- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Lol Hayes is JaVale McGee 2.0
Posted on 6/21/19 at 10:30 pm to SammyTiger
Posted on 6/21/19 at 10:30 pm to SammyTiger
High road? I called you an aspie bitch.
If you have something that pertains to any of the ongoing conversations, get it out.
If you have something that pertains to any of the ongoing conversations, get it out.
1
Posted on 6/21/19 at 10:40 pm to Bronc
You’ve literally just repeated that the pick is shite over and over.
Someone actually made a relevant point about his FT% that you didn’t understand the relevance off and you cried like a bitch that you’re not talking about the OP.
Cry like a bitch.
You haven’t brought ahit to the conversation.
You routinely discuss the 17th pick like it’s not a player with a very good career 3 pt shooting percentage.
You also ignore that almost all the stretch 5s over 24 came into the league with NO outside shots and act like an 18 year old will never develop one.
You also pretended Garland had some track record of excellence when he played in 5 games. What’s he do if you put a good peremeter defender on him? You think he saw one in those 5 games or in high school?
He’s 175 he drives to rim and you know who’s putting that shite back in his face?
Jaxson Hayes.
Have a different opinion but you aren’t defending it. You’re just repeating it.
You like Garland: great.
Why don’t you Hayes
Why don’t you like NAW
Why don’t you like extra cap space to pursue FA.
Who did you want to trade Solo for?
Someone actually made a relevant point about his FT% that you didn’t understand the relevance off and you cried like a bitch that you’re not talking about the OP.
Cry like a bitch.
You haven’t brought ahit to the conversation.
You routinely discuss the 17th pick like it’s not a player with a very good career 3 pt shooting percentage.
You also ignore that almost all the stretch 5s over 24 came into the league with NO outside shots and act like an 18 year old will never develop one.
You also pretended Garland had some track record of excellence when he played in 5 games. What’s he do if you put a good peremeter defender on him? You think he saw one in those 5 games or in high school?
He’s 175 he drives to rim and you know who’s putting that shite back in his face?
Jaxson Hayes.
Have a different opinion but you aren’t defending it. You’re just repeating it.
You like Garland: great.
Why don’t you Hayes
Why don’t you like NAW
Why don’t you like extra cap space to pursue FA.
Who did you want to trade Solo for?
This post was edited on 6/21/19 at 10:47 pm
Posted on 6/21/19 at 10:55 pm to SammyTiger
Aspie melting?
Maybe just try having a grown up conversation and not fly off the fricking wall because people don’t come to the same conclusions as you?
I’ve made my point very clear. I think Jaxson and Alexander will be fine, but I don’t think they were worth giving up the 4th pick for. Hills expiring contract was finally a positive and getting rid of it for a lesser draft pick is not a victory. In other words, I’m disappointed because Griffin traded a B+ opportunity in my mind for a C+. I could be wrong, but that’s how I see it. But some of you are so thin skinned you can’t take criticism that would assert Griffin’s maneuver was anything less than ultimate erudition.
I mentioned those two players because they had comparable FT percentages and never developed a jumper. Point being, if you look at long term analytical breakdowns of players, it is exceptionally rare for players to drastically improve their jump shooting over their careers, or from college. 75% is solid, but what is equally important is his form and motion. Which needs some serious work. His elbow is too cocked and his motion puts the ball over his eyes. Which will need correcting, Cheick Diallo came out with a better jumper and we are still waiting on his emergence from behind the arc. Truth is, that sort of development is not a sure thing. It’s the exception to the rule.
I don’t pretend anything with Garland. I have no problem acknowledging his floor could be Bayless, but what skills and fundamentals he demonstrated to me, many have not been matched in this draft or the previous one. And those skills to me, fit much better with this roster and projecting forward than Hayes. Same goes for Hunter. So for me, Alexander and Hayes are not worth giving up the 4th pick. Now unlike you, I have been consistently posting here and watching the Pels for a long time, so at the end of the day I do hope you all are right, but my intuition, the same intuition that got in these same drag down fights with mirror image Demps partisans when we gave up Lopez and Vasquez for Evans, or a first for Asik, is gnawing at me over this choice once again. Thankfully Griffin is not Demps, and he is wise enough to secure for himself enough cushion to make a few mistakes, because every GM does and will.
Maybe just try having a grown up conversation and not fly off the fricking wall because people don’t come to the same conclusions as you?
I’ve made my point very clear. I think Jaxson and Alexander will be fine, but I don’t think they were worth giving up the 4th pick for. Hills expiring contract was finally a positive and getting rid of it for a lesser draft pick is not a victory. In other words, I’m disappointed because Griffin traded a B+ opportunity in my mind for a C+. I could be wrong, but that’s how I see it. But some of you are so thin skinned you can’t take criticism that would assert Griffin’s maneuver was anything less than ultimate erudition.
I mentioned those two players because they had comparable FT percentages and never developed a jumper. Point being, if you look at long term analytical breakdowns of players, it is exceptionally rare for players to drastically improve their jump shooting over their careers, or from college. 75% is solid, but what is equally important is his form and motion. Which needs some serious work. His elbow is too cocked and his motion puts the ball over his eyes. Which will need correcting, Cheick Diallo came out with a better jumper and we are still waiting on his emergence from behind the arc. Truth is, that sort of development is not a sure thing. It’s the exception to the rule.
I don’t pretend anything with Garland. I have no problem acknowledging his floor could be Bayless, but what skills and fundamentals he demonstrated to me, many have not been matched in this draft or the previous one. And those skills to me, fit much better with this roster and projecting forward than Hayes. Same goes for Hunter. So for me, Alexander and Hayes are not worth giving up the 4th pick. Now unlike you, I have been consistently posting here and watching the Pels for a long time, so at the end of the day I do hope you all are right, but my intuition, the same intuition that got in these same drag down fights with mirror image Demps partisans when we gave up Lopez and Vasquez for Evans, or a first for Asik, is gnawing at me over this choice once again. Thankfully Griffin is not Demps, and he is wise enough to secure for himself enough cushion to make a few mistakes, because every GM does and will.
This post was edited on 6/21/19 at 11:03 pm
Posted on 6/21/19 at 11:04 pm to Bronc
Sorry I said he was ball dominant. What I meant to say is he's a point guard who had more turnovers than assists in college whose chief calling card is his ability to get his own shot. My bad.
Posted on 6/21/19 at 11:12 pm to New City Champ
And that is fair criticism and a concern I have.
But one I have less concern with playing next to several other facilitators.
In the same way I felt Murray was very lucky to end up on the Nuggets.
Both are not traditional facilitators, both seem much more score first, but also team players that aren’t going to demand control of the ball
at all times because they can play off it. But do project to improve as facilitators because they had/have solid passing fundamentals.
And if I’m wrong, I’m wrong, but time will be the only tell for it.
But one I have less concern with playing next to several other facilitators.
In the same way I felt Murray was very lucky to end up on the Nuggets.
Both are not traditional facilitators, both seem much more score first, but also team players that aren’t going to demand control of the ball
at all times because they can play off it. But do project to improve as facilitators because they had/have solid passing fundamentals.
And if I’m wrong, I’m wrong, but time will be the only tell for it.
This post was edited on 6/21/19 at 11:13 pm
Posted on 6/22/19 at 12:18 am to Bronc
Youve stated your point but you haven't supported it.
Youre dispointed Hayes ins't a 3 point shooter, but you wont accept that idea that maybe we will be aiming for a 3 point shooter in FA
Maybe this team wont be complete this year.
Going forward do we have anything else to target besides shooters?
Jaxson isn't our center of the present. But he is an incredible rim protector. Great instincts and athleticism. averaged 2.2 blocks a game. He is athletic, he will be incredible in transition. He is a very good roll man in the pick and roll. He is limited offensively now, but his shot looks consistent, and there are very few centers that came out of college knocking down a ton of 3s. Even if he never develops an outside game, its clear were are going to keep adding shooters.
you talk a lot about fit, but clearly we want to play good defense, pick and roll offernse, and run the frick out of other teams. Gentry likes that too.
And its clear our priority after that 8th pick and going forward is shooters and spacing.
At 17 we take NAW who shot 40% from NBA 3 point range last year while taking 120 shots from that distance. (thats twice as many shots and Hunter) That not a fluke thats NBA range at 17. His biggest knocks were that he isn't a primary ball handler and he isn't as good a pull up shooter as he is on the catch and shoot. He can drive and he is good on pick and rolls. He can defend 1-3.
35 we take draft and stash player who hit 42% behind the 3 point line.
We get rid of Solo and clear up a lot of space. Which is good for us for the same reason teams are willing to trade for an expiring- cap space. Either way it helps us find other players. We now have a lot of cap space to fill a few holes. And there happens to be a few very good stretch 5s on the market.
So you gotta compare Garland to
Jaxson, NAW, Silva, and a ton of money to go after more players.
If everyone pans out, Garland is a great 3 point shooter, Hunter is a great D and three player, but we got a great Rim protector, and possibly 2-3 3 point shooters. down the line.
Youre dispointed Hayes ins't a 3 point shooter, but you wont accept that idea that maybe we will be aiming for a 3 point shooter in FA
Maybe this team wont be complete this year.
Going forward do we have anything else to target besides shooters?
Jaxson isn't our center of the present. But he is an incredible rim protector. Great instincts and athleticism. averaged 2.2 blocks a game. He is athletic, he will be incredible in transition. He is a very good roll man in the pick and roll. He is limited offensively now, but his shot looks consistent, and there are very few centers that came out of college knocking down a ton of 3s. Even if he never develops an outside game, its clear were are going to keep adding shooters.
you talk a lot about fit, but clearly we want to play good defense, pick and roll offernse, and run the frick out of other teams. Gentry likes that too.
And its clear our priority after that 8th pick and going forward is shooters and spacing.
At 17 we take NAW who shot 40% from NBA 3 point range last year while taking 120 shots from that distance. (thats twice as many shots and Hunter) That not a fluke thats NBA range at 17. His biggest knocks were that he isn't a primary ball handler and he isn't as good a pull up shooter as he is on the catch and shoot. He can drive and he is good on pick and rolls. He can defend 1-3.
35 we take draft and stash player who hit 42% behind the 3 point line.
We get rid of Solo and clear up a lot of space. Which is good for us for the same reason teams are willing to trade for an expiring- cap space. Either way it helps us find other players. We now have a lot of cap space to fill a few holes. And there happens to be a few very good stretch 5s on the market.
So you gotta compare Garland to
Jaxson, NAW, Silva, and a ton of money to go after more players.
If everyone pans out, Garland is a great 3 point shooter, Hunter is a great D and three player, but we got a great Rim protector, and possibly 2-3 3 point shooters. down the line.
Posted on 6/22/19 at 12:52 am to SammyTiger
Ole BC killed the analysis
Posted on 6/22/19 at 1:21 am to IMJ127
That’s a bit off putting
Posted on 6/22/19 at 5:56 am to SammyTiger
For what it is worth, I think the mud slinging wasn't needed. Both sides were pretty well presented, at least eventually. You guys just need to learn to agree to disagree.
My thought on the trade:
Perhaps #4 turns out to be a star but I like the odds of taking Hayes and NAW. Haynes is raw and may not pan out but he has a very high ceiling and little pressure. While NAW may not be expected to surpass Garland/Hunter/Culver, would it be a complete shock if he did? Is the distance between where he ends up likely to be that far from the others? I like what we did but as any reasonable person will admit, it is a gamble. I just like the odds on this one.
My thought on the trade:
Perhaps #4 turns out to be a star but I like the odds of taking Hayes and NAW. Haynes is raw and may not pan out but he has a very high ceiling and little pressure. While NAW may not be expected to surpass Garland/Hunter/Culver, would it be a complete shock if he did? Is the distance between where he ends up likely to be that far from the others? I like what we did but as any reasonable person will admit, it is a gamble. I just like the odds on this one.
Posted on 6/22/19 at 7:37 am to SammyTiger
quote:
Youre dispointed Hayes ins't a 3 point shooter, but you wont accept that idea that maybe we will be aiming for a 3 point shooter in FA
Where did I say any of this?
If straw men is all I’m going to get from you, this is going to get real old, real fast. I’m disappointed in the high opportunity cost, not simply because he can’t shoot, but I do think you all are assuming development that is far less likely to happen than to happen. And without it, or without Zion becoming a knockdown shooter, it is unlikely Hayes will be an ideal long-term fit to spend a high second contract price on come his second contract. Which is problematic. As Zion projects pretty obviously to play a lot of minutes at the 5. Which will potentially leave a guy like Hayes on the bench at crucial moments in games. Especially in fourth quarters where defenses strengthen and you need guys that can create space. Especially when you have a coach who’s natural instinct is to go small.
quote:
Jaxson isn't our center of the present. But he is an incredible rim protector. Great instincts and athleticism. averaged 2.2 blocks a game. He is athletic, he will be incredible in transition. He is a very good roll man in the pick and roll. He is limited offensively now, but his shot looks consistent, and there are very few centers that came out of college knocking down a ton of 3s. Even if he never develops an outside game, its clear were are going to keep adding shooters.
Again, not once have I said the kid doesn’t have upside, I just don’t think he has anywhere near the likely development or long-term fit as guys we could of had at 4, and giving that and the Hill expiring up for Hayes, NAW and second rounders was not worth it. As I do not realistically see these players through the best case scenario lens you want to. Frankly, I’m not actually sure Hayes is much better of a prospect than Woods, who we already have and averaged 17 and 8 in only 24mpg.
And you keep mentioning getting shooters. Which I’m sure we will add some in FA, but long-term, if your core starting unit is 5 non-shooters, you have serious problems. Not every bucket comes in transition, in fact most don’t. And if you have five players that all occupy the same space, and aren’t really respected as shooters, you become very one dimensional and easy to defend. At the end of the day there are 240 minutes to go around every game and we will be using up around 200 of those minutes with guys that can’t hit a three reliably. No 6th, 7th, or 8th man from free agency is going to magically alleviate that. Zion and Jrue need starting caliber shooters and we went in the complete opposite direction thus far. Ball, Ingram, or Jrue could get moved, but it seems rather unlikely at this point.
As to Hayes shot, it’s not great. What little video of it we have, it needs major work. Which again, may happen, but this presumption based on FT% is pretty ridiculous. Very few almost entirely non-shooters ever become not just passable, but good ones. And again I’ll point to our own guy Woods, he averaged a slightly higher FT% in college and he is now 23 and still working on developing that reliable jumper at the NBA level. And he was a guy that came into the league already taking jump shots as part of his game. Again, Hayes is ours so I wish him the best, I think he will be solid, but the deal for me was not worth it.
This post was edited on 6/22/19 at 7:39 am
Posted on 6/22/19 at 8:01 am to Bronc
Hayes is viewed as having more upside than all but a small few from this draft. He is also viewed as having a decent jumper; many think otherwose because he wasnt asked to shoot in college.
He is pretty new to the game and needs to develop before truly being NBA ready but he has the frame to add strength and weight. He has the size to deal with any NBA player. He has the athleticism to play D in the 4th qtr. He shoots FTs well enough to close out games.
Does Gentry truly prefer short or speed? I thought he was about tempo. Hayes is his Amare for this team and generation. He will take a few years to develop his game (IF it happens) to be a threat on offense but with just a little work on D, he could be a solid contributor sooner rather thsn later.
He is pretty new to the game and needs to develop before truly being NBA ready but he has the frame to add strength and weight. He has the size to deal with any NBA player. He has the athleticism to play D in the 4th qtr. He shoots FTs well enough to close out games.
Does Gentry truly prefer short or speed? I thought he was about tempo. Hayes is his Amare for this team and generation. He will take a few years to develop his game (IF it happens) to be a threat on offense but with just a little work on D, he could be a solid contributor sooner rather thsn later.
Posted on 6/22/19 at 8:07 am to Milesahead
Hayes doesnt have to become a 3pt shooter. Zion WILL end up being decent enough in a few years, a la LBJ in his career.
What must happen is Ball has to learn to hit +33% from 3 or he will not be a fit for the team. He has enough potential to work with him (if no sufficient trade is on table) to see if it happens but that is where shooting is required.
Hayes can get by if he learns to play good D, rebound, and have a respectable game from 17' and in. Anything beyond that is gravy.
What must happen is Ball has to learn to hit +33% from 3 or he will not be a fit for the team. He has enough potential to work with him (if no sufficient trade is on table) to see if it happens but that is where shooting is required.
Hayes can get by if he learns to play good D, rebound, and have a respectable game from 17' and in. Anything beyond that is gravy.
Posted on 6/22/19 at 8:31 am to Milesahead
“As far as his game, he’s going to be able to make jumpers,” Smart told NBA.com. “He’s going to put the ball on the floor. The way the NBA’s going, he’ll probably eventually shoot threes. The kid’s just a puppy. Who knows what he’s capable of doing?”
There is some evidence to support Smart’s expectations. Hayes displays a fluid free throw form and converts accordingly, as he made 74 percent of his free throw attempts as a freshman, including 82.3 percent (51-62) throughout conference play.
There is some evidence to support Smart’s expectations. Hayes displays a fluid free throw form and converts accordingly, as he made 74 percent of his free throw attempts as a freshman, including 82.3 percent (51-62) throughout conference play.
Posted on 6/22/19 at 8:35 am to Milesahead
quote:
Hayes is viewed as having more upside than all but a small few from this draft. He is also viewed as having a decent jumper; many think otherwose because he wasnt asked to shoot in college
Bigs always have huge upside, that’s not really a shocker. Few ever reach it. I personally do not see his upside any greater than a dozen other players in this draft, but I do suspect he will develop better than half of those. Just not as high as his sudden fandom presumes(but I hope to be wrong).
As to Hayes jumper, it’s been a weird manifestation of group think how suddenly everyone seems to think his jumper is good to go.
A few posters and pundits mention his FT as a positive that maybe there is hope in that department(and there is) and a few days later everyone thinks there is this magical consensus writ large about him being a low key solid jump shooter and a few seasons from being Myles Turner, or in this case, Amare Stoudemire. Amare came into the league straight from high school, hitting 30% on his jumpers as a rookie. Hayes took like 3 and missed all of them. When pushed people point to one work out video where he de-emphasized that except for a very brief set of gym jumpers close to the rim.... And other videos aren’t as kind when he isn’t just taking set practice shots in a highlight reel from favorable angles that cover up some of his basic form and shooting motion issues that no doubt contribute to that erratic variance in his shot.
This isn't to say the kid can’t do it, but if people are expecting Myles Turner or Dedmon in a few seasons, I’d dial that expectation down a lot. Let alone Amare.
This post was edited on 6/22/19 at 8:38 am
Posted on 6/22/19 at 8:43 am to Bronc
I certainly dont see him as Amare in regards to how he plays. I brought up Amare to show Gentry has used bigs effectively. I dont think Hayes will ever be a 1st or 2nd option on offense. I personally see more Tyson Chandler type potential...which could be great for a team that wants to run and play D.
Posted on 6/22/19 at 10:05 am to Bronc
Again, you don't get as good a player at 8 as you do at 4.
But can the players we got at 8, 17, 25 and with the cap space overall contribute more to a team? I say probably.
Especially if you consider this a rebuild. by the time Hayes is our starter we will have a couple of seasons to go after shooters, see who develops their 3 point shot out of Ingram Ball NAW.
Also when you look at centers, how many came into the NBA with a great jump shot?
But can the players we got at 8, 17, 25 and with the cap space overall contribute more to a team? I say probably.
Especially if you consider this a rebuild. by the time Hayes is our starter we will have a couple of seasons to go after shooters, see who develops their 3 point shot out of Ingram Ball NAW.
Also when you look at centers, how many came into the NBA with a great jump shot?
Posted on 6/22/19 at 1:10 pm to SammyTiger
quote:
But can the players we got at 8, 17, 25 and with the cap space overall contribute more to a team
This has and continues to be the fundamental
disagreement here. You see a future stretch big with DPOY level talent, a playoff caliber rotational player, and Hills contract as a negative asset that required a deal like this to get out from under. I don’t see it that way.
As to centers with great jump shots. Depends on what you consider great, but the first two off the board last year had established jumpers, and the next center off the board this year did. Zach Collins was first at 10 the year before and was a solid jump shooter. It’s far more common as the league trends toward the three point line by default.
The thing I keep hammering with Hayes is that he is literally starting at zero. It is very rare for a player like that to ever develop a great and reliable in-game jumper, impossible, no, but he has an uphill battle(though I hope he makes it). The shot needs fundamental reform and he’s so late to the game that it is probably going to be a very late bloomer if it does. And unfortunately college is usually the best place to develop that sort of stuff so I do sort of hope he gets the Diallo treatment for a season or two. Where he can focus on improving fundamentals he didn’t have and hoping it sticks a bit better this time.
Posted on 6/22/19 at 2:44 pm to Milesahead
Am I off thinking Hayes might develop into a Rudy Gobert type?
Posted on 6/22/19 at 3:34 pm to Bronc
quote:
You see a future stretch big with DPOY level talent, a playoff caliber rotational player, and Hills contract as a negative asset that required a deal like this to get out from under. I don’t see it that way.
No I see an extremely athletic young center who has great defensive instincts, and set picks and roll and finish lobs in the worst case scenario
We might not be good next year and that’s ok
If we’re not contenders there is nothing wrong with getting another lotto pick for this team.
But getting rid of a bad contract is a plus.
We got 2 first and they had to take Solo to move up for Hunter. Who in my mind is a high floor low ceiling player.
Posted on 6/22/19 at 3:44 pm to SammyTiger
Hill is an expiring contract, that is no longer a negative asset. It also is not clear why getting off it is so important that you take a lesser draft pick to get off it unless you really think there is a big move needed to be made this FA period that requires that cash this instant? Or you really want Gayle to have some extra spending money.
Treating it as another win of this trade is something I am not willing to concede.
And I see that as his likely career arc and that to me doesn't warrant that move. As those are the type of guys that are becoming very cheap to fill out a roster with these days or find in later parts of the draft. The trend is toward the center position being a bit of a mercenary position that unless a guy is truly transitional you don't want to allocate a lot of cap space for relative to more important and sparse positions like the wing and guards.
Treating it as another win of this trade is something I am not willing to concede.
And I see that as his likely career arc and that to me doesn't warrant that move. As those are the type of guys that are becoming very cheap to fill out a roster with these days or find in later parts of the draft. The trend is toward the center position being a bit of a mercenary position that unless a guy is truly transitional you don't want to allocate a lot of cap space for relative to more important and sparse positions like the wing and guards.
This post was edited on 6/22/19 at 3:49 pm
Page 6 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News