is Gordon Hayward better than Jeff Green?

[dreamgreen]

Of course I see JG play all the time, and have only seen Hayward play a few times. I keep hearing Hayward will be a highly coveted player in free agency.

Would replacing JG with Hayward make us a better team? And if so by how much?

[Surferdad]

Of course I see JG play all the time, and have only seen Hayward play a few times. I keep hearing Hayward will be a highly coveted player in free agency.

Would replacing JG with Hayward make us a better team? And if so by how much?

I don't think so. Hayward is probably the better pure shooter but Green seems to have the edge in the paint and on defense.

[timpiker]

I've just seen him a few times as well but looks to me like Green is much better athletically but Hayward plays harder for longer durations.  Not sure which one I would choose.  Maybe Hayward because Green has been a 3 year tease so far.  Neither one will get us over the hump though.

[TwinTower14]

This one is easy - Yes, Hayward is better. They have similar stats but Hayward is 4 years younger and he hasn't maxed out yet.  Green is 27 and I don't think he is going to get much better than what he is right now. 

[sofutomygaha]

He's definitely younger, more aggressive, and hustles more. I think he's a comparable shooter. I couldn't comment on his defense, though. Overall, the answer is probably yes

[mmmmm]

No.

Hayward is scoring just a little more points per game than Green right now (16.8 vs 15., but he's not doing it as efficiently as Green.

Green has the slight edge in points-per-minute, scoring 16.9 per 36 to 16.4 for Hayward.  But more compelling is that Green is doing it far more efficiently, with fewer shots and touches.

Hayward is taking just under 15 shots per 36, and having to touch the ball almost 75 times per game in order to maintain that scoring output.

Green is taking just over 13 shots per 36 and touching the ball under 45 times per game, yet producing the same point production.

Basically, we are able to get the same production from Green that Hayward is providing, without having to make Green the focus of our offense.   If we want to focus the offense around a Wing, then we should just increase the number of touches / plays called for Green.

If you stick Hayward into this offense, and drop his USG% down from being involved in 1/4 of all plays down to the 1/5 that we utilize Green, then his numbers would drop.

[Jailan34]

No.

Hayward is scoring just a little more points per game than Green right now (16.8 vs 15., but he's not doing it as efficiently as Green.

Green has the slight edge in points-per-minute, scoring 16.9 per 36 to 16.4 for Hayward.  But more compelling is that Green is doing it far more efficiently, with fewer shots and touches.

Hayward is taking just under 15 shots per 36, and having to touch the ball almost 75 times per game in order to maintain that scoring output.

Green is taking just over 13 shots per 36 and touching the ball under 45 times per game, yet producing the same point production.

Basically, we are able to get the same production from Green that Hayward is providing, without having to make Green the focus of our offense.   If we want to focus the offense around a Wing, then we should just increase the number of touches / plays called for Green.

If you stick Hayward into this offense, and drop his USG% down from being involved in 1/4 of all plays down to the 1/5 that we utilize Green, then his numbers would drop.

Hayward touches the ball so much more because hes one of his teams primary playmakers as well as scorers. Hayward averages 5 assists while green averages 1.6, I think Hayward is the more complete and better player.

[Vox_Populi]

Green is certainly a better defender.

[KCattheStripe]

Green is certainly a better defender.

Not true. Hayward is a great shot blocker at the 2 and and improving man to man defender.

[LooseCannon]

They're probably close enough that Green is the better fit for some coaches' systems and Hayward is the better fit for others.

[mgent]

No.

Hayward is scoring just a little more points per game than Green right now (16.8 vs 15., but he's not doing it as efficiently as Green.

Green has the slight edge in points-per-minute, scoring 16.9 per 36 to 16.4 for Hayward.  But more compelling is that Green is doing it far more efficiently, with fewer shots and touches.

Hayward is taking just under 15 shots per 36, and having to touch the ball almost 75 times per game in order to maintain that scoring output.

Green is taking just over 13 shots per 36 and touching the ball under 45 times per game, yet producing the same point production.

Basically, we are able to get the same production from Green that Hayward is providing, without having to make Green the focus of our offense.   If we want to focus the offense around a Wing, then we should just increase the number of touches / plays called for Green.

If you stick Hayward into this offense, and drop his USG% down from being involved in 1/4 of all plays down to the 1/5 that we utilize Green, then his numbers would drop.

Hayward touches the ball so much more because hes one of his teams primary playmakers as well as scorers. Hayward averages 5 assists while green averages 1.6, I think Hayward is the more complete and better player.

Rondo is without a doubt our primary playmaker, he has the ball more often than all but a couple players in the league.  He doesn't need other elite playmakers around him, he needs efficient finishers.

It's likely that within a few years Hayward will be a better player, but to say they're the same now is laughable (nevermind saying Hayward is better and more complete).

Gordon's 17 points come from the worst team in the league on 39% shooting and 31% from 3.  Let's also not dimiss the fact that the only two guys he's really passing to are back-to-back #3 picks who have no problem getting easy shots off at the rim (and Jefferson who is a good shooter and transition finisher).

He's neither a better player than Green nor a better fit next to Rondo.

[Vox_Populi]

Green is certainly a better defender.

Not true. Hayward is a great shot blocker at the 2 and and improving man to man defender.

I dunno, Green's career BLK% is higher, if barely, and from what I've seen, he's a better help defender and iso defender. Admittedly I haven't watched too much of Hayward.

For what it's worth, Green's ranked 85th by Synergy based on all defense plays, Hayward's ranked 289th.

[saltlover]

I'd be fine with Hayward at the 2 next year and Green at the 3.  I think they'd compliment each other nicely.  I also don't think Hayward would struggle with Rondo -- he plays on the ball a lot, but it's not like the Jazz have had other good options to run the offense through in the last couple years. I'd bet you'd see Hayward's scoring stay the same or rise with Rondo while putting up fewer shots.

[Boris Badenov]

Hayward's in a horrific shooting slump right now and is shooting far below his career averages. If he gets back even to last year's efficiency numbers, or improves on them as many 23-year-olds do, then the offensive statistical comparison will clearly go in Hayward's favor. Hayward beats Green in every other measurable standard category - rebounds, assists, steals, blocks.

The defensive picture is murkier. I've heard some good things about Hayward's defense but the numbers just don't back it up - this year in particular the Jazz are much, much worse with him on the floor (111 vs. 101). Consequently his net plus/minus this year is just terrible.

I think like others have said it's probably a fit issue. I'd prefer to have Hayward on the Celtics right now, but primarily because he's only 23 and fits better on a rebuilding team. I think both guys are #3 or #4 options on good teams.

Edit: you can see the shooting slump here. It's quite amazing, he started out OK and then fell off a cliff:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/haywago01/gamelog/2014/

[mmmmm]

No.

Hayward is scoring just a little more points per game than Green right now (16.8 vs 15., but he's not doing it as efficiently as Green.

Green has the slight edge in points-per-minute, scoring 16.9 per 36 to 16.4 for Hayward.  But more compelling is that Green is doing it far more efficiently, with fewer shots and touches.

Hayward is taking just under 15 shots per 36, and having to touch the ball almost 75 times per game in order to maintain that scoring output.

Green is taking just over 13 shots per 36 and touching the ball under 45 times per game, yet producing the same point production.

Basically, we are able to get the same production from Green that Hayward is providing, without having to make Green the focus of our offense.   If we want to focus the offense around a Wing, then we should just increase the number of touches / plays called for Green.

If you stick Hayward into this offense, and drop his USG% down from being involved in 1/4 of all plays down to the 1/5 that we utilize Green, then his numbers would drop.

Hayward touches the ball so much more because hes one of his teams primary playmakers as well as scorers. Hayward averages 5 assists while green averages 1.6, I think Hayward is the more complete and better player.

Again, though, it is reasonable to expect that if Green handled the ball anywhere near as often as Hayward does, that his assist numbers would go up along with his point production.   

Hayward is touching the ball some 50-60% more often than Green.   If Green were handling the ball that much more, his assist numbers would likely rise to around 3 or so.  'Still less than Hayward, but that would be in conjunction with an increased point production.

Green has shown, so far, that his efficiency does not drop with increased USG.  In the 13 games last Spring and this Fall that Green has gotten at least 16 shots, he has averaged 22.8 points (on an average of 17.6 FGA in those games), maintaining a fat 1.3 points per shot scoring efficiency.   Overall for last year and so far this year, he has scored 1.29 points per FGA.   Not Kevin Durant (a ridiculous 1.5 points per shot!), but still extremely efficient.

Conversely, if you drop Hayward into a role where he got ~60% of his current touches, his assist and point production are going to go down.

I should note, that in prior seasons, Hayward was more efficient than he has been this year.  Last year, at much more modest usage (similar to Green's usage rates this year), he was at a similar ~1.3 points per shot.   This year, with increased USG and taking more shots, his efficiency has gone down significantly to about 1.2 points per shot.   The fall-off is so far largely due to a big drop-off in his 3PT%.