is Gordon Hayward better than Jeff Green?

[CFAN38]

Right now its debatable who is better. Green has the higher ceiling as a player due to length and athletism but at 27 isnt likly to ever hit his true peak. Hayward seems like a guy who will max out every bit of potential he has and 2-3 years from now will clearly be the better player.

For the Cs the answer is clearly contingent on their long term rondo plan. With Rondo Green will be his best, I don't think this is the case with Hayward. I think his unique skill sets lends him to playing with hybrid scoring guards rather then a pure passing point. An example would be if the Cs drafted Marcus Smart and played AB at SG and Hayward at SF. His passing would cover the voids in the back courts ability to create for others. 

[ssspence]

It's not really a fair fight. Uncle Snooze only comes to play once a week, and his rebounding and passing numbers are embarrassing.  And no, calling him a 'talent' no longer flies... he is what he is.

I was disappointed to see SAC trade for Gay and Cleveland trade for Deng -- I thought they were two of the teams we could dump him on.

Wish the Pacers would take him -- he seems to love playing against LeBron. But they won't.

If Simmons is correct and the Cs make a push for GH before the deadline, maybe Utah''d take back Green in a package.

[CelticG1]

Jeez I'm not a big fan of either but if Hayward is someone we are "targeting" or making a "big offer",  well all I have to say is YIKES.

This is why so many people preferred to cling to the big 3 the last few years.  So we didn't have to talk ourselves into guys like Gordon Hayward.

During the big 3 era this was the type of guy that we would love to see on the team with the MLE to help out the bench.  Then we'd see him get grossly overpaid somewhere else. Looks like our position has certainly changed mightily

[chambers]

They're both chumps. Green's length adds value on defense as he can guard pretty much any top 10 SF in the league.
Gordon's overall offensive game is slightly better whilst being significantly less athletic.
I wish this chump never went Butler- there is zero chance Ainge spends a dime of what Hayward will get from teams like Charlotte or New Orleans.
He's gotta be one of the most overrated guys in the NBA.
I'll also mention that when comparing them, Green's team is better overall and Hayward probably has more opportunity on that crappy Utah team.

Stay away from Hayward- he's not worth the money he'll fetch in free agency.

[mmmmm]

This year Hayward and Green have similar roles ...

Um ... no.

Hayward is playing SG and is one of the primary ball handlers on his team.  He averages 70.8 touches per game and has possession of the ball some 3.4 minutes per game.  He averages .23 points per touch.  He scores .26 points per half-court touch.

Green is playing SF, is used almost exclusively as a finisher on offense.  He averages just 46.7 touches per game and has possession of the ball just 1.6 minutes - less than half the time Hayward has it.  He averages .34 points per touch.  He scores .43 points per half-court touch.

They are both very good players, but they are not at all in similar roles.

[Chief]

http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/gordon-hayward-leads-utah-jazz-to-win-over-oklahoma-city-thunder-010714

[PhoSita]

This year Hayward and Green have similar roles ...

Um ... no.

Hayward is playing SG and is one of the primary ball handlers on his team.  He averages 70.8 touches per game and has possession of the ball some 3.4 minutes per game.  He averages .23 points per touch.  He scores .26 points per half-court touch.

Green is playing SF, is used almost exclusively as a finisher on offense.  He averages just 46.7 touches per game and has possession of the ball just 1.6 minutes - less than half the time Hayward has it.  He averages .34 points per touch.  He scores .43 points per half-court touch.

They are both very good players, but they are not at all in similar roles.

This is true, but I think it's worth pointing out that I don't think Green could or would want to function in the role that Hayward is playing right now.

I mean, if there was ever a time for Green to take a larger role in terms of getting more touches on offense, it would be this season.  It hasn't happened.  I just don't think that's the kind of player Green is or wants to be.

[Evantime34]

I think Hayward is loads better, he is better at creating his own shot than Jeff, younger than Jeff, has better stats in every area except shooting percentage.

Jeff is pretty much a player that scores off other people's set ups, where Hayward often initiates the offense in Utah. This team needs shot creation and Hayward is better at creating his own shot.

I would probably give up Green, Bogans and a heavily protected future first for him.

[dreamgreen]

At the time I started this thread I still had hope Green would take it to that next level. Now I have come to the reality that he is what he is, and has no desire to be anything more. Mean while Hayward seems to be continually progressing, and appears to have the drive to be the best he can be.

I choose Hayward.

[Jailan34]

Glad everyone is  finally catching up with me, Green had the perfect chance to show what he can do this season individually as well as being a leader for a team.

He hasn't done either and before I was "projecting" that Green didn't have the drive Hayward does, now its common knowledge.

[ddb]

I would take Hayward over Green 7 days a week and twice on Sunday.  Especially if the money is equal.  Even if Hayward gets a bit more. 

Hayward is built to be a 3rd option complimentary guy.  He would fit in seamlessly and he would know is role. 

Green on the other hand walks and talks like he's "the guy".  but he's not even close to it.  I'm not in a rush to trade him or anything, but if the right deal came along I would certainly entertain it. 

I would do Green/Bradley for Hayward/Jefferson, resign Hayward and let Jefferson walk to open up cap space.   

[Humble G]

This year Hayward and Green have similar roles ...

Um ... no.

Hayward is playing SG and is one of the primary ball handlers on his team.  He averages 70.8 touches per game and has possession of the ball some 3.4 minutes per game.  He averages .23 points per touch.  He scores .26 points per half-court touch.

Green is playing SF, is used almost exclusively as a finisher on offense.  He averages just 46.7 touches per game and has possession of the ball just 1.6 minutes - less than half the time Hayward has it.  He averages .34 points per touch.  He scores .43 points per half-court touch.

They are both very good players, but they are not at all in similar roles.

TP for those stats! very interesting! I was thinking that Hayward is much much better than Green but they are two different players with different roles. Its like comparing apples to oranges.....one is not necessarily better than the other its just which do you prefer. Hayward is like an apple and Green is like a a grapefruit. More people prefer apples to grapefruits! lol

[BigAlTheFuture]

Yeah, would definitely take Hayward over Green. Might not seem like it, but Green is already 27. Don't think he's shown any type of improvement these last few years. This guy peaked already. I think Hayward could be an all-star in the near future. So yeah, the answer is Hayward.

[vinnie]

Once again it's the poor Jeff Green story: seven years in the league, playing for different coaches and the guy has just never gotten plays run for him, never gets the ball enough, is always playing in the wrong system, etc. etc. etc.   

I don't think Hayward is a better player and is definitely weaker on defense, but personally I would prefer him to Green on my team.

[clover]

Yeah, Green always disappoints those who wish he'd have the drive and success that they think he can, but he's actually having a much better year than Hayward.

Hayward's shooting percentage has gone down every year he's been in the league, and he's shooting .317 from the 3, compared to Green's .382.

Green's defensive rating every year back to 2009 has been better than Hayward's has been any year. And at 5.7 to 3.3, Green's the better rebounder, too.

Even per 36 Green's scoring slightly more than Hayward, at 17.3 to 17.0, this year.

Hayward is much better at assists than Green, at a career 3.7 versus 1.8 per 36.

why use career numbers unless you want to skew everything to the veteran? 

This year Hayward and Green have similar roles, minutes, etc. on similar W/L teams. 

Hayward 17.1/5.4/4.9/1.3/0.7 with 2.6 t and 2.1 f on 31.7 (3), 45.1 (2), 82.9 (f)

Green 15.9/4.5/1.5/0.5/0.5 with 1.9 t and 1.8 f on 38.2 (3), 46.2 (2), 78.5 (f)

In other words, Green is a bit better shooter from the field (both 2 and 3) and doesn't turn the ball over or foul as much, but Hayward is better at everything else and is 4 years younger.

You're not looking at all at efficiency, and .100% isn't "a bit better". And I used career average in giving the major advantage in assists to Green. Using those raw totals without consideration of efficiency or minutes played is very deceiving, however.