They all may end up with better careers but to say they all show "more skills" than him is ludicrous. Harp was a very, very good player in his prime and plenty skilled. Moreso than any of the four young guys you mentioned at least.
Hayward , Kanter , and Favors are more skilled now as shot blockers than Harpring was in his prime.
Kanter and Favors are more skilled now as rebounders than Harpring was in his prime.
Burks and Hayward are better ball handlers and distributers now than Harpring was in his prime.
Hayward is a better shooter now than Harpring was in his prime.
Burks is a better scorer now than Harping was in his prime.
Hayward and Burks are probably about as good or better as perimeter defenders as Harping was in his prime.
For their size, they each bring more athleticism and a more diverse skill set to the table than Harping did.
Based on Harpring's obsession with fouling, they all now have a higher bball IQ than Harping.
Frankly , I think any one of them could score 17 points a game right now if they were the third option alongside a Stockton and Malone.
It is a shame that this good core group could be destined to having their future success undercut by playing with a team with a reputation for dirty play, and by playing for a team with a reputation for thinking that the way to stop other teams from scoring points is to foul them a lot. You will never get calls, you will never achieve your potential, if you have a rep for being a nasty dirty fouling team. You will never learn great defensive skills if your team thinks that fouling is a good way to get stops. Coaches should get this right. Harpring should find something else to talk about. Maybe listen to announcers for teams that win championships to get some ideas, whatever , that's not my job.
