What's new
By:

Is Gordon Hayward overrated?

Broncster said:
So this season Hayward played the second most total minutes, he also traveled the second most distance in the game total in the season. On offense he is running all over the place. Previous season he was 12th and the season before he was 10th in distance traveled for the season. I know he lead the league at a couple points in all three seasons . Even on a per game he is in the top 5 for the past 3 seasons.

Hayward is also getting physically beat up each game. He is always getting grabbed, pushed bumped and everything else.

Simply put it he is getting run ragged and beat down every game. Its no wonder he had no lift at the end of the season. Towards the end most of the time in the paint he was shooting flat footed. In end game situations he looks tired. This team is using and leaning on him more than most if not any team in the NBA does on 1 player. Hayward needs help and he needs to play less and he needs defenses to be required to defend and worry about other players on the court. I think Haywards 3 point shot is inconsistent because he rarely gets his legs under him. On a side note it is a miracle he has not been more injured the last three years.

He is asked to do more than Lebron, Durant and most the other star players even though he is not at their talent level.
Click to expand...

I am sick of this rest players BS. In the 50's, 60's and 70's NBA had the same amount of games that it has today, 82. It had the same amount of playing time per game, 48 minutes. The schedule back then was just as grueling as it is today. Difference is, today they have luxury planes to take them along their travel with masseuses to massage them on a regular basis and Dr's to evaluate their every nerve. In the early days they took a bus with no air conditioning and their doctor waited for them at the local hospital. At half time they smoked cigarettes and took shots of whiskey. Players today not only average less played games per year but also less minutes played per game. How about, tough love. Grow a pair of balls, quit making excuses and put your money where your mouth is while your on the court! I don't want to hear about little poor neglected Gordon Hayward, he is a grown man, and so are you, both you and him need to start acting like it! *Slap* Get a hold of yourself!!!!
 
Lakers_Slapper said:
I am sick of this rest players BS. In the 50's, 60's and 70's NBA had the same amount of games that it has today, 82. It had the same amount of playing time per game, 48 minutes. The schedule back then was just as grueling as it is today. Difference is, today they have luxury planes to take them along their travel with masseuses to massage them on a regular basis and Dr's to evaluate their every nerve. In the early days they took a bus with no air conditioning and their doctor waited for them at the local hospital. At half time they smoked cigarettes and took shots of whiskey. Players today not only average less played games per year but also less minutes played per game. How about, tough love. Grow a pair of balls, quit making excuses and put your money where your mouth is while your on the court! I don't want to hear about little poor neglected Gordon Hayward, he is a grown man, and so are you, both you and him need to start acting like it! *Slap* Get a hold of yourself!!!!
Click to expand...

Thats great for those people back then. Today players are moving far more miles per game. Practice is much more intense as is the weight training regime. Players are more athletic and are jumping higher and moving faster on a consistent basis. Players are fatigued and they are getting injured. It takes a lot more to keep elite athletes in shape and injury free now then it did back then, The NBA is waaayyyy more popular and pays a **** ton more, which draws much more elite athletes/players. Players often showed up very drunk in the 60s to games, didnt practice, took smoke breaks, took illegal drugs before/during games, and many other things. Should players today do those things as well since players did those things and were "fine" back then? Its a different game and a different era.

Now, back to the facts. Players injury rate greatly increases with increased minutes and goes way up when a player is fatigued and worn down and trying to keep playing. Players also shoot worse when their legs are fatigued. *slap* at least you have a catch phrase and a shtick to fall back on...

Hayward did "put his money where his mouth is" he was the best player on this team.

Being born with a penis between your legs is what makes you a man, nothing else matters or makes you more or less of a man. Sorry you feel you have to prove something to be a "man."
 
Are you kidding me right now? So giving you the benefit of the doubt, you are basically saying that, players back then could enter a game hungover and on illegal drugs but were able to play more minutes per game and more games per year because players back then could run as fast or jump as high?? Great point. Your a GD Genius.
 
Lakers_Slapper said:
Are you kidding me right now? So giving you the benefit of the doubt, you are basically saying that, players back then could enter a game hungover and on illegal drugs but were able to play more minutes per game and more games per year because players back then could run as fast or jump as high?? Great point. Your a GD Genius.
Click to expand...

No, I am saying many players did that it was to prove a point that player back then did many ill advised things like play to many minutes but it matter less then and was easier to do.

There were lower quality basketball players back then.

There were lesser athletes less then.

The game was slower and less competitive back then.

Playing more minutes back then was much easier and required less of the player physically.

Playing through injuries and being beat up mattered less then since it was a lower quality league and less parity.
 
NUMBERICA said:
More than half the teams in the NBA in a given year make the playoffs. The Jazz couldn't make them. Yes, the injuries sucked, but this was also the weakest field they could've played against. How bad the majority of the Western Conference is a way bigger outlier than the amount of the Jazz's injuries. They had the 12th worst record in basketball. I see the potential, but the results don't point "good" to me. Certainly not good enough to entice free agents, even their own.
Click to expand...
NUMBERICA said:
Hayward is a terrific player and great piece. But for him, why would he stay with a treadmill team that can't make the playoffs? Why would the Jazz devote such resources to a player that is short of a legit #1 playing for a treadmill team? At this point, keeping him heading into the season would be the gamble.
Click to expand...

Last season Utah managed a better road record than the year they went to the WCF with Deron and Boozer, and they did it after the disaster of a first half with Kanter starting. The ability to win on the road is IMO the best measure of when a team is becoming legit, and last year's team was the closest we've been to being a good road team since S&M. I personally believe we were turning a corner and that the majority of fans are underestimating just how much injuries DID factor in, particularly the loss of Exum.

I don't see how you classify Utah as a treadmill team without completely ignoring the very legitimate reasoning of multiple injuries to our most important players.
 
Ha what's joke

Hayward is BAD,rather than good, by definition(below average, by the facts- stat categories vs the NBA averages)! And when he's below average, and is given credit for being a near all-star, he cannot be underrated! Of the 7 areas that have any impact on the game, he's below league-average in 5 of them(bad)! He's given credit as being a good rebounder when per 36 minutes he's 1.1 below SF average, he's 0.2 steals below average, 0.3 blocks below average and yet he still gives up 0.8 points worse than average in total defenive points given up while not taking any risks! He turns it over 0.3x more than average for his assist/point totals. And so the only areas he's even above average are passing, by 1.6 assists per 36 min, and points per FG+FT possession-used, just Barely, by 0.8 points per game, and that's only due to him taking nearly Every single tech and must-foul FT when he's not the Jazz's best FT shooter,so he actually hurts them in getting those free points to inflate his total. Hardly a single other SF takes all those,so he wouldn't even be above average in that area either, if not for those free points that hurt the Jazz. That's why they've lost more than won every single year he's had the ball in his hands. He's below average by the facts, but the media had no one else to prop up in Utah!
 
Hayward is bad, by definition(below the NBA SF averages in total play)! Of the 7 areas that have any impact on the game, he's below league-average in 5 of them! He's given credit as being a good rebounder when per 36 minutes he's 1.1 below SF average, he's 0.2 steals below average, 0.3 blocks below average, and yet he STILL gives up 0.8 points worse than average in total defense while obviously not taking any risks! He turns it over 0.3x more than average for his assist/point totals. And so the only areas he's even above average are passing, by 1.6 assists per 36 min, and points per FG+FT possession-used, just Barely, by 0.8 points per game, and that's only due to him taking nearly Every single tech and must-foul FT when he's not the Jazz's best FT shooter,so he actually hurts them in getting those free points to inflate his total. Hardly a single other SF takes all those,so he wouldn't even be above average in that area either, if not for those free points he gets while hurting the Jazz. That's why they've lost more than won every single year he's had the ball in his hands. He's below average by the facts, but the media had no one else to prop up in Utah!
 
And because Hayward played all those minutes, so the ball was in his hands that much at his below-average talent, they lost more games than they won yet again! He's below SF average in rebounds per min, steal%, block%, total defensive points given up(SOMEHOW,EVEN with Favors and Gobert giving him the advantage of them being 5 points Better than average for 2/3 of Hayward's minutes! He's really THAT bad to even Still come out below average,meaning he had to be 9 points worse than average all the time, for the 1/3 of the time without Favors and Gobert to result in a -6), and turnovers per assist/points. There are only TWO other categories that have any impact on the game!- assists and points per possession-used. He was 1.6 assists better than average and 0.8 total points better per game for his shot total, when had he not taken nearly Every Single tech and must-foul FT when he's not their best FT shooter(so getting those free points to inflate his total actually hurt Utah), he wouldn't have even been At All above average in that way Either, instead of barely above, since hardly another SF gets all those. The facts show that the media built him up falsely since there was no one else to do so with in Utah. He's below average by the numbers,and that's why they lose with him as their #1. Plain and simple. Look at the numbers.
 
That escalated quickly
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top