The Gordon Hayward thread

Smitty7 · Post #1 » by **Smitty7** » Wed Jan 29, 2014 8:09 am

So should we trade Hayward? Personally I wouldn't mind seeing getting some assets in return for Hayward but he might be really valuable for our re-build. What do you think we should do? We are currently sitting at 16-29 and 13th in the West. We have a 3.5% chance at the 1st Ovr. pick. Do we take the risk of trading away our expiring contracts for little in return and risk playing ourselves out of pick that the Jazz desperately need or do we trade Hayward and help our chances in the tank race? I think Hayward does want to play here after this year and if we don't trade him away I think the Jazz will sign him at the end of the season even if we have to over pay. What other moves could we make to help our chance at a top pick? If we are out of the t5 I see little to no chance at moving up in the draft.

Bobcat Ghetto · Post #2 » by **Bobcat Ghetto** » Wed Jan 29, 2014 2:28 pm

Trading RJeff, and/or Williams alone will help the tank, they have been contributing well this season and have risen their trade value for 1. Being an expiring contract and 2. Playing really well showing to be excellent bench players for contenders. I don't see the need to trade Hayward. Just trade Marvin and RJeff

Sent from my LG-LS980 using RealGM Forums mobile app

jazzfanWA · Post #3 » by **jazzfanWA** » Wed Jan 29, 2014 3:57 pm

I think Hayward likes Utah as well...but keep in mind that he is getting married and his wife may have a differing opinion about living there.

HolyToledo12 · Post #4 » by **HolyToledo12** » Wed Jan 29, 2014 6:59 pm

At some point you need to step up and pay your guys to stay especially in Utah where players don't want to play. You have to keep him and you cant be rebuilding every year for the next 10 years ala the Bobcats and the old LAC teams.

pickIBL · Post #5 » by **pickIBL** » Wed Jan 29, 2014 8:17 pm

HolyToledo12 wrote:At some point you need to step up and pay your guys to stay especially in Utah where players don't want to play. You have to keep him and you cant be rebuilding every year for the next 10 years ala the Bobcats and the old LAC teams.

I'd agree that a team like San Antonio has benefited from the stability of their core and coach. Long-term the Jazz should follow that path. But do you want Corbin around long-term? Do you want to pay the chunk of cap it will take to retain Hayward?

If you are asking me if I want Thad Young at 9 million or Hayward at 14 the answer is Thad. Afflalo at 7.5 or Hayward at 14. I take Afflalo.

laika · Post #6 » by **laika** » Thu Jan 30, 2014 1:45 am

Yes.

Hayward will never be an elite defender. He isn't a very good shooter. He is a decent passer, but that isn't enough to justify keeping him.

Besides, you know that if we keep him he will be wildly overpaid, hurting the rest of the team.

If we recognized him for what he is- a 6th man hustle guy that can exploit the occasional mismatch- then it would be fine to keep him. But if you are going to treat him like any sort of star then you are better off letting him go.

The59Sound · Post #7 » by **The59Sound** » Thu Jan 30, 2014 1:50 am

To say that all Hayward is is a 6th-man hustle guy is a bit ludicrous. You really don't think Gordon Hayward is a starter?

laika · Post #8 » by **laika** » Thu Jan 30, 2014 1:59 am

The59Sound wrote:To say that all Hayward is is a 6th-man hustle guy is a bit ludicrous. You really don't think Gordon Hayward is a starter?

On a championship team, no.

Hayward is the wrong size to be really good. He is too slow to be a really good SG and too weak to be a really good SF. He creates just as many mismatches against us as for us.

Post #9 » by **Inigo Montoya** » Thu Jan 30, 2014 1:59 am

yeah, that's a bit harsh.

he'll never be an elite defender? well, how many players will? it is called "elite" for a reason.
he isn't a good shooter? well, i think he's actually pretty good, just not as a 1st option. if you set him up instead of having him create for himself and carry the most of the offensive load, his shooting percentages will look pretty good imho.

i do agree with that he'll likely get overpaid and i think the jazz should have traded him, but let's not sell hayward short in terms of how good of a player he is. but while we're at it, let's not over rate him as well please.

Post #10 » by **Inigo Montoya** » Thu Jan 30, 2014 2:02 am

laika wrote:
The59Sound wrote:To say that all Hayward is is a 6th-man hustle guy is a bit ludicrous. You really don't think Gordon Hayward is a starter?

On a championship team, no.

Hayward is the wrong size to be really good. He is too slow to be a really good SG and too weak to be a really good SF. He creates just as many mismatches against us as for us.

how many really good SGs are there in this league? not many. i think he's doing just fine. and it's not like all of the best SGs out there are good defenders (or penetrators). just look at harden.

Viktor Vaughn · Post #11 » by **Viktor Vaughn** » Thu Jan 30, 2014 2:13 am

Hayward is a very interesting player. I don't think anyone really understands his value. He's either over valued to the point of "give him a max deal because he deserves it", or he's undervalued to the point of "he only deserves to be a sixth man". Luckily, his value isn't determined by us, it's determined by other GM's. So yeah, I'm open to trading him, but I'd have to see what the other GM's value him at.

Post #12 » by **Inigo Montoya** » Thu Jan 30, 2014 2:19 am

Viktor Vaughn wrote:Luckily, his value isn't determined by us, it's determined by other GM's.

how is that lucky for us jazz fans, that other GMs are going to have to overpay him if they want to pry him away from the jazz? if we want to keep hayward without his contract crippling our team, the fact that other GMs get to determine his value is actually a very bad thing.

reapaman · Post #13 » by **reapaman** » Thu Jan 30, 2014 2:32 am

Well Hayward's defense is not good but that's not alone what makes him a sixth man. Its his skill set. He's a ball dominator that can do a little bit of everything (on offense) but not great at anything. At some point we need a true lead scorer and along with a ball dominator like Burkes, where is there room for Hayward to dominate the ball? Restricting him by "setting him up" for shots is a waste and likely will through him off. Plus we can find way cheaper guys that can fill that role while play much better defense. Not to mention if we kept Burkes, then him and Hayward creates 2 defensive holes and if we kept Kanter than that's 3.

This is why he needs to come off the bench so he can do his thing unrestricted.

Post #14 » by **Inigo Montoya** » Thu Jan 30, 2014 2:44 am

reapaman wrote: Restricting him by "setting him up" for shots is a waste and likely will through him off.

i'm not talking about just making him a spot up shooter or a recipient of cuts and that's it. but i think there should definitely be a happy medium between how much he is he is used now and how little he was used in previous years. he's not really a ball dominator - he is just asked to do so much this year which negatively affects his shooting percentages. until this season he averaged 45%FG and 41%3PT. but we clearly see a trend of his shooting percentages going down the more his usage is increased, which is to be expected. finding a role for him in which he can excel, bring his good attributes\strengths to the table and have good shooting percentages is the job of a good coach - like hornacek did with gerald green...

Winglish · Post #15 » by **Winglish** » Thu Jan 30, 2014 2:51 am

Gordon Hayward is the 4th best SG in the NBA in fantasy basketball. No trades, please. At least not at this time.

Daddy 801 · Post #16 » by **Daddy 801** » Thu Jan 30, 2014 3:00 am

If Hayward is going to get a ridiculous payday I say trade him. Not because he isn't worth a good chunk of money. He just isn't worth what some GM's will pay. Hypothetically speaking of course.

Having said that.....I'm curious what happens in the scenario no GM wants to overpay and he doesn't get any offers he is happy with. If Hayward refuses to sign any contracts.....what next? How can the Jazz match an offer if he refuses to sign any of them? Weird stuff. And in this new CBA era of basketball it wouldn't surprise me.

Post #17 » by **Inigo Montoya** » Thu Jan 30, 2014 3:05 am

Winglish wrote:Gordon Hayward is the 4th best SG in the NBA in fantasy basketball. No trades, please. At least not at this time.

honestly, that's the best argument against trading hayward i've seen yet.

Daddy 801 wrote:If Hayward is going to get a ridiculous payday I say trade him. Not because he isn't worth a good chunk of money. He just isn't worth what some GM's will pay. Hypothetically speaking of course.

Having said that.....I'm curious what happens in the scenario no GM wants to overpay and he doesn't get any offers he is happy with. If Hayward refuses to sign any contracts.....what next? How can the Jazz match an offer if he refuses to sign any of them? Weird stuff. And in this new CBA era of basketball it wouldn't surprise me.

if he doesn't get offers from other teams, the jazz don't need to match. they make hayward their own offer, and he can choose if he want to sign it or not. if not, he'll become an URFA at the end of next season and he'll be free to sign wherever he wants, without the jazz being able to match offers.

it does happen from time to time, like with OJ mayo, but i don't see this scenario happening. hayward will get offers, and he'll sign one of them, and they'll be really good offers, most likely.

kebutah · Post #18 » by **kebutah** » Thu Jan 30, 2014 3:06 am

He is a RFA when the Jazz give him a qualifying offer. He is always able to accept the QO and become an UFA next year.

Winglish · Post #19 » by **Winglish** » Thu Jan 30, 2014 3:13 am

^^^^
That's actually a very good point. What does Hayward's qualifying offer have to be? Does anyone know?

The59Sound · Post #20 » by **The59Sound** » Thu Jan 30, 2014 3:14 am

kebutah wrote:He is a RFA when the Jazz give him a qualifying offer. He is always able to accept the QO and become an UFA next year.

Absolutely. Very few guys go that route (Ben Gordon, OJ Mayo, and... Brandon Jennings -- I think -- come to mind), however, because:

1) Anything can happen over the next year, such as injuries. It's the right time for a long-term pay day; and
2) Teams are more likely to offer a higher salary (overpay, essentially) to prevent the player's current team from matching. A UFA loses that advantage.