What's new
By:

Following 2016 potential draftees

idiot said:
Shot the 3 better than Lyles (though only 28% -- same as Dejounte Murray). Defense probably Lyles-esque (or Love-esque).
Click to expand...

Seems really similar to Lyles in style: decent length, some playmaking/basketball-feel skills considering size, good offensive agility but defense a legit question, shot wasn't great as a freshman but looks like there's every reason for it to translate/improve in the NBA. About an inch bigger than Lyles.
 
fishonjazz said:
Reading this and then looking at his three point percentage last year and the amount of attempts, plus his two point percentage and free throw percentage and ppg plus his size (and like you said, quickness athleticism and ability to create off the dribble) is easy to understand the steph curry comp I have heard.

Plus he will likely be drafted right at about the same spot as curry too
I think even some of the criticisms/weaknesses are similar to curry coming out of college
Click to expand...

Good grief Fish. Comparing Hield to Curry is off the rails stupid.

Let me blunt, NikmStauskas was better at creating his own shot in comparison to Hield. Hield is better than Valentine at creating his own shot, but that doesn't mean he's good at it. He has a pretty weak handle, not much of a driver, not a great athlete, just average in that regard. Certainly not quick.

Second, Steph Curry is an anomaly. An outlier. People rarely ever improve like he did. It's possible of course, but it rarely ever happens. Hield is much more Stauskas than Curry in regards to impact.
 
Thee jazz fan said:
I think u only trade Hayward for a sure thing.
Click to expand...

First off, even though we have a difference of opinion, thank you for not being a dick about it.

Any pick is a gamble. But there appears to be a difference of gambling strategy. Some poker players are very conservative - and you appear to fit into this category.
Other gamblers take calculated risks. That's my camp.

I'm not saying be reckless with our chips, but if the chance at the jackpot only costs us a player like Hayward, then yeah, I'd call. It didn't cost me much.

So now we're back to debating Hayward's value. And I'm of the opinion, which someone else expressed already, that the Jazz have guys that can pretty much replace what Hayward gives us. So it's not like we're risking much of anything at all.


Who knows if Jamal Murray is a star. But the potential is there. Who has a good comp for him? Lillard maybe?

But if he busts, well, it didn't cost us all that much. Hayward isn't a star. He's replaceable. IMO.
 
BENTLEY said:
First off, even though we have a difference of opinion, thank you for not being a dick about it.

Any pick is a gamble. But there appears to be a difference of gambling strategy. Some poker players are very conservative - and you appear to fit into this category.
Other gamblers take calculated risks. That's my camp.

I'm not saying be reckless with our chips, but if the chance at the jackpot only costs us a player like Hayward, then yeah, I'd call. It didn't cost me much.

So now we're back to debating Hayward's value. And I'm of the opinion, which someone else expressed already, that the Jazz have guys that can pretty much replace what Hayward gives us. So it's not like we're risking much of anything at all.


Who knows if Jamal Murray is a star. But the potential is there. Who has a good comp for him? Lillard maybe?

But if he busts, well, it didn't cost us all that much. Hayward isn't a star. He's replaceable. IMO.
Click to expand...
The potential isnt there. He is a 3rd tier prospect who is undersized.

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk
 
If he bust it won't cost us much? Only 6 years of player development for our best player

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk
 
BENTLEY said:
First off, even though we have a difference of opinion, thank you for not being a dick about it.

Any pick is a gamble. But there appears to be a difference of gambling strategy. Some poker players are very conservative - and you appear to fit into this category.
Other gamblers take calculated risks. That's my camp.

I'm not saying be reckless with our chips, but if the chance at the jackpot only costs us a player like Hayward, then yeah, I'd call. It didn't cost me much.

So now we're back to debating Hayward's value. And I'm of the opinion, which someone else expressed already, that the Jazz have guys that can pretty much replace what Hayward gives us. So it's not like we're risking much of anything at all.


Who knows if Jamal Murray is a star. But the potential is there. Who has a good comp for him? Lillard maybe?

But if he busts, well, it didn't cost us all that much. Hayward isn't a star. He's replaceable. IMO.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with this at all. U talk about Hayward like he's dime a dozen type of player. I think I like him as a player a lot more then u.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#bern said:
Good grief Fish. Comparing Hield to Curry is off the rails stupid.

Let me blunt, NikmStauskas was better at creating his own shot in comparison to Hield. Hield is better than Valentine at creating his own shot, but that doesn't mean he's good at it. He has a pretty weak handle, not much of a driver, not a great athlete, just average in that regard. Certainly not quick.

Second, Steph Curry is an anomaly. An outlier. People rarely ever improve like he did. It's possible of course, but it rarely ever happens. Hield is much more Stauskas than Curry in regards to impact.
Click to expand...
Wasn't my comp dick licker. I have heard others use it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top