What's new

Is Alec having a better season than Gordon?

is alec having a better year than gordon?

  • Yes

    Votes: 46 70.8%
  • No

    Votes: 19 29.2%

  • Total voters
    65
[size/HUGE] fixed [/size];726518 said:
Footnote:
I'd say roughly 95% of jazzfanzers ranked Gordon above Alec coming into this year.


Not me. Just based on the eyeball test Alec has always reminded me of Wade. He's just got "it." Heyward? Ugh. When the jass drafted him I felt like someone took a dump in my stomach. And he turned out to be better than a glob o crap in my stomach. Significantly better. Look, I think Heyward has value - but not anywhere near what he thinks. 6 mil is what I'm thinking. 7 tops. Gotta save that $ for studs like Alec and hopefully a top 3 pick.

If some other team offers him 10-12 mil I'm thinking don't match.
 
Not me. Just based on the eyeball test Alec has always reminded me of Wade. He's just got "it."

Careful
everytime i compare burks to wade i get bashed
 
Yes and he clearly has a solid role.

What does Hayward do well? You never know when he's going to show up or what he will do.
 
Yes and he clearly has a solid role.

What does Hayward do well? You never know when he's going to show up or what he will do.

This is my biggest issue as well - how do you estimate value for a player who is either great or terrible and rarely anything in between?
 
This is my biggest issue as well - how do you estimate value for a player who is either great or terrible and rarely anything in between?

I think you ask yourself "how much should i pay a guy who has 6 terrible games and then 1 good/great game?"
 
I think you ask yourself "how much should i pay a guy who has 6 terrible games and then 1 good/great game?"
I'd calculate it this way:
Good/Great game = max money = ~$15M/season or $183K/game
Terrible game = his current salary = $3.5M/season or $43K/game
extrapolating the 6 terrible games to 1 good/great game ratio to the entire season:
12 good games, 70 terrible games
(12 x $183K) + (70 x $43K) = $5,206,000/year

Wow, that's right around the mid level exception...what Stan Van Gundy said Hayward is worth. He's a smart guy.
 
I'd calculate it this way:
Good/Great game = max money = ~$15M/season or $183K/game
Terrible game = his current salary = $3.5M/season or $43K/game
extrapolating the 6 terrible games to 1 good/great game ratio to the entire season:
12 good games, 70 terrible games
(12 x $183K) + (70 x $43K) = $5,206,000/year

Wow, that's right around the mid level exception...what Stan Van Gundy said Hayward is worth. He's a smart guy.

Did you actually look to see if it was a 1 in 6 ratio?
 
I really think Jazz fans who expected more from Hayward were delusional. Since entering the league he has never jumped into any situation with two feet on the ground. Coming into the league he was slow developing and wildly inconsistant. Same could be said when they tried to make him a 3 and then again when they tried to make him an every day starter. And now he's struggling as the primary option - not a surprise by any stretch as far as I'm concerned.


As far as his pending free agency - are people really sore that he didn't sign the extension? I'm not sure why. An NBA career is very short - he's going to drain every nickle that he can from the league and I don't blame him.

I love the fact that there is a Jazz fan that realizes that Hayward is a joke. He always has been. You put him with or around any kind of real talent he his a waterboy on steroids. Actually building a team around him? LOL faaagitttaboutit!!!! Unless you want that team to be weak and soft like him. Hayward gets his stats buffed up from being on a team with no talent. Not saying that we will always be in that situation but thats where we are in the current standing. You put him on a team with some front runners he will get lost in the fog. Hayward is not God, he is not the answer, he never has been. Learn about basketball and stop cheering for every soft marshmellow the Jazz draft.
 
Back
Top