Hayward’s Screws removed

[BitterJim]

I think people are forgetting how good Hayward is in all aspects of the game: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEt8p6a6uXU

I actually think the exact opposite. It seems a lot of fans have expectations that are too high, mostly because of the "max contract" label. Hayward will be the fourth best player on the team, behind Irving, Tatum, and then Brown. I fully expect Hayward to be a team contributor, make the right play, and play within the framework of the schemes. But if fans criticize Al Horford for "not being a max guy" then Hayward is going to get the criticism even worse. I see a lot of fans penciling Hayward in for 20ppg next season. They are going to be in for a big surprise. I'm fully expecting him to average about 13, 3, and 3 while playing about 26 minutes a game.

Are those expectations based upon any kind of reality?

Yes, they are. For his career, he only averages 15.6ppg. He is now returning from a left tibia fracture/dislocation while playing on a team that has many scoring options. Under these circumstances, why is it unrealistic to believe he will average 13ppg?

Because his production has increased every year of his career. He’s not a 15.6ppg scorer. Rather, he was a Western Conference All-Star averaging 22 ppg, comparing favorably to Paul George and Jimmy Butler.

Marcus Morris scores 13 ppg this year. Hayward is obviously more talented and accomplished than Morris, so it seems a bit odd that Hayward wouldn’t exceed that projection.

Fair enough. But, his numbers increased as he became the number one option. His efficiency, however, didn't necessarily increase. Given Hayward's mediocre efficiency, I cannot see how the offense would benefit by giving him more shots than either Tatum or Brown, who have both proven to be more efficient (Tatum especially). Not the end all be all, but Tatum had a higher TS% as a rookie than every season Hayward ever had except 2016-2017. Last season, Jaylen Brown's TS% was .562. Hayward's career TS% is literally .563. Also, take into consideration that Brown's TS% is adversely affected with poor FT shooting. If he can improve his FTs, his TS% should only continue to rise. I am not saying that Hayward is a bad player. Rather, I am saying I do not see the substantial evidence to declare him a better player than either Brown or Tatum, or a player deserving of more shots/touches, especially when he is coming off a significant injury.

Hayward is not a bad player, however he IS a bad contract.  I hope they can find a way to get out from under it.

Hayward is only a bad contract if you factor in him making $30 million on a broken leg. His contract is market rate for the player he was (and hopefully continues to be after he recovers)

There's always this odd idea that floats around here that if a player isn't a super-duper star they aren't worthy of a max, but that isn't true. He makes about as much as Lebron and Curry because those guys are massively underpaid, not because he's overpaid.

[Monkhouse]

Also TS% is my least favorite stat along with per36, (people use this on players that barely average 10 MPG..) It always unfairly rates free throw highly..

That being said, Hayward shot 39.8% 3P, and got to the line 5 times per game. Something that Tatum will eventually get past in 1-2 years, but I'm not convinced that he will score a lot either. Our offense relies on moving and sharing the ball.

Agree about the ball movement part. However, while Hayward's career 3pt percentage and FT percentage are a very respectable .368 and .82, these are both numbers Tatum eclipsed as a rookie.

Wait, but don't misconstrue my point. I'm not convinced Tatum is better than Hayward now. But he certainly surpass him in a two years at least.

We should also take into account, how great of a player Horford really is... He makes the offense move the ball, his give and go's while setting timely screens also allows our players to be given that extra second of space to make timely decisions.

[BitterJim]

Also TS% is my least favorite stat along with per36, (people use this on players that barely average 10 MPG..) It always unfairly rates free throw highly..

That being said, Hayward shot 39.8% 3P, and got to the line 5 times per game. Something that Tatum will eventually get past in 1-2 years, but I'm not convinced that he will score a lot either. Our offense relies on moving and sharing the ball.

Agree about the ball movement part. However, while Hayward's career 3pt percentage and FT percentage are a very respectable .368 and .82, these are both numbers Tatum eclipsed as a rookie.

Why do you keep using his career average numbers instead of his most recent season (or two)? Hayward is not the same player he was when he came into the league, so why include those years (unless your goal is just to deflate his numbers)?

[KungPoweChicken]

Also TS% is my least favorite stat along with per36, (people use this on players that barely average 10 MPG..) It always unfairly rates free throw highly..

That being said, Hayward shot 39.8% 3P, and got to the line 5 times per game. Something that Tatum will eventually get past in 1-2 years, but I'm not convinced that he will score a lot either. Our offense relies on moving and sharing the ball.

Agree about the ball movement part. However, while Hayward's career 3pt percentage and FT percentage are a very respectable .368 and .82, these are both numbers Tatum eclipsed as a rookie.

Wait, but don't misconstrue my point. I'm not convinced Tatum is better than Hayward now. But he certainly surpass him in a year or two.

What statistical argument can one make for Hayward being a better, more efficient scorer and shot creator than Tatum? On overall game, I would certainly give the nod to Hayward in terms of offensive facilitation.

[KungPoweChicken]

Also TS% is my least favorite stat along with per36, (people use this on players that barely average 10 MPG..) It always unfairly rates free throw highly..

That being said, Hayward shot 39.8% 3P, and got to the line 5 times per game. Something that Tatum will eventually get past in 1-2 years, but I'm not convinced that he will score a lot either. Our offense relies on moving and sharing the ball.

Agree about the ball movement part. However, while Hayward's career 3pt percentage and FT percentage are a very respectable .368 and .82, these are both numbers Tatum eclipsed as a rookie.

Why do you keep using his career average numbers instead of his most recent season (or two)? Hayward is not the same player he was when he came into the league, so why include those years (unless your goal is just to deflate his numbers)?

Because he is turning 29 this season, playing on a team with three bonafide scorers, and is coming off a significant injury. Considering all that, do you think it's reasonable to simply use Hayward's career season numbers on bad Utah teams where he was the number one option?

As an analogy, when Kevin Love was in his prime with the Wolves he was averaging 26ppg. His four seasons with the Cavs, however, he has averaged 17.1ppg with 19.0ppg the highest in 2016-17. Should we expect K-Love to start putting up 25ppg next season if he is still playing on the Cavs with the same team dynamic?

[Monkhouse]

Also TS% is my least favorite stat along with per36, (people use this on players that barely average 10 MPG..) It always unfairly rates free throw highly..

That being said, Hayward shot 39.8% 3P, and got to the line 5 times per game. Something that Tatum will eventually get past in 1-2 years, but I'm not convinced that he will score a lot either. Our offense relies on moving and sharing the ball.

Agree about the ball movement part. However, while Hayward's career 3pt percentage and FT percentage are a very respectable .368 and .82, these are both numbers Tatum eclipsed as a rookie.

Wait, but don't misconstrue my point. I'm not convinced Tatum is better than Hayward now. But he certainly surpass him in a year or two.

What statistical argument can one make for Hayward being a better, more efficient scorer and shot creator than Tatum? On overall game, I would certainly give the nod to Hayward in terms of offensive facilitation.

Playoff stats for both players where each was the main option:
Jayson Tatum: 18.1 points, 4.7 rebounds, 3 assists, 1.3 steals with 45%/31%/83% shooting in 34.8mpg.  7-3 record.
Gordon Hayward: 24.1ppg, 6.1rpg, 3.4apg, 0.9spg on 44%/41%/93% shooting in 37.4 mpg 4-7 record.

That being said GSW is a powerhouse, and the Jazz still didn't have a bonafide secondary scorer next to Hayward... He was literally shouldering the entire offensive load. Stevens is an excellent coach, and he managed to shut down Simmons, and force Giannis into some incredibly tough shots. See what Stevens could do with Hayward? I can only imagine.

You really cannot dispute how great of a player Hayward is... And he just has to play like Klay Thompson on C&S opportunities, and play make occasionally.. His numbers will be back to normal in 1-2 years of full recovery.

[KungPoweChicken]

Also TS% is my least favorite stat along with per36, (people use this on players that barely average 10 MPG..) It always unfairly rates free throw highly..

That being said, Hayward shot 39.8% 3P, and got to the line 5 times per game. Something that Tatum will eventually get past in 1-2 years, but I'm not convinced that he will score a lot either. Our offense relies on moving and sharing the ball.

Agree about the ball movement part. However, while Hayward's career 3pt percentage and FT percentage are a very respectable .368 and .82, these are both numbers Tatum eclipsed as a rookie.

Wait, but don't misconstrue my point. I'm not convinced Tatum is better than Hayward now. But he certainly surpass him in a year or two.

What statistical argument can one make for Hayward being a better, more efficient scorer and shot creator than Tatum? On overall game, I would certainly give the nod to Hayward in terms of offensive facilitation.

Playoff stats for both players where each was the main option:
Jayson Tatum: 18.1 points, 4.7 rebounds, 3 assists, 1.3 steals with 45%/31%/83% shooting in 34.8mpg.  7-3 record.
Gordon Hayward: 24.1ppg, 6.1rpg, 3.4apg, 0.9spg on 44%/41%/93% shooting in 37.4 mpg 4-7 record.

That being said GSW is a powerhouse, and the Jazz still didn't have a bonafide secondary scorer next to Hayward... He was literally shouldering the entire offensive load. Stevens is an excellent coach, and he managed to shut down Simmons, and force Giannis into some incredibly tough shots. See what Stevens could do with Hayward? I can only imagine.

You really cannot dispute how great of a player Hayward is... And he just has to play like Klay Thompson on C&S opportunities, and play make occasionally.. His numbers will be back to normal in 1-2 years of full recovery.

Just out of curiosity, where are you finding the offensive stats for when the player was the "main option?" And what exactly does main option entail for statistical influence? Nevertheless, I appreciate the debate. No doubt the last time Hayward was in the playoffs he played great.

[BitterJim]

Also TS% is my least favorite stat along with per36, (people use this on players that barely average 10 MPG..) It always unfairly rates free throw highly..

That being said, Hayward shot 39.8% 3P, and got to the line 5 times per game. Something that Tatum will eventually get past in 1-2 years, but I'm not convinced that he will score a lot either. Our offense relies on moving and sharing the ball.

Agree about the ball movement part. However, while Hayward's career 3pt percentage and FT percentage are a very respectable .368 and .82, these are both numbers Tatum eclipsed as a rookie.

Why do you keep using his career average numbers instead of his most recent season (or two)? Hayward is not the same player he was when he came into the league, so why include those years (unless your goal is just to deflate his numbers)?

Because he is turning 29 this season, playing on a team with three bonafide scorers, and is coming off a significant injury. Considering all that, do you think it's reasonable to simply use Hayward's career season numbers on bad Utah teams where he was the number one option?

Do you think playing with more scorers on a better team will decrease his shooting percentages? His role will likely decrease, but you're using his entire career averages when the first few seasons he was nothing like the player he is today.

The right thing to do would be to look at his current numbers and then adjust from there based on the recovery/change in role.  Other wise you may as well call Jimmy Butler a 16ppg scorer, Vincent Carter an 18ppg scorer, or say Rozier couldn't start on another team because he only averages 7ppg for his career.

Is Hayward going to average the same as he did two seasons ago on the Jazz? No, because he won't have the same role. So does that mean he's going to be the average of the player he's been as he's grown up? No, because he's not the same player he was when he was younger. The player he'll be will be based on how his injury/role change affect his play vs. 2016-17, not anything to do with how he was in his first few seasons

[Monkhouse]

Also TS% is my least favorite stat along with per36, (people use this on players that barely average 10 MPG..) It always unfairly rates free throw highly..

That being said, Hayward shot 39.8% 3P, and got to the line 5 times per game. Something that Tatum will eventually get past in 1-2 years, but I'm not convinced that he will score a lot either. Our offense relies on moving and sharing the ball.

Agree about the ball movement part. However, while Hayward's career 3pt percentage and FT percentage are a very respectable .368 and .82, these are both numbers Tatum eclipsed as a rookie.

Wait, but don't misconstrue my point. I'm not convinced Tatum is better than Hayward now. But he certainly surpass him in a year or two.

What statistical argument can one make for Hayward being a better, more efficient scorer and shot creator than Tatum? On overall game, I would certainly give the nod to Hayward in terms of offensive facilitation.

Playoff stats for both players where each was the main option:
Jayson Tatum: 18.1 points, 4.7 rebounds, 3 assists, 1.3 steals with 45%/31%/83% shooting in 34.8mpg.  7-3 record.
Gordon Hayward: 24.1ppg, 6.1rpg, 3.4apg, 0.9spg on 44%/41%/93% shooting in 37.4 mpg 4-7 record.

That being said GSW is a powerhouse, and the Jazz still didn't have a bonafide secondary scorer next to Hayward... He was literally shouldering the entire offensive load. Stevens is an excellent coach, and he managed to shut down Simmons, and force Giannis into some incredibly tough shots. See what Stevens could do with Hayward? I can only imagine.

You really cannot dispute how great of a player Hayward is... And he just has to play like Klay Thompson on C&S opportunities, and play make occasionally.. His numbers will be back to normal in 1-2 years of full recovery.

Just out of curiosity, where are you finding the offensive stats for when the player was the "main option?" And what exactly does main option entail for statistical influence? Nevertheless, I appreciate the debate. No doubt the last time Hayward was in the playoffs he played great.

I go by USG%.

Same here, TP for the debate. I think while Hayward will struggle ala Paul George in the beginning of the season, but I think Hayward is overall, 'smarter,' offensively in how he makes plays and approaches the defense. George gets too trigger happy for my liking, and even though I love both players, I would take Hayward over George at this point.

Main option generally entail a difference in output in scoring measures. Generally, the more of an main option you are, the more higher tendency a player will have in scoring in certain characteristics, be it higher USG%, more FGA, and whether or not their TS% goes up and down.

[Fafnir]

What statistical argument can one make for Hayward being a better, more efficient scorer and shot creator than Tatum? On overall game, I would certainly give the nod to Hayward in terms of offensive facilitation.

He's scored more points than Tatums, both in total and per possession, all while shouldering a higher usage and offensive role (similar TOs way more assists).

He also did so more efficiently his last year than Tatum did this year.

I mean just look at the BasketBallReference pages for both players its all right there.

[KungPoweChicken]

Also TS% is my least favorite stat along with per36, (people use this on players that barely average 10 MPG..) It always unfairly rates free throw highly..

That being said, Hayward shot 39.8% 3P, and got to the line 5 times per game. Something that Tatum will eventually get past in 1-2 years, but I'm not convinced that he will score a lot either. Our offense relies on moving and sharing the ball.

Agree about the ball movement part. However, while Hayward's career 3pt percentage and FT percentage are a very respectable .368 and .82, these are both numbers Tatum eclipsed as a rookie.

Why do you keep using his career average numbers instead of his most recent season (or two)? Hayward is not the same player he was when he came into the league, so why include those years (unless your goal is just to deflate his numbers)?

Because he is turning 29 this season, playing on a team with three bonafide scorers, and is coming off a significant injury. Considering all that, do you think it's reasonable to simply use Hayward's career season numbers on bad Utah teams where he was the number one option?

Do you think playing with more scorers on a better team will decrease his shooting percentages? His role will likely decrease, but you're using his entire career averages when the first few seasons he was nothing like the player he is today.

The right thing to do would be to look at his current numbers and then adjust from there based on the recovery/change in role.  Other wise you may as well call Jimmy Butler a 16ppg scorer, Vincent Carter an 18ppg scorer, or say Rozier couldn't start on another team because he only averages 7ppg for his career.

Is Hayward going to average the same as he did two seasons ago on the Jazz? No, because he won't have the same role. So does that mean he's going to be the average of the player he's been as he's grown up? No, because he's not the same player he was when he was younger. The player he'll be will be based on how his injury/role change affect his play vs. 2016-17, not anything to do with how he was in his first few seasons

The problem I have with this argument is that Hayward's TS% has stayed remarkably consistent over his career, which includes his early days where he was "nothing like the player he is today."

[Monkhouse]

Either way, the fact that having both on our team forces NBA players to make tough decisions when going over/under screens. They not only have to respect Hayward now, they also have to be wary of Brown's stellar 3 point shooting, or Tatum's dribble drives.

[bdm860]

Also TS% is my least favorite stat along with per36, (people use this on players that barely average 10 MPG..) It always unfairly rates free throw highly..

Wait what?

I get people misusing per-36 (though I think that's overblown a little too, as it's more of small but loud pro-rookie contingent that misuses it, most use it properly IMO).

But TS%?  I think that's one of the best stats.  There's no overrating free throws, free throws matter a lot.  If you get to the line a lot (or don't) and how that matters a ton in how effective of a scorer you are.  Can you expound on that a little?

[BitterJim]

Also TS% is my least favorite stat along with per36, (people use this on players that barely average 10 MPG..) It always unfairly rates free throw highly..

That being said, Hayward shot 39.8% 3P, and got to the line 5 times per game. Something that Tatum will eventually get past in 1-2 years, but I'm not convinced that he will score a lot either. Our offense relies on moving and sharing the ball.

Agree about the ball movement part. However, while Hayward's career 3pt percentage and FT percentage are a very respectable .368 and .82, these are both numbers Tatum eclipsed as a rookie.

Why do you keep using his career average numbers instead of his most recent season (or two)? Hayward is not the same player he was when he came into the league, so why include those years (unless your goal is just to deflate his numbers)?

Because he is turning 29 this season, playing on a team with three bonafide scorers, and is coming off a significant injury. Considering all that, do you think it's reasonable to simply use Hayward's career season numbers on bad Utah teams where he was the number one option?

As an analogy, when Kevin Love was in his prime with the Wolves he was averaging 26ppg. His four seasons with the Cavs, however, he has averaged 17.1ppg with 19.0ppg the highest in 2016-17. Should we expect K-Love to start putting up 25ppg next season if he is still playing on the Cavs with the same team dynamic?

To address the second half you added: where did you get that idea? I would take his most recent season (or two), and say that, in the same role next year, he should be averaging about 18ppg. Taking his career average (which includes his 11 ppg rookie season and 25ppg monster seasons) doesn't make any sense

If Lebron leaves and his role changes, I'd use the past couple of years as a baseline and guess from there.

I honestly have no clue what your basing my apparent Kevin Love projection of 25ppg from

[KungPoweChicken]

What statistical argument can one make for Hayward being a better, more efficient scorer and shot creator than Tatum? On overall game, I would certainly give the nod to Hayward in terms of offensive facilitation.

He's scored more points than Tatums, both in total and per possession, all while shouldering a higher usage and offensive role (similar TOs way more assists).

He also did so more efficiently his last year than Tatum did this year.

I mean just look at the BasketBallReference pages for both players its all right there.

Yes, in Hayward's career season, he was "slightly" more efficient and averaged more points with nearly 5 more shot attempts a game than Tatum on a mediocre Utah team. A Utah team that made the divisional round without him this year. This is true.