Wow, defensive are we? Even got offended about the Holiday comment. Proof it was true I guess. For the record, I wasn't criticizing you for observing the Holiday, but rather for hiding behind it. Trust me, I observed the Holiday too. But I also know that if you're already reading Jazz bball posts on the Holiday anyway, and if you take 5 mins to read a post you'll probably take 5 1/2 to finish it. I don't even care if you read my posts, just don't be a coward about it.
Still you haven't addressed my comparisons in my first rebuttal post (with regard to hand size, agility, sprint times, etc.). And I doubt you will attempt to, because you have no way to refute the #'s and the comparisons. Not to mention that it makes your first 20 posts completely obsolete. As far as my "garbage posts", I suppose I have the patience to keep posting mine as long as you keep up your diarrhea of the mouth. Have you ever actually played basketball? Timing and IQ are just as important in help defense as having monkey arms is. You look at a players physical tools way too much. I was referring to the primary positions Hayward would be guarding, not his help defense. But even on help defense, it won't matter. He had 2 steals off his man and a help defense block in his first Summer League game, not because he has long arms but because he's smart, has good timing, and he's still freakin 6 foot 8 for crying out loud. A 6 foot 8 wingspan is not "alligator arms", cmon...don't be a tool. But as long as you're bringing up other Jazz (or ex-Jazz) players, Brewer is a perfect comparison. Because although he gets steals with his long arms, he also gets burned for not playing "smart defense". Korver, as another comparison, plays much smarter defense, but isn't fast enough to be terribly effective. Hayward is much bigger and taller (and faster) than Korver and seems to be just as smart. He'll probably play the same position as KK (giving him an advantage). Further, he will stay in front of his man because he has similar anticipation, shiftiness and timing to Brewer (though not the insane length). In the end, he won't be AK, but he'll be fine on defense. I can't believe you actually think I was saying (in your words) "Hayward needs a smaller wingspan". Obviously I'd take a bigger wingspan, all else considered. I just happen to believe he has other abilities that will make up for his "just good" (not great) wingspan. Oh and by the way, just because Booz and Memo don't play help defense, doesn't mean they're not supposed to. If our bigs rotated like Boston, our wings wouldn't be so exposed. I'd take undersized guys like Milsap and Hayward over Memo and Booz any day. It's about heart and effort, not wingspan.
As to trusting the experts, I'm just glad they don't trust you. It's one thing if some experts say it's a good pick and he'll be good, but when "all" of them say it...it kinda holds some weight. Nobody raved about Kirk Snyder or Humphries the way they do about Hayward, and if anything, with Hayward chosen at 9 he should have been more scrutinized. But he wasn't. Only by Jazz fans who didn't want to see any more white guys, no matter how good he might be.
By the way, I never claimed Hayward was the best athlete all around in the draft. Or even a top flight athlete. Had you read my second post, you'd have learned that I was surprised to see that in a few of the categories he compared favorably to some of the top athletes. Not even my first post claimed he was the best, just that he ought to be given more credit by some of the haters (which you clearly are one).
The difference between guys like you, and guys like me, is that I admit when I'm wrong. I admitted I neglected the wingspan measurement in my 2nd post. In fact, after reading your responses to my very 1st post, I believed you were probably right (because you stated them so emphatically, and everyone seemed to agree with you). I was actually planning to concede all the way around, until I actually went back to check your comparisons. When I found just as many valid comparisons contrary to yours, and which totally refuted your point, obviously I couldn't concede those.
So you're welcome for the cheap shots. I thank you for your jabs at me as well (since the beginning).
