What's new
By:

Why Hayward is not an all start/subscript: his limitations

A

actusreus

Well-Known Member
1. He's not elite athletically.
2. He's not that fast.
3. He scores a lot from the free throw line, just like Harden, but unlike Harden, he can't get past guys. That's why he has to do all the long steps, the contact and hangs, the head flailing, looking for fouls. I give him mad props for crafting his game around his limitations, but it's definitely not fun to watch. Everyone on here knows that every time he drives, the odds that he'll slip, turn it over, or get rejected, are equal or greater to the odds he'll make the basket. Not good.
4. He's really improved his shooting, and he's a great passer, but you saw what happened last night. When he and Kemba were neck and neck, Kemba kept his foot on the gas, and Gordon choked. Well, that's not fair, 36, or whatever he had, definitely not choking. But each guy needed to do more to win, and one guy did. (Note, the guy who did isn't on our team, lol)
5. I really like our team, and I really like Gordon, but come on, he's not an all-star. And this team can't compete without every single player healthy and contributing. Even then, we're never beating the top two seeds in the West. One star away. . .
 
Hayward has kind of become Paul Pierce during the KG/Allen days. That's without having KG/Allen around him.
 
Hayward is a poor mans AK. If Hayward at his peak was on the Dwill era team he would hardly touch the floor. Lets be honest he doesn't do anything great he is just above average in all categories.
 
Hayward will always be an all-start in my book!
 
Mission Accomplished said:
Hayward is a poor mans AK. If Hayward at his peak was on the Dwill era team he would hardly touch the floor. Lets be honest he doesn't do anything great he is just above average in all categories.
Click to expand...
A lineup up of Dwill, Hayward. Ak, Boozer, and Memo would have been great. Hayward would have gotten the start at the shooting guard spot and plenty of minutes at the 3 spot. Now add a defensive big to that team and it might have won it all. Saying Hayward wouldn't hardly touch the floor is just plain ignorance or more likely blind hate. Being above average at everything makes him really good, especially on a team with good players around him. Hayward is a step below all star but he is still improving every year. If this team was healthy and in the 5 spot or higher going into the all star break, he makes the all star team.

Sent from my 0PM92 using Tapatalk
 
If you love em let em go.

I think it's time for both Hayward and Favors. I would honestly still enjoy watching Burks, Hood, Gobert even though we would lose a lot without Favs & G-time(don't want to watch Burke though). The Jazz have a stellar supporting cast locked in for the next 6 years. We need to plug in an all star or 2 and that means the draft. Cashing in those 2 now will bring a lot back and give them both better careers in appropriate roles. Or we could struggle for the next few years and watch G-time walk in FA leaving us just 4 years to prove to Rudy that Utah can be legit.
 
Do you know why Hayward is actually more valuable than many "all-stars"? Versatility and his ability to work well within many different lineups. Our team is not an iso ball team who has a bonafide go to scorer, but the backhanded compliments and then just down right bashing of Hayward drives me crazy. He is a complete player with some nominal limitations... there are only a handful of Durants, Currys, and Lebrons.

This team is built differently than most and if all healthy who knows what we can do. Because of the way we are built though to be great we have to be healthy. If all stars were measured based on helping teams win basketball games Hayward would be an all-star. Hayward has good stats, but if he used more possessions he could certainly push those stats higher. If he took defensive possessions off like DMC, Derozan, Harden, and others he might have more energy to do even more for us.

Hayward has carried us. He has no veteran help and is out there with guys like Neto, Withey, Chris Johnson, Trevor Booker, Joe Ingles, etc. and we are still around .500. How many of those guys are rotation players on other teams? I think Hayward is the least of our problems right now.
 
♪alt13 said:
If you love em let em go.

I think it's time for both Hayward and Favors. I would honestly still enjoy watching Burks, Hood, Gobert even though we would lose a lot without Favs & G-time(don't want to watch Burke though). The Jazz have a stellar supporting cast locked in for the next 6 years. We need to plug in an all star or 2 and that means the draft. Cashing in those 2 now will bring a lot back and give them both better careers in appropriate roles. Or we could struggle for the next few years and watch G-time walk in FA leaving us just 4 years to prove to Rudy that Utah can be legit.
Click to expand...

Build around a supporting cast? Sounds like a fantastic way to run a franchise. Yep, build around guys you can sign on the free agent market at any time for 5-10 million and throw darts at a draft board. How could no other GM have tried this brilliant strategy?
 
We could have three dudes who are top 5-7 at their position in Rudy, Favs, and Hayward. We also have good supporting players who could develop into something more in Trey Lyles, Rodney Hood, and Alec Burks. Trey Burke has also improved. We have the wild card in Exum and a **** ton of cap space (that may do us no good) and ample draft picks. Maybe we should... I don't know... let it breathe a bit.
 
King Cy said:
Hayward has kind of become Paul Pierce during the KG/Allen days. That's without having KG/Allen around him.
Click to expand...
Talk about aiming low...what about this?: "Hayward has kind of become Michael Jordan during the Washington Wizards days. And that's without Jerry Stackhouse and Christian Laettner around him."?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top