What if we would have not made the D-Will trade?

[MVP]

Hahaha.

Way worse?!?! Really? Its funny, because now you are arguing that all of the players are just simply a bit better. Your initial point was that the Hayward pick was metaphorical garbage compared to the slew of other players selected after him. Now we are quickly realizing that you are horribly wrong (even after you changed your point) and the most of us are right. Good talk though.

Dude, you completely ignoring first half of the season where Hayward plain sucked. It is not about how he played after all star break when nothing mattered and he got minutes due to injuries to other players on the roster - we talk about all season. Otherwise we can look at CJ scoring 40 pts one game and proclaim him next Kobe.
And I am not saying he is a bust, I said jury is still out on Hayward as his first season was not impressive at all and there were numerous rookies drafted after him who had better stats. Argue all you want about it but it is simple fact.

 

[Deleted member 848]

Dude, you completely ignoring first half of the season where Hayward plain sucked. It is not about how he played after all star break when nothing mattered and he got minutes due to injuries to other players on the roster - we talk about all season. Otherwise we can look at CJ scoring 40 pts one game and proclaim him next Kobe.
And I am not saying he is a bust, I said jury is still out on Hayward as his first season was not impressive at all and there were numerous rookies drafted after him who had better stats. Argue all you want about it but it is simple fact.

So you're comparing the undeniable progress of the last 2-3 months of a rookie's season, to CJs one game, and youre saying its the same thing?? ITS TO BE EXPECTED for the first few months of a rookies season to suck, ESPECIALLY when hes getting **** all for minutes. We DONT talk about "all-season" when its a rookie's season; if you had any remnance of bias-free cognitive function, you would realize that if a rookie starts performing much better once he is given much more minutes towards the end of the season, it is seriously meaningful. Comparing this to CJs one game is utterly idiotic. And please explain to me how the last 2 months of NBA basketball are "meaningless", I am very curious to read your response.

 

[MVP]

ITS TO BE EXPECTED for the first few months of a rookies season to suck, ESPECIALLY when hes getting **** all for minutes.
And please explain to me how the last 2 months of NBA basketball are "meaningless", I am very curious to read your response.

He had games with good minutes in first half of the season and he sucked - 28min vs 76.rs, 4pts, 5TO for example
Take away last 10 games where he got his nice stats when Jazz were out of playoffs and nothing really mattered and see what stats you get for rest of the season.
Talk to me after he plays well in the games that matter.

 

[Deleted member 848]

He had games with good minutes in first half of the season and he sucked - 28min vs 76.rs, 4pts, 5TO for example
Take away last 10 games where he got his nice stats when Jazz were out of playoffs and nothing really mattered and see what stats you get for rest of the season.
Talk to me after he plays well in the games that matter.

There are 23 games after the all-star break, not ten. The stats I have been using include 13 other games before the period in which you think that "doesnt matter" so my data still holds, and your points are proven foolish yet again. Also, the Jazz were 36-36 with ten games left in the season, a playoff berth was still possible. Also, out of the final ten games, only 2 of the teams were out of the playoff picture, with he 8 others all trying to fight for the best possible seed (Lakers, Hornets, Trailblazers, Nuggets, etc.) So they do all matter; Im not sure why you think that they dont. You cant tell me that the Lakers weren't motivated to win when we beat them 86-85 at the staples center.

Here is what it comes down to. Most of the posters here unanimously agree that Gordon Hayward improved tremendously, with even coach Phil Jackson and Kobe Bryant touting him as having a very bright future in this league, with Bryant even saying that he think Hayward will become a Jeff Hornacek who can put the ball down better. So not only does this entire forum disagree with you, but the Zen Master and one of the most talented basketball players of the decade is siding with us as well. The games that Hayward did well in, were not as a result of teams not playing their starters, not showing the will to win, other characteristics that would deem a performance less impressive. His performances were against teams trying to get the bets possible playoff seed, with all of their starters playing >30 minutes and still not managing to shut down Gordon Hayward. Rookies showing improvement at the end of the season, and then continuing to improve onto the next season is no strange ocurrence. Wesley Matthews improved after the allstar break, and continued his momentum into next season.. Same with Deron Williams. Same with Derrick Favors. Same with almost all good players who started their season with limited minutes, only to improve once their minutes were finally increased

The only reason you could deny any of this, is to try and win this argument for some stupid reason. The fact that youre trying to pull anything out of your *** to take away an amazing improvement from one of our future cornerstones of the franchise for self-pride reasons is completely pathetic and unsubstantiated; you might as well have your fan-card revoked. Just give up already; you lost this argument a long time ago when you said drafting Gordon Hayward really wasnt that wise, seeing as there were "much better" players selected after him. Now you're just beating around the bush, and the longer you do it the more foolish you become.

 

[MVP]

T
The only reason you could deny any of this, is to try and win this argument for some stupid reason. The fact that youre trying to pull anything out of your *** to take away an amazing improvement from one of our future cornerstones of the franchise for self-pride reasons is completely pathetic and unsubstantiated; you might as well have your fan-card revoked. Just give up already; you lost this argument a long time ago when you said drafting Gordon Hayward really wasnt that wise, seeing as there were "much better" players selected after him. Now you're just beating around the bush, and the longer you do it the more foolish you become.

Who are you kidding? Cornerstone of franchise? LMAO...role players are never cornerstone of franchises, and Hayward will never be more then that. Amazing improvement? Few games in double figures at the end of losing season??? Check out Samardo Samuels or whatever his name is from Cleveland, he played "amazingly" well at the end of the season as well but nobody on Cavs boards proclaiming him "cornerstone of the franchise"...Whatever - you are even worse homer then I thought. There is really no point in talking to you as you obviously can't look at the player without your Jazz glasses on.
I do not care about winning some kind of argument by the way, I have my opinion about O'Connor's drafting ability and it is not going to change.
And as I said it is to early to tell if Hayward was the best pick for the Jazz - I do not think so, you can have your own opinion, it does not mean that you are right.
And saying that all forum unanimously agrees with you is a bit of the stretch don't you think so?

 

[Deleted member 848]

Who are you kidding? Cornerstone of franchise? LMAO...role players are never cornerstone of franchises, and Hayward will never be more then that. Amazing improvement? Few games in double figures at the end of losing season??? Check out Samardo Samuels or whatever his name is from Cleveland, he played "amazingly" well at the end of the season as well but nobody on Cavs boards proclaiming him "cornerstone of the franchise"...Whatever - you are even worse homer then I thought. There is really no point in talking to you as you obviously can't look at the player without your Jazz glasses on.
I do not care about winning some kind of argument by the way, I have my opinion about O'Connor's drafting ability and it is not going to change.
And as I said it is to early to tell if Hayward was the best pick for the Jazz - I do not think so, you can have your own opinion, it does not mean that you are right.
And saying that all forum unanimously agrees with you is a bit of the stretch don't you think so?

"Few games in double figures"? Thats absolutely all that improved? Lol, why on earth am I arguing with you.


PS: I enjoy how you chronically only quote, and reply to 25% of my posts, ignoring the rest of the information that you simply have no response to; another sign that you really don't know what the hell you're talking about, and your pre-formed opinion of KOC (that you said yourself wouldn't change) is a textbook example of confirmation-bias. You are making me hope that the Jazz don't resign AK after the lockout, just so you and your 4 functioning brain cells can tag along with AK to a Phoenix Suns forum or wtv. And no, I think that Gordon Hayward was an absolutely stellar pick at 9th at all- in fact, the only poster I can think of that would disagree with this is KOC_BEGONE, who's coincidentally another one of the most impotent posters on this forum. The similarities between you and him are striking.

 

[MVP]

PS: I enjoy how you chronically only quote, and reply to 25% of my posts, ignoring the rest of the information that you simply have no response to; another sign that you really don't know what the hell you're talking about

just so you and your 4 functioning brain cells can tag along

who's coincidentally another one of the most impotent posters on this forum.

I see you like to insult other posters about their mental ability even if I did not say anything personal to you except that you are a bad homer. So if you want to keep insulting my mental ability, or my basketball knowledge, ( even if you are the one who had no clue who drafted AK ) go ahead, I have thick skin.

Reason I do not quote other of your crap is that there is not a single reason I would need to quote the absurd homerism (based on games after all star break ) you posting. I get it - you like Hayward and think O'Connor did "stellar" job at drafting him... Fine, I guess just time will tell if you are right or wrong. Just doesn't mean you need to push your biased excitement about him after few good games as the only right thing to other people and call them names ok?

 

[Dr. Jones]

time will tell

Awwwweesssommmeee!! Let time tell. See you back here in, what, 3 years?????

 

[MVP]

Let time tell. See you back here in, what, 3 years?????

You might be on to something. That's how long average O'Connor first round pick lasts with the Jazz

 

[Stifle Tower]

He had games with good minutes in first half of the season and he sucked - 28min vs 76.rs, 4pts, 5TO for example
Take away last 10 games where he got his nice stats when Jazz were out of playoffs and nothing really mattered and see what stats you get for rest of the season.
Talk to me after he plays well in the games that matter.

So how do you explain AK's first year stats with the Jazz? He had a helluva lot more playing time in Europe than did Hayward in college and sucked, on average, the whole season (as mentioned in my previous post, 45%/25% shooting). Hayward, even after his miserable start, ended up shooting 49%/47%. Hmmm, I guess rookies should be evaluated solely on their first 3 months in the league. Everything after that is meaningless. Obviously, AK NEVER improved from his first season and we can expect that Gordon has already reached his ceiling. The last half of the season was a complete aberration; his shooting will most certainlty drop to Ronnie Price levels once play resumes.

 

[MVP]

So how do you explain AK's first year stats with the Jazz? He had a helluva lot more playing time in Europe than did Hayward in college and sucked, on average, the whole season (as mentioned in my previous post, 45%/25% shooting). .

Sucked? Crazy how people forget things... at that time all Jazz fans were posting that he is most exciting rookie Jazz ever had, nobody was saying anything about sucking.
Even that average FG% did not prevented him from being selected to All NBA rookie team. Why you so focused on AK's shooting FG anyway? Like he was expected to be a shooter? He did numerous other things great, like defense and rebounding - for example he had more steals in his first season then Stockton in his rookie year. By the way you know what Stockton's 3%fg were first 3 years? 18.2%, 13.3%, 17.9%... so AK actually was doing way better then John in his rookie year when it comes to 3pt shooting
There is obviously good chance Hayward will improve, and he should - otherwise it would be really disasterous pick... but how high is his ceiling? All-star? No way in my book. I do not think he will be any more then poor man's Harpring with slightly better passing and worse rebounding.

 

[LogGrad98]

Just from what we have seen so far, I would place Hayward's range of potential like this (of course true worst case is out of the league and true best case is the next LeBron, neither of which are very likely):

Likely Worst Case - A more athletic Harpring with better ball handling skills, 1 step above current CJ
Likely Best Case - A more athletic, taller Hornacek with better defensive skills

I think he has a fairly narrow band, potentially-speaking. I don't see him becoming the next LeBron, for example, but I can see him as a solid borderline All-star, more than solid contributor, 2nd or 3rd option on a solid winning team. On the other end, I don't really see him bottoming out completely either, so my guess would be a contributor, bench energy guy on a solid winning team as the worst case.

Of course, if the NBA is done for the next 4 or 5 years, then none of this means **** really.