Just came across this article and I found it pretty interesting, because on the surface it looks like bro Nerd is right on the money:
https://www.jazzbros.com/2010/06/the-i-hope-im-wrong-post/
However, after actually looking carefully and considering the facts, I realized there are some huge holes in thes article, which I am about to discuss.
The biggest point of the article is to show that Hayward, like Adam Morrison, is a poor athlete, defender, and has small weight, and therefore translation from College success to NBA one is perhaps just as unlikely for Hayward as it was for Morrison.
First, let’s look at athleticism aspect as this is the biggest question mark. Comparing Hayward to Morrison is extremely unfair to Gordon. The article does state Hayward can jump 5 inches higher than Morrison with and without a step (!!!), bust basically discounts this unbelievably telling fact. The difference of 5 inches jumping ability is the same difference as between Hayward and Ronnie Brewer, who is probably best athlete in entire NBA. In other words, Hayward is right about in the middle between someone like Morrison and the best athletes as there is in entire league. So, there is really no comparison here at all. In other words a statement that Hayward and Morrison are comparable athletically is just as ludicrous as saying Hayward is one of the best athletes in NBA and is comparable to Brewer. It’s simply not true. No, Hayward is not top of the NBA athlete, like Brewer, but nowhere near someone like Morrison either. Also, the fact he was able to get us for boards almost at the double rate of Morrison and almost tripled his blocking output supports that as well. Additionally, the guy is athletic enough to become top ranked in 2 sports, (not just basketball, but tennis also). Look at Evan Turner’s measurements, and Hayward is nearly identical there. Not the best athlete in the draft, but a good one. He is gifted athletically; there is no doubt about that, and Morrison comparison simply does not apply here at all.
As far as weight, Hayward is 211, and Morrison was 198 when he was drafted. That’s 13 lb difference. 7% advantage to Hayward. The bigger difference though is that Morrison was at 198 when he was 22 years old. Hayward is 211 at 20 years of age. To gain another 9 lbs or so of pure muscle to be at a very good weight of 220 or so for SG/SF is not really that difficult for a 20 year old who is just going to be given access to world class facilities. To gain 22 lbs of pure muscle for a 22 year old to reach the same weight is a lot more difficult. Think of it like that: just to get to Hayward’s level of 211, Morrison had to gain more muscle than it takes Hayward to get to the near perfect weight for a SG/SF. And again Morrison was 2 years older than Hayward when entering NBA, which does make a big difference. Hence, while for Morrison it was an uphill battle to reach great weight at NBA level, being 22 lbs away and at 22 years of age, for Hayward, at just 9lb away and at just 20 years of age, it is really pretty close. Again, nowhere near.
Finally, defense. I think it is far to say that it is a question mark for pretty much every prospect whether they can play good defense at NBA level. The difference here is that for Morrison the evaluation was that he was already a poor defender even at College level. Hayward was not at all a poor defender at College level. In fact one of the sites you mentioned actually says he is a “solid defender”, while Morrison’s assessment was that he coasts on the defense and can’t defend quick players. Again, there is simply no comparison here.
So, is the article a bunch of poppycock that only looks reasonable on surface but fails the Litmus test or Bros are onto something? I think the former, but what are your thoughts? Hopefully Nerd will read this as well and responds after considering the above.
https://www.jazzbros.com/2010/06/the-i-hope-im-wrong-post/
However, after actually looking carefully and considering the facts, I realized there are some huge holes in thes article, which I am about to discuss.
The biggest point of the article is to show that Hayward, like Adam Morrison, is a poor athlete, defender, and has small weight, and therefore translation from College success to NBA one is perhaps just as unlikely for Hayward as it was for Morrison.
First, let’s look at athleticism aspect as this is the biggest question mark. Comparing Hayward to Morrison is extremely unfair to Gordon. The article does state Hayward can jump 5 inches higher than Morrison with and without a step (!!!), bust basically discounts this unbelievably telling fact. The difference of 5 inches jumping ability is the same difference as between Hayward and Ronnie Brewer, who is probably best athlete in entire NBA. In other words, Hayward is right about in the middle between someone like Morrison and the best athletes as there is in entire league. So, there is really no comparison here at all. In other words a statement that Hayward and Morrison are comparable athletically is just as ludicrous as saying Hayward is one of the best athletes in NBA and is comparable to Brewer. It’s simply not true. No, Hayward is not top of the NBA athlete, like Brewer, but nowhere near someone like Morrison either. Also, the fact he was able to get us for boards almost at the double rate of Morrison and almost tripled his blocking output supports that as well. Additionally, the guy is athletic enough to become top ranked in 2 sports, (not just basketball, but tennis also). Look at Evan Turner’s measurements, and Hayward is nearly identical there. Not the best athlete in the draft, but a good one. He is gifted athletically; there is no doubt about that, and Morrison comparison simply does not apply here at all.
As far as weight, Hayward is 211, and Morrison was 198 when he was drafted. That’s 13 lb difference. 7% advantage to Hayward. The bigger difference though is that Morrison was at 198 when he was 22 years old. Hayward is 211 at 20 years of age. To gain another 9 lbs or so of pure muscle to be at a very good weight of 220 or so for SG/SF is not really that difficult for a 20 year old who is just going to be given access to world class facilities. To gain 22 lbs of pure muscle for a 22 year old to reach the same weight is a lot more difficult. Think of it like that: just to get to Hayward’s level of 211, Morrison had to gain more muscle than it takes Hayward to get to the near perfect weight for a SG/SF. And again Morrison was 2 years older than Hayward when entering NBA, which does make a big difference. Hence, while for Morrison it was an uphill battle to reach great weight at NBA level, being 22 lbs away and at 22 years of age, for Hayward, at just 9lb away and at just 20 years of age, it is really pretty close. Again, nowhere near.
Finally, defense. I think it is far to say that it is a question mark for pretty much every prospect whether they can play good defense at NBA level. The difference here is that for Morrison the evaluation was that he was already a poor defender even at College level. Hayward was not at all a poor defender at College level. In fact one of the sites you mentioned actually says he is a “solid defender”, while Morrison’s assessment was that he coasts on the defense and can’t defend quick players. Again, there is simply no comparison here.
So, is the article a bunch of poppycock that only looks reasonable on surface but fails the Litmus test or Bros are onto something? I think the former, but what are your thoughts? Hopefully Nerd will read this as well and responds after considering the above.
