What's new
By:

Trade idea, Hayward to the Suns

Haywards first year as the first option focus of the defense he shot 41% from the field and 30% from three. His 4th year in the league.
Then last year his 6th year in the league he shot 43% from the field and 35% from three.

Im not positive that Hood could achieve those efficiency numbers if he was the #1 option and focus of the defense. No one knows for sure.
But i definately dont think its out of the realm of possibility. I mean its not like those numbers are just fantastic super hard to attain numbers. I dont know where they rank vs other #1 options in the nba but i doubt its like some crazy top 5 ranking for efficiency or something.

I think hood, in his 3rd year, could shoot 41% from the field and 30% from three as a first option. And then improve those numbers after a couple years as a first option and possibly reach the lofty shooting numbers of 43% and 35%. Again, im not certain he could but i definately think its possible.
 
You're just missing so much.

It's not just shooting numbers. Hayward gets those, while being the focal point of our offense, while initiating our offense, while creating for our offense, while playing great defense. The chances that Hood could do all of that as well as Hayward are pretty damn slim, considering at no point has he done it before. Not for us, and not in college.
 
Hayward makes others better and is an elite scorer on difficult shots.

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk
 
If Hood can do it great, but then we'd need someone to fill Hood's production.

Hood also doesn't create as much for others as hayward does. Looking at free agency and projecting the numbers some guys will get... I think Hayward is worth the 5 year megamax and that we should retain him.

Guys like Beal, Barnes, Fournier are going to get 20M per year this offseason. Guys like Crabbe Bazemore will get 15ish. Hayward is worth 30-35 in that type of environment... even though thats a **** ton of money and you'd rather use it towards a superstar... superstars flat out aren't available.
 
Hekate said:
It's not sustaniable. Hood is wildly inconsistent and Burks hardly plays.
Click to expand...
Well, Hayward doesn't miss many games, I'll give him that. But the only thing consistent about Hayward is his inconsistency. Every great game he has is followed by 5 or 6 mediocre ones. Will Hood be any different? I hope so. He won't be worse.

Hekate said:
Teams will shift their focus on Hood and Burks.
Click to expand...
After the Jazz traded Millsap and Jefferson away, handing the reins to G-time, teams focused on Hayward -- AND HE STRUGGLED. But the Hayward apologists gave him a blanket excuse, it's not his fault, he'll come around eventually. Excuse after excuse for Hayward's struggles, but this forgiving attitude is reserved exclusively for Hayward and isn't extended to Hood or anyone else.

Let's look at the numbers:
In Hayward's 2nd year he averaged 11.8 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 3.1 apg.
In Hood's 2nd year he averaged 14.5 ppg, 3.4 rpg, 2.7 apg.

Now the apologists will excuse Hayward because in his second year he wasn't the focus of the offense. Well, neither was Hood.

Hayward's 5th year averages are 19 ppg, 5 rpg, 3.7 apg.

I think by his 5th year Hood can achieve those same numbers if not better (if he is given the same responsibilities and coddling given to Hayward).

Hekate said:
Hayward is damn good player, he will contribute to any team and damn good players with longer contracts are easier to trade.
Click to expand...
Hayward's "damn good"ness is debatable, which is why we're debating it. Just more pro-Hayward propaganda without the stats to support it. What, am I arguing with Spence Checketts and David Locke? Get some new material guys - Hayward isn't giving you the evidence to support your Gordon-love.
Stop swallowing the Hayward propaganda broadcast by 1280thezone.




Let me end on this: I agree that Hayward is a very good player, as is Hood. But I don't think either of them should be #1 on any winning team. At best they're both a couple #2s. But the Jazz need a #1.
So I say let Hood be our #2 and trade Hayward for the chance at a #1. It's our only hope.
 
BENTLEY said:
Well, Hayward doesn't miss many games, I'll give him that. But the only thing consistent about Hayward is his inconsistency. Every great game he has is followed by 5 or 6 mediocre ones. Will Hood be any different? I hope so. He won't be worse.


After the Jazz traded Millsap and Jefferson away, handing the reins to G-time, teams focused on Hayward -- AND HE STRUGGLED. But the Hayward apologists gave him a blanket excuse, it's not his fault, he'll come around eventually. Excuse after excuse for Hayward's struggles, but this forgiving attitude is reserved exclusively for Hayward and isn't extended to Hood or anyone else.

Let's look at the numbers:
In Hayward's 2nd year he averaged 11.8 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 3.1 apg.
In Hood's 2nd year he averaged 14.5 ppg, 3.4 rpg, 2.7 apg.

Now the apologists will excuse Hayward because in his second year he wasn't the focus of the offense. Well, neither was Hood.

Hayward's 5th year averages are 19 ppg, 5 rpg, 3.7 apg.

I think by his 5th year Hood can achieve those same numbers if not better (if he is given the same responsibilities and coddling given to Hayward).


Hayward's "damn good"ness is debatable, which is why we're debating it. Just more pro-Hayward propaganda without the stats to support it. What, am I arguing with Spence Checketts and David Locke? Get some new material guys - Hayward isn't giving you the evidence to support your Gordon-love.
Stop swallowing the Hayward propaganda broadcast by 1280thezone.




Let me end on this: I agree that Hayward is a very good player, as is Hood. But I don't think either of them should be #1 on any winning team. At best they're both a couple #2s. But the Jazz need a #1.
So I say let Hood be our #2 and trade Hayward for the chance at a #1. It's our only hope.
Click to expand...

you better duck, dude. Some of the idiots on this board tried to barbecue me a few months ago for suggesting that Hayward was inconsistent.
 
#bern said:
You're just missing so much.

It's not just shooting numbers. Hayward gets those, while being the focal point of our offense, while initiating our offense, while creating for our offense, while playing great defense. The chances that Hood could do all of that as well as Hayward are pretty damn slim, considering at no point has he done it before. Not for us, and not in college.
Click to expand...

Apologist. (it's the new racist)
 
Unless a straight-up trade for the #1 or #2 pick or a deal for a superstar comes along, then we should keep Hayward. Hopefully Hood and Exum take more pressure off of him and Hayward is able to increase his catch-and-shoot percentage. If he was a 40% 3-pt shooter, we'd all be pretty stoked.
 
NAOS said:
Unless a straight-up trade for the #1 or #2 pick or a deal for a superstar comes along, then we should keep Hayward. Hopefully Hood and Exum take more pressure off of him and Hayward is able to increase his catch-and-shoot percentage. If he was a 40% 3-pt shooter, we'd all be pretty stoked.
Click to expand...

I agree. I want Ingram but that's a #2 pick. I'm not sure trading Hayward for the #3 is worth it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top