So much for hayward extension. Paul George got max deal

[colton]

Well, none of us can know that so the discussion is destined to fall back to what WE think.

I think you didn't understand me.

I was saying the important question isn't whether YOU think that Hayward and George are anywhere comparable. It's whether HAYWARD thinks they are. So the discussion should center on what you believe Hayward thinks, not how much better you think George is than Hayward.

 

[Deleted member 848]

As soon as Hayward is a primary option on the 23rd best team offense in the league (26th when considering FG%), then we can even begin to remotely have this conversation.

Keep in mind that Hibbert and West (particularly West during the regular Season-- moreso George and Hibbert during the playoffs) shouldered the offense at nearly an equal rate.

 

[NUMBERICA]

Keep in mind that Hibbert and West (particularly West during the regular Season-- moreso George and Hibbert during the playoffs) shouldered the offense at nearly an equal rate.

Do that all you want. Paul George was/is a primary option on a contender, can score in an iso (even if an overrated ability), and is also their primary wing defender.

 

[Jazz4ever]

If Hayward is counting on this year to earn him a big paycheck, he might be in for a surprise. Our record will not be good, and don't see him getting much over 30 minutes a game in a stealth tank year.

 

[Ellipse]

So, just wondering who you think is a better player then Hayward on this team? I think it could be Favors by mid season, but for now he still needs to figure out how to stay on the out and not be a liability on offense. If he can learn to stay out of foul trouble, and develop a go to move on offense then I see him being the best player on the team. Is it Kanter or Burks? Don make me laugh! First half of the year he couldn't even get off the bench, and rarely finished a game, and Kanter is still so raw in his development as a player and I don't even believe he got 20 per game in the rotation, and still has to prove he can handle an 82 game season get in 25 to 30 minutes let alone starter mins. Of the core4 Hayward is the one player who has really proven himself and now the jazz want him to be the leader of the team, and there isn't one player that deserves to be the leader more then him at this point.

He's more then just a glue guy or a role player and is miles ahead of guys like Korver or Reddick. I'm sorry but to say otherwise is rediculus.

The question should be: Who will be the best player on this team two years from now? We've seen what Hayward can do and it ain't enough to get us to where we want to be. If Hayward is the best player on this team two years from now, then there is no way we get a championship from this rebuild. If he is the third best player on the team, then a championship may be within reach.

 

[Deleted member 848]

Do that all you want. Paul George was/is a primary option on a contender, can score in an iso (even if an overrated ability), and is also their primary wing defender.

George ranked 69th in the NBA (minimum 100 plays) in isolation play types with a points per possession of .719, per Synergy Sports. When isolated, his effective field goal percentage was 37.9 percent, his worst of any play type.

.

 

[Deleted member 848]

George turned the ball over on 14.6 percent of his isolations. Nobody in the top 20 turned it over that frequently. Also, George only got to the line 6.5 percent of the time, the third lowest percentage of players who had 100 isolations.

 

[Thee Idiotic Minivan K]

The question should be: Who will be the best player on this team two years from now? We've seen what Hayward can do and it ain't enough to get us to where we want to be. If Hayward is the best player on this team two years from now, then there is no way we get a championship from this rebuild. If he is the third best player on the team, then a championship may be within reach.

We have not seen all Hayward can do. He was relegated to a flawed offense and ineptitude coach who thought the best way to score was to throw the ball into Al on every play.

Is it too late to trade up and pick Paul George?



It is too late, isn't it.


****.

 

[NUMBERICA]

And yet, he was one of the best options on a team that almost got to the finals and is an elite defender.

Please don't make Zach Lowe more right.

 

[NUMBERICA]

And in contrast to Hayward, Hayward's contributions in the playoffs are turning into a ghost on a team that snuck into the playoffs and unceremoniously got swept.

Maybe something changes.

 

[Dr. Jones]

Numb hates HAY.

 

[Ellipse]

We have not seen all Hayward can do. He was relegated to a flawed offense and ineptitude coach who thought the best way to score was to throw the ball into Al on every play.

But we have seen even less of what Kanter, Favors, and Burks can do. Hayward played starter minutes last year and we saw what he can do physically. He has shown a talent for making other players on the floor better and his play will improve as he learns to play smarter, but I think the steep part of his learning curve is behind him.

 

[Deleted member 848]

And yet, he was one of the best options on a team that almost got to the finals and is an elite defender.

Please don't make Zach Lowe more right.

A team that got to the Finals because of tremendous defense (where George deserves lots, and lots of credit), an inexplicable emergence from Roy Hibbert, and contributions from all five starters throughout the playoffs.



I don't think you're seeing my point. Paul George is very mediocre offensively. Saying otherwise is either untrue, dishonest, or would need tremendous amounts of evidence that would null nearly every statistical measure that has rated him.



You seem to be side-stepping this point, by saying that "well clearly he's good enough if he made the finals".

No, he made the finals because that Indiana team was absolutely murdering teams on the boards, and by playing defense tenaciously. If George can become a top 20 first option, and Indiana gets an okay bench-- then Miami does not stand a chance.

 

[Deleted member 848]

And in contrast to Hayward, Hayward's contributions in the playoffs are turning into a ghost on a team that snuck into the playoffs and unceremoniously got swept.

Maybe something changes.

How was George's first playoff campaign?


Better yet, how was Kobe in his first playoff appearance??


Lastly, comparing the roles (and therefore performances) of a 2012 Hayward and a 2013 George is laughable at best.

 

[Thee Idiotic Minivan K]

But we have seen even less of what Kanter, Favors, and Burks can do. Hayward played starter minutes last year and we saw what he can do physically. He has shown a talent for making other players on the floor better and his play will improve as he learns to play smarter, but I think the steep part of his learning curve is behind him.

Your basing this on the limited role Ty Corbin forced on him.

 

[Ellipse]

Your basing this on the limited role Ty Corbin forced on him.

And you are basing your evaluation on ... what? Some notion that Hayward unchained is going to become a superstar? I have always liked Hayward's game and I thought the Jazz made the right move in drafting him, but I have never held any illusions that someday he will be an All Star.

 

[NUMBERICA]

How was George's first playoff campaign?


Better yet, how was Kobe in his first playoff appearance??


Lastly, comparing the roles (and therefore performances) of a 2012 Hayward and a 2013 George is laughable at best.

So it's unfair to compare Hayward's performance to George's because of different experience levels, but we're supposed to compare George's first playoff run as a rookie to Hayward's first playoff run in his second year?

And by the way, George's first year in the playoffs were still better.

 

[NUMBERICA]

Look, I'm just trying to state the obvious. People (that aren't wild-eyed homers) don't care that much about decent contributors on mediocre to poor teams and that's what Hayward's been to this point. I don't understand the comparison at this point.

 

[framer]

Ahhh real basketball again. . . .
Every team in the league would NOT max Paul George. That was a disastrous decision. If you are not a top 10 player in the league, you shouldn't be maxed. George isn't now, nor will he ever be, top 10. Add this to a maxed Hibbert. . .
The one way that this might effect Hayward is that nobody will be saving money to slot in George. Oftentimes teams that miss on a free agent will throw the same money at a lesser prospect in order to not come away empty handed. I can see a team that wanted what George brought and missing him talking themselves into believing that Hayward could fill that role too. Take George off the table, and Hayward stands on his own value, which means that he will likely receive less as an RFA. Also, since the Jazz have boatloads of cap space, teams would have to throw crazy money at Hayward to pry him away. If a team wants to offer crazy money, I would suspect they would rather try their luck with Favors, or wait on Kanter.
All that said, if Hayward will sign for 9.5 or under, get that deal done! At that price, Hayward is a far better asset than George, and it ain't even close!

 

[mhindy]

I think George is really really good, but it would scare me a little bit as an Indy fan to see this extension. He is a lights out defender but to live up to this deal his offensive game needs to improve exponentially.

All that being said, I can't really blame them for giving it to him. Just the way the NBA works at this point in time.

(And yes, George is on an entirely different level than Hayward on D and has more potential as an offensive player)