Gordon Hayward has the consistency of CJ Miles

[b_line]

Korver has maintained a 42% accuracy from behind the arc over the course of ELEVEN SEASONS...that is an absolutely amazing feat. Not many players have ever attained that type of accuracy for that long of a period. Players like Larry Bird, Jeff Hornacek, Reggie Miller, Ray Allen, Dirk Notwitzki, are below Korver in terms of career 3PT%. But yeah, go ahead and pick one season from Hayward to convince yourself that he can be as good as Korver from 3.

yeah you have probably not looked at Hayward's stats at all right? For his career before this season, he was shooting .411 from three. This season is 1/4 of the way through. Hayward has always finished the season strong. If you think this season is the norm for him, then yeah, he will not ever be close to as good as a shooter as Korver. But guess what, the past three seasons say that he is just about on par with Korver for 3 pt shooting percentages. Hayward's .411, to Kyle's .421.

Hayward is a damn good spot up shooter. If he was being asked to play that role on a championship team, he would look awesome. The reason he looks crappy this year is because he was the only one who teams had to defend for like 2/3 the games he has played in so far. Now that Favors is kind of scoring consistently, and Burke is taking a lot of the offensive pressure off of Hayward, I expect his shooting percentages to be somewhat closer to his career averages. They will still probably be a little lower, but over the next few seasons he will probably improve on those.

 

[akirac73]

yeah you have probably not looked at Hayward's stats at all right? For his career before this season, he was shooting .411 from three. This season is 1/4 of the way through. Hayward has always finished the season strong. If you think this season is the norm for him, then yeah, he will not ever be close to as good as a shooter as Korver. But guess what, the past three seasons say that he is just about on par with Korver for 3 pt shooting percentages. Hayward's .411, to Kyle's .421.

Hayward is a damn good spot up shooter. If he was being asked to play that role on a championship team, he would look awesome. The reason he looks crappy this year is because he was the only one who teams had to defend for like 2/3 the games he has played in so far. Now that Favors is kind of scoring consistently, and Burke is taking a lot of the offensive pressure off of Hayward, I expect his shooting percentages to be somewhat closer to his career averages. They will still probably be a little lower, but over the next few seasons he will probably improve on those.

You're comparing Hayward's small sample size of three seasons (but then you conveniently disregard his horrendous shooting percentages through his fourth season) to Korver's career 3pt shooting through 11 seasons. OK got it, seems like a totally fair and unbiased use of stats.

Another thing you're simply not understanding...Korver is a pure shooter, meaning he can hit threes fading away, coming off a curl, with a hand in his face, with his feet set, with his feet not set, it doesn't matter...the guy is simply uncanny. He played for the Jazz...you should know this.

Hayward on the other hand needs to have all of the stars aligned to make a three (needs to be wide open, feet properly set, time to line up his shot, etc.) take any of these conditions away and he's basically throwing up a prayer.


I don't know if this website will be around in 6 years, but come back and see me after Hayward plays 10 seasons in the NBA and lets talk again. I guarantee you Hayward will not have a 40% career 3ptFG%. No way in hell...

 

[b_line]

You're comparing Hayward's small sample size of three seasons (but then you conveniently disregard his horrendous shooting percentages through his fourth season) to Korver's career 3pt shooting through 11 seasons. OK got it, seems like a totally fair and unbiased use of stats.

Another thing you're simply not understanding...Korver is a pure shooter, meaning he can hit threes fading away, coming off a curl, with a hand in his face, with his feet set, with his feet not set, it doesn't matter...the guy is simply uncanny. He played for the Jazz...you should know this.

Hayward on the other hand needs to have all of the stars aligned to make a three (needs to be wide open, feet properly set, time to line up his shot, etc.) take any of these conditions away and he's basically throwing up a prayer.


I don't know if this website will be around in 6 years, but come back and see me after Hayward plays 10 seasons in the NBA and lets talk again. I guarantee you Hayward will not have a 40% career 3ptFG%. No way in hell...

Ok, lets compare their first three seasons then, when Korver was actually a slightly worse shooter than Hayward at .405 compared to Hayward's .415.

And if you are going to talk to me about small sample size, then let's go with the 22 games you are calling horrendous as a small sample size. I would tend to think that three full seasons would be a better indicator of how good a shooter is than the first 22 games of one season.

If Hayward has to have all the stars align, then how in the hell did he make so damn many shots in his first three years in the NBA? If you don't think Hayward is a good spot up shooter when the floor is spaced, then you are an idiot. He is elite at that one skill. If Korver was on this team, with no spacing, he would be shooting a terrible percentage as well. It is not about who can shoot better contested three point shots, because Korver does not make a living shooting those. The way Korver gets his shots are because he has a good post player or two on his team, as well as a point guard who can drive the ball, thus taking the defense a little bit away from him. Last year, Hayward thrived on the wing shooting a high percentage threes because Millsap and Al would draw so much attention away from Hayward.

If you want to say that Hayward sucks this year, that he is inconsistent, and that he needs to be better at a myriad of things, that is fine. But saying that he is not a good spot shooter is beyond stupid, especially when he has good spacing. In fact, the argument against Hayward getting over 10 million per year is that he is a one dimensional spot up shooter.

 

[akirac73]

Korver is an elite level shooter. Take a look at this grantland article (scroll down to the last third of the page). Hayward is not even mentioned nor does he deserve to be.
.
https://www.grantland.com/story/_/i...ntroduces-new-way-understand-nba-best-scorers
.
Then check our our very own Jazz homer David Locke and read his article where he clearly thinks Hayward is NOT an elite shooter.
.
https://weareutahjazz.com/lockedonj...mula-who-on-last-years-jazz-was-best-shooter/
.
Also, Name one person on this message board that has stated Hayward is not worth $10M/year because he is a one-dimensional spot up shooter? I've never seen this at all. Most people don't think he's worth the money because he's unbelievably inconsistent, he often disappears or fails in clutch situations, he's not a leader or #1 on an NBA team, etc.

 

[b_line]

Ok. I give up. Hayward completely sucks at shooting threes. Despite his career average which is above league average, I will bow to your infinite wisdom and say that he is no where near being a good spot up three point shooter.

Next, let's break down his poor passing and assist numbers. I would also like to hear about how he is a below average defender.

 

[Diamond77]

Hayward is a decent all-around player but he excels in nothing and he is not a difference-maker.

He would be worth $10M/year only if he were at Kirilenko level. AK was a huge difference-maker with the Jazz!

 

[akirac73]

Next, let's break down his poor passing and assist numbers. I would also like to hear about how he is a below average defender.

OK since you brought it up...his assist numbers are nice but he does make a lot of bad passes/decisions (he has the 8th most turnovers in the league). He's an above average defender that is big and athletic enough to cover most shooting guards, he rotates pretty well, and is excellent in transition defense (has a knack for blocking shots from behind). However, Hayward is not a lock down defender like Tony Allen, Lebron James, or Luol Deng.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

David Locke has an interesting insight on this. (I know people here have a variety of attitudes about Locke, but I find his podcasts interesting and insightful, and, frankly, I trust his views more than just about anybody on this board.) Anyway, according to Locke, Hayward is being asked to do something nobody else in the NBA is being asked to do, transition from being the 3rd or 4th option to the 1st option on a team, making his adjustment to this new role as difficult, or more difficult, than what anyone else is being asked to do in the entire league. Add to this, opposing teams are game planning their defenses to stop Hayward, and making this especially challenging (to this point as least) is that there are a limited number of other legit offensive threats on the team. I noticed this in the Portland game; the defense Portland laid on Hayward was intense, and Gordon had to run through several screens all game long even to touch the ball (Batum was particularly aggressive guarding him). I think I also read somewhere that in terms of distance covered during games, Hayward is near the top of the league, which partly reflects what he has to go through at times to even get touches. So anyone expecting that he would make this transition seamlessly without a drop off in efficiency, at least in the short term, is not being realistic. Does anyone really think that Miles would do as well as Hayward were he to become the #1 option and principle target of all opposing teams defensive game plans?

I think patience here is merited. He is being asked to do something that he has never, ever done before and which is probably not an appropriate role for him. With the emergence of Burke, Burks, and other offensive weapons, I expect to see Hayward's efficiency numbers improve. But we'll see.