Hayward is a SmFwd

BringtheD · Post #1 » by **BringtheD** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 8:35 am

How can you not have Larry Bird as the best small forward to ever play the game. I was lucky enough to watch him in his prime. He could do everthying that you would want a smfwd to do, he didn't revolutionzie the position, he created it. If you don't have LBird as your starting sm fwrd on your all time team, then you just entered yourself in the dictionary as the defintion of iditot.
I am sick and tired of all this talk of Hayward being a shooting guard. Look at him, and tell me, how he plays, is he a shototing guard or a small forward.

I want a poll, is Hayward a smfwd, or shotting f@#$guard.

Bullet · Post #2 » by **Bullet** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 8:59 am

He is a wing player.

CarrKeefe · Post #3 » by **CarrKeefe** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 9:10 am

You're wrong.

Hayward is most definitely a shooting guard. He's a wing player with the versatility and ball handling skills to dribble to the basket and make cuts off screen to get open. Hayward is a shooting guard.

Maneesh · Post #4 » by **Maneesh** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 12:20 pm

It is sf. That enough. Why make auch long? I dont even know what you say first i saw. I believe he sg.

The59Sound · Post #5 » by **The59Sound** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 2:00 pm

Hayward's an asset at the 2 because he's a very good ball handler, and he has size over a lot of other 2s, while still being quick enough to defend most of them. I expect him to start at SG, but spend plenty of time playing both positions. They may be interchangeable on offense right now anyway. For instance, if Gordon and CJ are playing together, does it matter who is at the 2 and who is at the 3, except for defensive match-ups?

If we come into a badass 2 guard, Hayward can play the 3 with no difficulties. But until we find a better 2 than Raja Bell, Gordon's the best option there.

Neon Black · Post #6 » by **Neon Black** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 2:40 pm

This is a really weird thing to be upset about.

d-will8 · Post #7 » by **d-will8** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 2:46 pm

I'd say he can play either very capably, though I like his mismatch potential at the two. He'll also need to bulk up a bit to defend guys like LeBron and Melo.

Fido · Post #8 » by **Fido** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 2:59 pm

If it makes you feel better to call him a SF, go right ahead. It really doesn't matter.

HolyToledo · Post #9 » by **HolyToledo** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 3:21 pm

The days of pegging players into a position is over. SF/SG are now wing players and he is a wing player. You still have a PG position and then you have the "Bigs" as there are very few players that are the true traditional centers. Hayward is a wing player along with Miles for next years team and the Jazz could use another one of them unless they are moving Millsap to the wings.

carrottop12 · Post #10 » by **carrottop12** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 3:32 pm

Consdering the fight over Millsap moving to the SF, I do think it matters whether or not Hayward is an SG, or an SF. Personally, I have always seen him more as an SF than an SG. Prototypical SG's in this league are top level athletes, good isolation players, good shooters, and creators off the dribble. While Hayward is certainly a great shooter, and has shown some ability to create of the dribble, his size, speed, and who he should be defending make him a much better SF in my opinion.

If it came down to drafting an SG, and moving Hay to the SF, or putting Hay at SG, and moving Millsap to SF, I'd much rather take the first option.

I definitely don't think the Hayward/Millsap SG/SF combo is a good one. Even if we end up drafting a guy like Kawhi Leonard, or Marcus Morris, I'd rather see them at SF, then Gordon at SG, and move Millsap to the bench.

Post #11 » by **jazzfan1971** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 3:32 pm

He's defending 2s just fine. I think that means he's a 2.

BringtheD · Post #12 » by **BringtheD** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 3:37 pm

It sounds like most people are satisfied with him being a sg, or just a wing player. I'm upset about it because i'm sick and tired of watching the Jazz put lineups there with guys out of position. Even if you want him to play the sg for mismatch reasons then that is an admission for an out of position player. Let's hope we get a badass sg then, because i really am sick and tired of these jerrysloan type of lineups.

Post #13 » by **jazzfan1971** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 3:39 pm

Was Magic a PG? Is Lebron a SF? Duncan a PF?

Not sure playing them 'out of position' is really so damaging.

Paper Face · Post #14 » by **Paper Face** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 3:42 pm

BringtheD wrote:If you don't have LBird as your starting sm fwrd on your all time team, then you just entered yourself in the dictionary as the defintion of iditot.

This is the greatest thing I've seen posted on this forum in months.

BringtheD · Post #15 » by **BringtheD** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 3:43 pm

Well I'll tell you what magic wasn't, merely a back court player, and lebron isn't merely a wing player either, neither is Duncan merely a front court player; their position is relative to their strengths as players.

Post #16 » by **jazzfan1971** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 3:44 pm

What's your point?

The59Sound · Post #17 » by **The59Sound** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 3:49 pm

This is getting bizarre.

Re: "Gordon must be playing out of position if he's causing match-up problems." Magic certainly wasn't playing out of position and he caused match-up nightmares.

BringtheD · Post #18 » by **BringtheD** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 3:53 pm

I would like to see the Jazz put him in the position now that they probably see for him in the longterm. I don't want to see young guys have to settle into positions that don't fit them, then ask them later on, why don't you change nearly everything you've been working on. I guess it's fair enough, but it's jerrysloaning it.

BringtheD · Post #19 » by **BringtheD** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 4:01 pm

Even the great bball players need to be in the right positions and play those roles.

carrottop12 · Post #20 » by **carrottop12** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 4:07 pm

First of all, lets get this clear, some of us are trying to compare Gordon Hayward to Duncan, Magic, LeBron etc.

Hayward doesn't have anywhere near the skill set that those guys have or had. Those guys multifaceted games were the reason they were match up problems, along with their size. Karl Malone is the same size as LeBron, the reason LeBron is a match up problem, and Malone was a prototypical PF is because LeBron is also a top notch ball handler and passer. It doesn't make sense to relegate him to the post like you had to with Malone.

It is true that Hayward has several very good NBA skills, but they aren't so good that they transverse positioning. With his 6'8 frame, that is going to add weight over the next several years, which will slow him down some, he has the prototypical SF body. Why are we trying to smash him into a position just to create mismatches? Kobe was faster than any other SG in the league when he was younger, which made him faster than any other SF in the league, but you don't see anyone trying to change him to SF just for the mismatches, or to PG because it would create mismatches. His size and skill set works best as an SG.

With Gordon's skill set, he will be just as effective, and have just as many advantages over small forwards as he would over shooting guards, so why try to move him? IMO, his ball handling, and superb shooting abilities make him more of a mismatch for most SF's in the league than SG's anyways.

I don't like big guys who player smaller than their height would suggest. While there are exceptions/advantages of having a guy like Magic at 6'9 who can run the point, its much easier to have guys excel being smaller than their position and playing up to it, than bigger than their position and playing down to it.

But when you have a guy with the prototypical height at a position, who can do all things that other smaller players are typically known for, you don't make him play the smaller position, you let him dominate his position by allowing him to do things that defenders his size can't protect against.