Grade the Rookies

[BIG BEN'S FRO]

Grading Hayes is as simple as this to me. Would you have drafted him at 7 now that the season is over? If yes, assign an A or B. If not C or worse. I am a solid C-.

[hoophabit]

Everyone gets an A with consideration given to their respective draft positions except Hayes, who gets a hopeful I. Hopeful in that he generally looked quite a bit better after returning from the long layoff.

[Drwho17]

Grading Hayes is as simple as this to me. Would you have drafted him at 7 now that the season is over? If yes, assign an A or B. If not C or worse. I am a solid C-.

At this point in time, there were better options at #7, however I will wait another year to see what he looks like with an offseason under his belt, he was always a projection/upside type pick, not necessarily expected to be a ready to go player. I think there is a reason to be optimistic from some of the things he showed through the end of the season, I could see him becoming a Jason Kidd type player, tall for a PG/defensive minded passer.

[Invictus88]

Grading Hayes is as simple as this to me. Would you have drafted him at 7 now that the season is over? If yes, assign an A or B. If not C or worse. I am a solid C-.

If you are grading based solely on raw production alone then sure, give the guy a C or worse. He played 20ish games and only started to come on in the back half of that.

If you are grading on how well he did as a 19 year old in a limited number of games split in half by a career threatening injury then I think you have to give him at least a B if not an A. The only way he really does better is if he was expected to be instantly good before he got hurt and not miss a beat after he came back. But we drafted him at 7 knowing full well he was going to take time to develop; not at 1 or 2.

If you think that there just hasn't been enough consistency in playing time due to covid/his injury circumstances to evaluate his play then you give him an I.

I won't say any more about this because this point has been talked to death already. I don't relate to the expectations of folks giving him a C or below based on the above reasoning.

[SamFlow]

beef stew - starter
bey - starter
Lee - bench, role, pleasant surprise, but would not be shocked if he was in the g league next year back and forth.
euro rookie - worth another look, probably g league back and forth.
Killian - borderline starter at this point. grade is incomplete. will wait until this next year to make the call. can run a team and will get better.

[dVs33]

Hayes - showed plenty of potential. He proved to already have great vision and passing and his defence looked solid. He’s definitely more of a project than I thought he’d be, but I’m still happy with the pick. I give it a B.

Beef Stew - didn’t know anything about him going into the draft so it’s hard to compare him to my expectations, but he definitely impressed me. Live his energy and hustle. I don’t think his ceiling is super high (I hope I’m wrong), but he looks like he’ll be a solid starter for years. Great pick in the middle of the 1st round. Give it an A.

Bey - similar to the stew pick, didn’t have expectations. He looked great. Very poised from the get go. Solid starter for years to come. I give that a n A too.

Lee - showed great poise and looks to be a solid role player. Great value for a 2nd rounder. Give it a B+

All the rookies have plenty of room to grow and after a proper offseason I think we’ll see them all take a big step forward. Great job b6 weaver.

[flow]

Grading Hayes is as simple as this to me. Would you have drafted him at 7 now that the season is over? If yes, assign an A or B. If not C or worse. I am a solid C-.

If you are grading based solely on raw production alone then sure, give the guy a C or worse. He played 20ish games and only started to come on in the back half of that.

If you are grading on how well he did as a 19 year old in a limited number of games split in half by a career threatening injury then I think you have to give him at least a B if not an A. The only way he really does better is if he was expected to be instantly good before he got hurt and not miss a beat after he came back. But we drafted him at 7 knowing full well he was going to take time to develop; not at 1 or 2.

If you think that there just hasn't been enough consistency in playing time due to covid/his injury circumstances to evaluate his play then you give him an I.

I won't say any more about this because this point has been talked to death already. I don't relate to the expectations of folks giving him a C or below based on the above reasoning.

B if not an A? Come on.

Look, I get that he had a significant injury that disrupted his season. But the fact is, Hayes finished the season with the worst turnover ratio of all drafted rookies (55th out of 55), and of all rookies period - drafted or undrafted - who averaged 6+ minutes per game. That's a dubious distinction. Even with the injury.

His ceiling is high, though. And he seems fully recovered from the tear. Let's hope he has an MIP type season next year.

.

[Invictus88]

Grading Hayes is as simple as this to me. Would you have drafted him at 7 now that the season is over? If yes, assign an A or B. If not C or worse. I am a solid C-.

If you are grading based solely on raw production alone then sure, give the guy a C or worse. He played 20ish games and only started to come on in the back half of that.

If you are grading on how well he did as a 19 year old in a limited number of games split in half by a career threatening injury then I think you have to give him at least a B if not an A. The only way he really does better is if he was expected to be instantly good before he got hurt and not miss a beat after he came back. But we drafted him at 7 knowing full well he was going to take time to develop; not at 1 or 2.

If you think that there just hasn't been enough consistency in playing time due to covid/his injury circumstances to evaluate his play then you give him an I.

I won't say any more about this because this point has been talked to death already. I don't relate to the expectations of folks giving him a C or below based on the above reasoning.

B if not an A? Come on.

Look, I get that he had a significant injury that disrupted his season. But the fact is, Hayes finished the season with the worst turnover ratio of all drafted rookies (55th out of 55), and of all rookies period - drafted or undrafted - who averaged 6+ minutes per game. That's a dubious distinction. Even with the injury.

His ceiling is high, though. And he seems fully recovered from the tear. Let's hope he has an MIP type season next year.

.

I don't know if you didn't read or just didn't understand. Otherwise you wouldn't have a problem with my post.

It's clear you're evaluating based on raw production. Great. Give him a C or worse.

I've been under the impression that he wasn't right healthwise at the start of the season and then faced an injury that has ended the careers of other players. He came back from that within the same season and then looked the part of an NBA player with a lot of upside. I personally find that to be a very good outcome given the circumstances.

[ByeByeDre]

If they redid the draft today……..

Bey and Stewart both would be in top ten. Both A’s.
Hayes would be low teens or early twenties - D.
Lee would be late 20’s/early 30’s - B

[flow]

If you are grading based solely on raw production alone then sure, give the guy a C or worse. He played 20ish games and only started to come on in the back half of that.

If you are grading on how well he did as a 19 year old in a limited number of games split in half by a career threatening injury then I think you have to give him at least a B if not an A. The only way he really does better is if he was expected to be instantly good before he got hurt and not miss a beat after he came back. But we drafted him at 7 knowing full well he was going to take time to develop; not at 1 or 2.

If you think that there just hasn't been enough consistency in playing time due to covid/his injury circumstances to evaluate his play then you give him an I.

I won't say any more about this because this point has been talked to death already. I don't relate to the expectations of folks giving him a C or below based on the above reasoning.

B if not an A? Come on.

Look, I get that he had a significant injury that disrupted his season. But the fact is, Hayes finished the season with the worst turnover ratio of all drafted rookies (55th out of 55), and of all rookies period - drafted or undrafted - who averaged 6+ minutes per game. That's a dubious distinction. Even with the injury.

His ceiling is high, though. And he seems fully recovered from the tear. Let's hope he has an MIP type season next year.

.

I don't know if you didn't read or just didn't understand. Otherwise you wouldn't have a problem with my post.

It's clear you're evaluating based on raw production. Great. Give him a C or worse.

I've been under the impression that he wasn't right healthwise at the start of the season and then faced an injury that has ended the careers of other players. He came back from that within the same season and then looked the part of an NBA player with a lot of upside. I personally find that to be a very good outcome given the circumstances.

Not only did I read it, I highlighted it. I highlighted it because I disagree with it. My post took all the circumstances into consideration.

First of all , they're all 19. The age crutch is a sham.

He played 7 healthy, disastrous games to start the season. I didn't realize that we're pretending he was injured from jump street now. He came back and played well enough to be praised, but not to be criticized for turnovers? It's an insult to the kid's ceiling/ability to excuse or disregard the worst turnover ratio in the league due to a healed leg injury.

[Invictus88]

B if not an A? Come on.

Look, I get that he had a significant injury that disrupted his season. But the fact is, Hayes finished the season with the worst turnover ratio of all drafted rookies (55th out of 55), and of all rookies period - drafted or undrafted - who averaged 6+ minutes per game. That's a dubious distinction. Even with the injury.

His ceiling is high, though. And he seems fully recovered from the tear. Let's hope he has an MIP type season next year.

.

I don't know if you didn't read or just didn't understand. Otherwise you wouldn't have a problem with my post.

It's clear you're evaluating based on raw production. Great. Give him a C or worse.

I've been under the impression that he wasn't right healthwise at the start of the season and then faced an injury that has ended the careers of other players. He came back from that within the same season and then looked the part of an NBA player with a lot of upside. I personally find that to be a very good outcome given the circumstances.

Not only did I read it, I highlighted it. I highlighted it because I disagree with it. My post took all the circumstances into consideration.

First of all , they're all 19. The age crutch is a sham.

He played 7 healthy, disastrous games to start the season. I didn't realize that we're pretending he was injured from jump street now. He came back and played well enough to be praised, but not to be criticized for turnovers? It's an insult to the kid's ceiling/ability to excuse or disregard the worst turnover ratio in the league due to a healed leg injury.

So if the age 19 crutch is a sham and his play was so horrendously bad that there's no excuse for it -- regardless of whether he had the injury -- then why do you state that his ceiling is still high? Why even mention the possibility of having a MIP-type season in the coming year?

It's because despite the fact that his numbers were bad he still did show flashes of possibility towards the end.

You take the glass half empty view and bury the guy because his numbers in a vacuum are terrible. It's a route I mentioned people would take. That's your opinion. Great.

I take the glass half full view and say "Dude has been through the ringer adversity-wise his first season and looks like he's going to come out the other side having survived it to live another day". He faced an injury to a critical joint and came back from it better than he went in.

I already mentioned that my first preference was to give the guy an 'I' because we need more data; but my second choice woild be the higher grade. My level of acceptable outcomes from this year's events is obviously different than yours?

And I looked and I can't find where I got the idea that Hayes was injured to start the season. It must have been on video somewhere ir a podcast ir something. He was just so slow to start the year and looked like a different player after coming back. It feels like it lines up with observations but I freely admit might not be accurate; or at least I can't find written proof anymore.

[FloridaMan78]

Grading Hayes is as simple as this to me. Would you have drafted him at 7 now that the season is over? If yes, assign an A or B. If not C or worse. I am a solid C-.

If you are grading based solely on raw production alone then sure, give the guy a C or worse. He played 20ish games and only started to come on in the back half of that.

If you are grading on how well he did as a 19 year old in a limited number of games split in half by a career threatening injury then I think you have to give him at least a B if not an A. The only way he really does better is if he was expected to be instantly good before he got hurt and not miss a beat after he came back. But we drafted him at 7 knowing full well he was going to take time to develop; not at 1 or 2.

If you think that there just hasn't been enough consistency in playing time due to covid/his injury circumstances to evaluate his play then you give him an I.

I won't say any more about this because this point has been talked to death already. I don't relate to the expectations of folks giving him a C or below based on the above reasoning.

B if not an A? Come on.

Look, I get that he had a significant injury that disrupted his season. But the fact is, Hayes finished the season with the worst turnover ratio of all drafted rookies (55th out of 55), and of all rookies period - drafted or undrafted - who averaged 6+ minutes per game. That's a dubious distinction. Even with the injury.

His ceiling is high, though. And he seems fully recovered from the tear. Let's hope he has an MIP type season next year.

.

This video shows why I’m not worried about his turnover ratio, 5 of his TOs hit the guy in the hands and should have been an assist, and I think the team will be more ready next year.

What I don’t like is that contested lefty layup at 2:25 when it was an easy right hand layup, he’s really gotta work on that, happened nearly every game he played this year. Easy off hand layups is grade school ish. His whole emphasis this off season should be putting the ball in the hole.

Watch on YouTube

[Billl]

Hayes - Incomplete. Not sure how else to grade him. Looked totally scared to start, got hurt, and then came back for the last month when we were in full tank. The last 15 games, his worst assist night was 4. And most nights, he had multiple passes that were great, but surprised his teammates and they weren't ready to finish. Obviously needs to work on his right and get stronger to finish, but man can he pass the rock.

Bey - A - Rock solid starter tailor made for how the game is being played right now. If he mixes in a few more quick post ups and the occasional drive, he'll be a very efficient player.

Stewart - A - going to be the most popular piston for the next decade. Probably not going to be a star, but he could be our version of Udonis Haslem in terms of building a team identity. Everyone feeds off his energy.

Lee - B - Most second rounders don't stick. He looks like he might. Not really sold on him at this point, but at least you can see the potential.

[zeebneeb]

If you are grading based solely on raw production alone then sure, give the guy a C or worse. He played 20ish games and only started to come on in the back half of that.

If you are grading on how well he did as a 19 year old in a limited number of games split in half by a career threatening injury then I think you have to give him at least a B if not an A. The only way he really does better is if he was expected to be instantly good before he got hurt and not miss a beat after he came back. But we drafted him at 7 knowing full well he was going to take time to develop; not at 1 or 2.

If you think that there just hasn't been enough consistency in playing time due to covid/his injury circumstances to evaluate his play then you give him an I.

I won't say any more about this because this point has been talked to death already. I don't relate to the expectations of folks giving him a C or below based on the above reasoning.

B if not an A? Come on.

Look, I get that he had a significant injury that disrupted his season. But the fact is, Hayes finished the season with the worst turnover ratio of all drafted rookies (55th out of 55), and of all rookies period - drafted or undrafted - who averaged 6+ minutes per game. That's a dubious distinction. Even with the injury.

His ceiling is high, though. And he seems fully recovered from the tear. Let's hope he has an MIP type season next year.

.

This video shows why I’m not worried about his turnover ratio, 5 of his TOs hit the guy in the hands and should have been an assist, and I think the team will be more ready next year.

What I don’t like is that contested lefty layup at 2:25 when it was an easy right hand layup, he’s really gotta work on that, happened nearly every game he played this year. Easy off hand layups is grade school ish. His whole emphasis this off season should be putting the ball in the hole.

Watch on YouTube

You have summed up exactly how I feel about Killian pretty well. It got to be almost a drinking game level of comedy how many times teammates where caught not looking for the pass, or not ready when it came from Hayes.

Hayes dictates the speed on the floor, and can control the flow. He is slippery, and understands pacing, and where his teammates are at. The biggest issue he has is his lack of a right hand. If he comes out next year, and has the exact same problem, then I would seriously consider moving him which may sound nuts, but it would show that he isn't willing to work on his game, or improve.

In clarifying my statement, if he shows the exact same level of ineptitude with his right hand, that he showed this season, it is a huge red flag for me, and should be for Weaver as well. He has all the tools to be an outstanding PG/floor general in this league, but was consistently hampered by his lack of being able to shift to the right, or finish with his right hand.

I'm hoping that he shows improvement next season. I'm not asking for a wholesale fix in a few months, as that can take a few season to fully correct, but a higher level of confidence with his right hand, and the willingness to use it occasionally as he grows more comfortable doing so. It should be apparent where he is at in that process just a few games into next season.