Lol. Their only similarities are being really good at shooting.
Look, what I'm saying is that Curry had a lot of weaknesses coming out. He improved a lot of them. That makes him an extreme anomaly. Players hardly ever improve the way he did. That's why I don't like pointing to a weakness of a player, then pointing at Curry and saying, "he had the same weakness! So player x could improve there too!" Sure, it's possible. So is me having sex with Jessica Alba and cheating on my wife. It's possible. It's also extremely unlikely. That's why I think it's a stupid exercise of thought. Are you following?
Now then, Hayward led us to the 5th or 6th best point differential in the West, with an injured cast. We had a losing record. Based on averages, things just really didn't go our way. Call it bad luck, lack of clutchness, bad coaching, whatever, to me, point differential is more indicative of how good your team is than a win-loss record. Hayward is also our best player. It's not arguable. You're not going to replace him with Bazemore and a rookie and be just as good. You're not going to replace him with Fournier and a rookie and be just as good. This is a really weak draft, and it just isn't the time to trade him. If it was for the 17 draft, then maybe, but not in this one.
How easy is it to replace a 21/6/4 guy that plays great defense Fish? You think they grow on trees? I love ya bud, but you're way off. Outside of Hood, who is streaky as all get out, Hayward is currently our only guy who can create a shot for himself and for others. Bazemore can't do that. Fournier can't really do it. Barnes can't do it. Hayward is not nearly as replaceable as you think.
