up sometime. Bet if the pacers were dum enough to trade George for Gordon that the jazz front office would do it in a heartbeat.
Click to expand...

paul george is overrated imo, he sucks really and they can't eliminate NYK if Roy Hibbert didn't put up GOAT stats. Tyson chandler is son of a ..............................
 
fishonjazz said:
My 2 cents.... I think its l pretty obvious that george is better right now. (Every gm In the league would rather have geoerge than hayward I think)
But.... I think hayward was in a worse situation than george, so george had an advantage. (More responsibility, better coach, better supporting cast, weaker conference, more minutes)

I think next year haywards number will be as good as, and probably better than, george.
Click to expand...

Agree I think George is better overall, but I stand by my statement that Hayward is better at everything offensively (though it may be by a marginal amount). George just possess elite defensive and rebounding ability that put him over the top.
 
AKMVP said:
Posts like that are such a typical display of homerism on this site. Hayward is not a better passer or ball handler. George averages more assists per game and per 36 min and has higher AST%.

https://www.basketball-reference.co...m=0&p1=georgpa01&y1=2013&p2=haywago01&y2=2013

Please explain to me by what undocumented stats or criteria Hayward is better passer?
Click to expand...
And how often in those 36 minutes does Gordon touch the ball compared to George? Because George is clearly asked to be a larger part of the offense so far in his career and Hayward has had to find his spots to play off of Al and Millsap. IMO Hayward is the better passer and the very slim margin George has in your stat is more indicative of how much they each have the ball and have so far been asked to do.
 
AKMVP said:
You grabbing straws my friend. George still beats Hayward in usage to assist ratio ( 23.5% usage and 4.1 asists vs 22.1% usage and 3.0 assists as you can see their usage % is very similar ).. Lets just agree for once without any excuses. It used to make me sick when people where arguing that Deron was better PG then Paul while he was still Jazzman based on few head to head matchups.
That player A plays for Jazz but has worse stats then player B does not give player A any home discount or advantage, lets be objective here.
Click to expand...
The stats shown in the OP clearly indicate that Hayward is on a very similar level to George. No excuses the stats show that Hayward is not significantly worse or better than George or Leonard. And in fact indicate that Hayward is better in a lot of area's that most people assume George is better at.
.
I've maintained that if George and Hayward switched roles that Hayward would be the guy that looks like a star around the country while everybody here would be arguing that George is better. I think they are very close talent wise, and one (George) has been put in a place where he is seen more and has had an advantage so far. While the other one has been overshadowed by the other players on his team and the system they ran.
 
I think we all like/love Hay, but personally I don't think he's a sure thing.
Things are looking good, but some questions about his shooting, and ability as a leader remain.
 
gregbroncs said:
And how often in those 36 minutes does Gordon touch the ball compared to George? Because George is clearly asked to be a larger part of the offense so far in his career and Hayward has had to find his spots to play off of Al and Millsap. IMO Hayward is the better passer and the very slim margin George has in your stat is more indicative of how much they each have the ball and have so far been asked to do.
Click to expand...

Clearly you do not understand what usage rate or AST% or ast/usage ratio means - otherwise you would not ask such a question. To put it simple way for you - George touches ball slightly more then Hayward ( 1.4% higher usage rate) and produces more assists ( 1.1 assist per game more ) compared to the amount of time they both touch the ball or are involved in offense = George is better passer. There is just no way of twisting or arguing about it.
Hayward is better shooter the George in regular season.
To me true quality of a player usually shows up during playoffs. Hayward shrunk and disappeared in single experience he had vs Spurs while George excelled and last year he played like superstar. Big difference.
 
AKMVP said:
Clearly you do not understand what usage rate or AST% or ast/usage ratio means - otherwise you would not ask such a question. To put it simple way for you - George touches ball slightly more then Hayward ( 1.4% higher usage rate) and produces more assists ( 1.1 assist per game more ) compared to the amount of time they both touch the ball or are involved in offense = George is better passer. There is just no way of twisting or arguing about it.
Hayward is better shooter the George in regular season.
To me true quality of a player usually shows up during playoffs. Hayward shrunk and disappeared in single experience he had vs Spurs while George excelled and last year he played like superstar. Big difference.
Click to expand...
Clearly you don't understand how per 36 works. George gets .4 more assists per 36 minutes not 1.1. So having a usage rate of 1.4% more means that he is about the same as Gordon in assists. Also regarding usage rate they are counting catching the ball in shooting position the same as being the guy setting up the offense and passing it to guys in scoring position. So I fail to see how it is relevant to my argument.
.
In George's 1st playoffs experience he sucked every bit as much as Hayward did in his 1st playoffs.
 
gregbroncs said:
Yes because .4 assists in 36 minutes while having the ball far more often is "clearly" better.
Click to expand...

1.4% difference in usage rate is not far more often. It is barely more often. And I think you should look at per game numbers and not per 36 min.
 
This thread should probably die now
 
At the end of the day it is impossible to have unbiased discussion here - I am out. Sorry, but to me George is All-star and future superstar while Hayward - decent starter, good role player. Until he proves otherwise you guys can call him god or better then George or whatever, as long as that makes you happy I guess.
 
AKMVP said:
1.4% difference in usage rate is not far more often. It is barely more often. And I think you should look at per game numbers and not per 36 min.
Click to expand...
.4% is not clearly better. With 1.4% more usage.

Why go per game when George plays more minutes? Obviously you want to use per game because they skew the #'s to your argument. So when on the floor he touches the ball 1.4% more often. George will have better #'s per game because he played more minutes per game. So he was 1.4% more likely to touch the ball per possession and he got more possessions per game because he played more minutes. Making the amount of times he touched the ball in the game mean more than just some usage %.
 
AKMVP said:
At the end of the day it is impossible to have unbiased discussion here - I am out. Sorry, but to me George is All-star and future superstar while Hayward - decent starter, good role player. Until he proves otherwise you guys can call him god or better then George or whatever, as long as that makes you happy I guess.
Click to expand...
George is an all star (a term I find a joke considering the way the come up with them) in the East. Does he make the all star team if playing for the Jazz in the west with Millsap and Al taking most of the shots?
 
images
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top