PDA

View Full Version : Still doubting Gordon Hayward?



Pacergeek
04-06-2011, 07:40 AM
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/recap?gid=2011040513

i know graphic-er never had any doubts about Gordon. What about the rest of you? Still think we got over on Utah by drafting Paul George?

Will Galen
04-06-2011, 07:52 AM
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/recap?gid=2011040513

i know graphic-er never had any doubts about Gordon. What about the rest of you? Still think we got over on Utah by drafting Paul George?

Duh! I really think opinions don't matter a bit at this stage. Time, and many games will tell, not pointing out how good someone was in one game, or even this season.

They are both young and as Pacers fans it doesn't matter because we didn't have a chance to draft Gordon. It will matter to some Utah fans if George blows up and Gordon doesn't, because Utah had the choice.

troyc11a
04-06-2011, 07:54 AM
Hayward will be a good, solid NBA player for years. He will probably start for Utah next year. It isnt very smart to doubt him because he has talent.
George has the potential to be an all=star and might have a higher ceiling, but he also has a higher chance of failure. Hayward was the safer pick.

Pacergeek
04-06-2011, 08:04 AM
Duh! I really think opinions don't matter a bit at this stage. Time, and many games will tell, not pointing out how good someone was in one game, or even this season.

They are both young and as Pacers fans it doesn't matter because we didn't have a chance to draft Gordon. It will matter to some Utah fans if George blows up and Gordon doesn't, because Utah had the choice.

true. it doesn't really matter because we had no chance to get him. i just feel somewhat vindicated this morning because Gordon is emerging as a player. scoring 22 against the defending champs as a rookie is impressive. ludicrous that posters like Vnzla thought he was a bust.

Dr. Awesome
04-06-2011, 08:04 AM
I love how your argument is that one game shows he is a better player.

troyc11a
04-06-2011, 08:06 AM
I love how your argument is that one game shows he is a better player.

I dont know that Gordon is better. Maybe a safer future.

Basketball Fan
04-06-2011, 08:07 AM
I do find it ironic a year ago around this time he almost won the championship for Butler at the last second and he's the hero for this game.

I do think Hayward will be a serviceable player but the next great Hoosier basketball player since Larry Bird? No

Although he might've helped Butler win on Monday.

McKeyFan
04-06-2011, 08:08 AM
McHayward.

Speed
04-06-2011, 08:12 AM
Message Boards, where you only remember when you are right and demand everyone give you credit for it....

Pacergeek
04-06-2011, 08:19 AM
I love how your argument is that one game shows he is a better player.

i'm not trying to argue that he is better than Paul George, but i was shredded for suggesting that they are about equal. i mean, people thought i was crazy for even suggesting that they are close. by the way, has Paul hit for 22 this season?

Speed
04-06-2011, 08:20 AM
i'm not trying to argue that he is better than Paul George, but i was shredded for suggesting that they are about equal. i mean, people thought i was crazy for even suggesting that they are close. by the way, has Paul hit for 22 this season?

Clearly this argument is now settled.

dohman
04-06-2011, 08:34 AM
i'm not trying to argue that he is better than Paul George, but i was shredded for suggesting that they are about equal. i mean, people thought i was crazy for even suggesting that they are close. by the way, has Paul hit for 22 this season?


Nope, but when he had the green light he was scoring 12 to 15 a game at 50% from the field.

owl
04-06-2011, 09:01 AM
I would love to have Hayward on the Pacers along with George. Hayward is a good defender. He was on Kobe last night and did a good job. George seems to be determined to be the best he can be so lets hope he can reach his potential.

vnzla81
04-06-2011, 09:21 AM
Yeah the guy was impressive last night, he looked good as the point forward and Utah was playing a weird line up with Millsap at the 3 Favors at the 4 and Al at the 5. Like somebody else already said, is just one game and even Adam Morrison had his nights, I wouldn't trade PG for him unless Utah is willing to pay top value, Hayward has the potential to be a bust or Mike Dunleavy(he plays the same way) when PG's ceiling at least I think is way higher.

Unclebuck
04-06-2011, 09:33 AM
I never doubted that he would be a good player. My argument against drafting Hayward was against the notion that he would sell tickets.

I'd be shocked if Hayward turns out to be a better player than Paul George.

Mackey_Rose
04-06-2011, 09:50 AM
I never doubted that he would be a good player. My argument against drafting Hayward was against the notion that he would sell tickets.

I'd be shocked if Hayward turns out to be a better player than Paul George.

He sold a lot of tickets when he came back here this year.

graphic-er
04-06-2011, 09:58 AM
<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/vGggGD-l34I" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

debate settled.

Honestly Hayward has proven to be a very good pick at 9th. Sure he has his moments where he looks really bad just like all rookies. Right now I think he is head and shoulders above George. He defended Kobe really well to close out the game last night. Kobe lost the ball there at the end, but Gordon got in good position to pressure the ball, force an off balanced attempt for Kobe, that's about all you can do. That's a player using his length right there.

As for George I can only hope he gets it together, has clearly hit the rookie wall, cause he looks terrible on Defense, slow to react, looks terrible trying to get his own shot on offense, and seemingly is only interested in bombing wide open 3pters instead of pump faking it to get open for an easy mid range shot. He also takes the most unorthodox layup attempts when he gets in the paint to try and finish.

As for Indiana not having the opportunity to draft Hayward, they could of pulled off a trade to move up a couple of spots to get him if they really wanted him. I think those picks were up for trade if someone was willing to bite. I kept thinking that we could have swapped picks with LAC.

Ransom
04-06-2011, 10:03 AM
I like Hayward, But the OP is working pretty hard to make me hate him.

Unclebuck
04-06-2011, 10:04 AM
He sold a lot of tickets when he came back here this year.


OK, how many are a lot?

But even if they did 1 game per season is a lot different from 41 home games.

BringJackBack
04-06-2011, 10:17 AM
<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/vGggGD-l34I" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

debate settled.

.

Get that ****ing **** out of here. Not cool, and it doesn't tell ****.

George is already better than Hayward, and this discussion will be laughed at two years from now.

imawhat
04-06-2011, 10:18 AM
Right now I think he is head and shoulders above George.

George: 20.7mpg, 7.7 pt/3.7 rb/1.1 ast/44.7 FG%/1.1st/0.4bpg
Hayward: 15.8mpg, 4.7 pt/1.9 rb/1.1 ast/46.5 FG%/0.4 st/0.3 bpg

Yes, clearly.

graphic-er
04-06-2011, 10:18 AM
OK, how many are a lot?

But even if they did 1 game per season is a lot different from 41 home games.

Well the game was a sell out. One of the few we had this year.

i know that wouldn't' translate to 41 sellouts a year if he was here. But I think one of the biggest reasons to draft him outside of his obvious talent is the fact that he alone would have helped this team make huge strides in being relevant again in the local market.

I really don't understand it, for a team that says they are bleeding money, haven't made the playoffs in several years. How could they afford not to go after Hayward. Its not like his talent level isn't deserving of 9th pick in the draft. People have said that it is better that he develops on another team. I say how you can afford to let him develop anywhere but Indiana. If the kid is good enough his game is going to shine thru regardless of where is starts his career.

I'll never forgive Bird for this one. This is Indiana, we are a college basketball state. So when an Indiana player is with in your reach you gotta go get him.

BringJackBack
04-06-2011, 10:20 AM
Oh God... *Ignore list*

imawhat
04-06-2011, 10:20 AM
Yes, Dallas is still happy they stole Alford from the Pacers.

Mackey_Rose
04-06-2011, 10:22 AM
OK, how many are a lot?

But even if they did 1 game per season is a lot different from 41 home games.

It is true that only buying a ticket to 1 game is a lot easier than a full season, but I'd imagine that some of the people who bought a ticket to see him would consider it.

The posted attendance of that game was 16,205. The average attendance on the season has been 13,458.

From being there, I'd say it was in the top 5 biggest crowds of the season. Unlike the average, which is probably actually much lower, I'd say that single game was pretty close to the actual number of seats filled. Keep in mind, that was a Jazz team that had just traded its best player, so it wasn't like that would be a hot ticket normally.

Many, many of those people who showed up that night were there to see Hayward. Did you go to that game by any chance?

graphic-er
04-06-2011, 10:22 AM
Yes, Golden State is still happy they stole Alford from the Pacers.

Thats a real bad example, Alford's game just isn't suited for the pro's, last time I checked Alford wasn't 6-8.

imawhat
04-06-2011, 10:26 AM
I miss Sarunas.

graphic-er
04-06-2011, 10:28 AM
It is true that only buying a ticket to 1 game is a lot easier than a full season, but I'd imagine that some of the people who bought a ticket to see him would consider it.

The posted attendance of that game was 16,205. The average attendance on the season has been 13,458.

From being there, I'd say it was in the top 5 biggest crowds of the season. Unlike the average, which is probably actually much lower, I'd say that single game was pretty close to the actual number of seats filled. Keep in mind, that was a Jazz team that had just traded its best player, so it wasn't like that would be a hot ticket normally.

Many, many of those people who showed up that night were there to see Hayward. Did you go to that game by any chance?

I did, infact that game was the main reason I picked the ticket package we got. I chose to suffer through Washing Wizards and Sacramento Kings so I could watch Gordon Hayward play.

Speed
04-06-2011, 10:28 AM
I look forward to having this discussion, again, when Matt Howard is picked one pick before the Pacers in the 2nd round this year.

Unclebuck
04-06-2011, 10:55 AM
It is true that only buying a ticket to 1 game is a lot easier than a full season, but I'd imagine that some of the people who bought a ticket to see him would consider it.

The posted attendance of that game was 16,205. The average attendance on the season has been 13,458.

From being there, I'd say it was in the top 5 biggest crowds of the season. Unlike the average, which is probably actually much lower, I'd say that single game was pretty close to the actual number of seats filled. Keep in mind, that was a Jazz team that had just traded its best player, so it wasn't like that would be a hot ticket normally.

I would have been more impressed if that many people showed on January 31st - night 1 of the ice storm.

Many, many of those people who showed up that night were there to see Hayward. Did you go to that game by any chance?


I stand corrected.

I went back and looked at attendance for every home Friday night game. The only 3 Friday night games that got a higher number were the two Bulls games the the OKC game the day after Thanksgiving.

Although I do wonder if that was a Marsh Family night which draw pretty well, plus the end of February is going to draw well as it is before the college and HS turnaments and the weather is not as cold.

In early January the pacers played the Rockets at home and got 14440 for a Friday night game. That is pretty much the average for Friday night games for the season. So OK I'll go so far as to say 1800-2000 people came to the Utah game just because of Hayward.

Although I would have been really impressed if that many people showed up On January 31st - the first night of the ice storm.

Justin Tyme
04-06-2011, 10:57 AM
[QUOTE=bhaas0532;1208148]

because Gordon is emerging as a player. scoring 22 against the defending champs as a rookie is impressive. /QUOTE]


BRush looked good the last 15 games or so of his 1st 2 seasons, so I wouldn't put much stock in a few good games at seasons end unless you think Hayward's end quality is that of Rush.

Justin Tyme
04-06-2011, 11:03 AM
I look forward to having this discussion, again, when Matt Howard is picked one pick before the Pacers in the 2nd round this year.


KUDOS!

Pacergeek
04-06-2011, 11:04 AM
Yeah the guy was impressive last night, he looked good as the point forward and Utah was playing a weird line up with Millsap at the 3 Favors at the 4 and Al at the 5. Like somebody else already said, is just one game and even Adam Morrison had his nights, I wouldn't trade PG for him unless Utah is willing to pay top value, Hayward has the potential to be a bust or Mike Dunleavy(he plays the same way) when PG's ceiling at least I think is way higher.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/4724/gamelog;_ylt=AmXF02O2OjHKsqVpzUp7MQ2kvLYF

it isn't just "one game" in which Gordon has done well. If you check his game log, when he gets minutes he tends to produce. he actually has fantasy value right now.

Lou Bega
04-06-2011, 11:17 AM
My only question marks about Hayward were his outside shooting and his lateral quickness. His outside shot has been improving and he is a better athlete than I thought he was. I am happy he is doing well and agree that Paul George is overvalued by certain members on this board.

Hayward was drafted 9th overall and the Pacers had the 10th pick. It would be great to see Gordon Hayward and Matt Howard going head 2 head in the Rookie/Soph game next season. But Good Things are worth wating for.

BillS
04-06-2011, 11:17 AM
I think people overestimate the power of a local player to drive huge increases in attendance.

At an extreme you are probably talking an increase due to that player of 500 per game. While not a spit in the bucket, that won't single-handedly save the franchise.

And suppose the local player turns out to be a bust? You wasted the pick AND you can't play him so the attendance doesn't show up. Or, do you give starter's minutes to a crappy player just because he's local?

PacerPride33
04-06-2011, 11:23 AM
Still think Paul George will be better in the long run, but Hayward will be a solid pro. However, I am very fond of Utah's big men. Favors, Millsap and Jefferson is very impressive. If we could nab one of them that would be awesome

Ransom
04-06-2011, 11:29 AM
This happens when the Pacers are less than contenders. People start calling for local guys. Back when Larry Brown's team was in decline before Bird took over, I remember reading letters in the Star saying we should have drafted Calbert Chaney and Greg Graham.

People who demand local guys annoy me. It betrays a very narrow view of basketball and suggests Indiana fans will only root for a certain type of player.

Again, I like Hayward, he's from my hometown of Brownsburg. But I don't buy him as better than George right now, forget down the road.

graphic-er
04-06-2011, 11:44 AM
This happens when the Pacers are less than contenders. People start calling for local guys. Back when Larry Brown's team was in decline before Bird took over, I remember reading letters in the Star saying we should have drafted Calbert Chaney and Greg Graham.

People who demand local guys annoy me. It betrays a very narrow view of basketball and suggests Indiana fans will only root for a certain type of player.

Again, I like Hayward, he's from my hometown of Brownsburg. But I don't buy him as better than George right now, forget down the road.

Any draft pick regardless of who it is or where he is from could be a wasted pick. I agree with you in saying that they shouldn't be going after a local player who just isn't that much of a talent. But Gordon Hayward has talent.

mb221
04-06-2011, 11:45 AM
Keep in mind Utah is playing for nothing so the pressure on Hayward is most likely minimal. On the other hand, the Pacers are fighting for their playoff lives so the pressure on George is most likely just the opposite.

dal9
04-06-2011, 11:54 AM
theres a real goofy picture of him on the front page of NBA .com right now...


its like "hey mom, i had this dream last night that I was in the NBA and dunked on the lakers, and kobe and d-fish and andrew bynum couldnt stop me and were just watching me in awe!"

Phree Refill
04-06-2011, 12:04 PM
Any draft pick regardless of who it is or where he is from could be a wasted pick. I agree with you in saying that they shouldn't be going after a local player who just isn't that much of a talent. But I have... err I mean Gordon Hayward has talent.

Fixed

dal9
04-06-2011, 12:13 PM
^aha! we should check if graphic-er posts during Jazz games!!!

(just bustin your balls)

Day-V
04-06-2011, 12:41 PM
:50cent:



(Side note: is it just me, or does the 50 Cent GIF look different? IDK, it looks faster/more fluid/higher quality. Or maybe I'm just losing it?)

Speed
04-06-2011, 12:44 PM
I hate that I can't just enjoy Indiana boys having success. That I have to admit some deep seeded doubt that I've been proven wrong on. Can't I wonder if a guy is good enough, but then also root for him to be really good?

Pacergeek
04-06-2011, 01:06 PM
I hate that I can't just enjoy Indiana boys having success. That I have to admit some deep seeded doubt that I've been proven wrong on. Can't I wonder if a guy is good enough, but then also root for him to be really good?

its okay to admit if you might have been wrong about something. i have said some really stupid things about Tyler Hansbrough and Brandon Rush in the past. i thought Tyler was a bird blunder, but now he is my favorite on the team. i thought Rush was another bust, but i now see that he is a solid rotational player. No point in being stubborn if you had an opinion on a certain player that has changed.

Unclebuck
04-06-2011, 01:13 PM
This happens when the Pacers are less than contenders. People start calling for local guys. Back when Larry Brown's team was in decline before Bird took over, I remember reading letters in the Star saying we should have drafted Calbert Chaney and Greg Graham.

People who demand local guys annoy me. It betrays a very narrow view of basketball and suggests Indiana fans will only root for a certain type of player.

Again, I like Hayward, he's from my hometown of Brownsburg. But I don't buy him as better than George right now, forget down the road.


You should have seen it in the 80's and early 90's. It was soooo much worse

Justin Tyme
04-06-2011, 01:13 PM
How much has hometown McBob done with selling of tickets? I'm sure he has hometown fans that come to games to see him play, but does it really impact the amount of tickets sold? My guess you could have a roster full of hometown or Indiana players, and it wouldn't impact ticket sales that much. Winning plays more importance in selling tickets than Hayward and McBob would.

Since86
04-06-2011, 01:21 PM
Josh didn't go to college in Indiana, and that has a huge impact on whether or not people follow them.

I'm not saying that Gordon would bring a lot of people in, I think it would be a small bump, but there is a huge difference between Josh and Gordon.

BornReady
04-06-2011, 01:27 PM
no, I still prefer Paul George :)

edit: its not like it really matters anyways. we didn't have a shot at haywood as he was drafted before our pick.

CableKC
04-06-2011, 01:41 PM
debate settled.

Honestly Hayward has proven to be a very good pick at 9th. Sure he has his moments where he looks really bad just like all rookies. Right now I think he is head and shoulders above George. He defended Kobe really well to close out the game last night. Kobe lost the ball there at the end, but Gordon got in good position to pressure the ball, force an off balanced attempt for Kobe, that's about all you can do. That's a player using his length right there.
graphic-er, I respect your opinion ( even if it is clearly biased ) and agree that Hayward can be a solid NBA Player in the future.....while I myself don't see the "all-star" potential of PG that most here see ( many of which are biased themselves when it comes to PG ).....I fail to see how you can come to the conclusion that Hayward is "heads and shoulders" above George right now.

What has Hayward done that has put him "heads and shoulders" over PG?

IMHO...there is not enough data to say that one Player is "heads and shoulders" above the other right now. In the best case scenario....I can possibly see that the both of them are on equal footing....but neither is "so much better than the other" that one can suggest what you are suggesting.


As for George I can only hope he gets it together, has clearly hit the rookie wall, cause he looks terrible on Defense, slow to react, looks terrible trying to get his own shot on offense, and seemingly is only interested in bombing wide open 3pters instead of pump faking it to get open for an easy mid range shot. He also takes the most unorthodox layup attempts when he gets in the paint to try and finish.
I agree that PG has likely hit the rookie wall.....but if you look at the number of minutes that PG has played since January compared to Hayward since the start of February ( roughly the same time that JO'B and Sloan left the Team ). Although both Players have played roughly the same amount of Total minutes throughout the season ( Hayward with 1073 total minutes and PG with 1178 total minutes ), PG has logged more minutes since the beginning of February ( 774 minutes ) then Hayward has ( 595 minutes ). Frankly, I can see why PG hit the Rookie Wall at this point in the season.

As for Indiana not having the opportunity to draft Hayward, they could of pulled off a trade to move up a couple of spots to get him if they really wanted him. I think those picks were up for trade if someone was willing to bite. I kept thinking that we could have swapped picks with LAC.
Sorry, but despite seeing an uptick in minutes since Sloan left and the Jazz have been bounced from the Playoffs....I simply don't see anything that Hayward has done to warrant paying whatever price it would have cost the Pacers to pay to jump a few spots to make a run for Hayward over PG. I'm not saying that PG is better then Hayward...I'm saying that the cost to jump a few spots to get Hayward isn't worth it IMHO. We're not talking about the difference between drafting someone like Greg Monroe over someone like PG or Hayward to jump a few spots....we're talking about the difference between 2 rookie Players that haven't truly distinguised themselves from the rest of the rookies drafted below them.

troyc11a
04-06-2011, 02:20 PM
Isnt it safe to assume that George has more upside potential but Hayward may be a little better right now? Both players fit their teams need and George gets more opportunities because he is on a lesser talented team. I would be happy with either one really. Both good picks for 9-10

troyc11a
04-06-2011, 02:22 PM
How much has hometown McBob done with selling of tickets? I'm sure he has hometown fans that come to games to see him play, but does it really impact the amount of tickets sold? My guess you could have a roster full of hometown or Indiana players, and it wouldn't impact ticket sales that much. Winning plays more importance in selling tickets than Hayward and McBob would.

You are right on most of this but I think you are missing the main point. The goal is for some is not to have home town talent and lose, but to have a winner with home town talent on the roster. There we would have the best of both worlds. I just want to see us build a winner first. Then get the home town talent if possible.

redfoster
04-06-2011, 02:33 PM
Frankly, yes I am.

TheDon
04-06-2011, 02:50 PM
Who is this Gordon Hayward you speak of?

Anthem
04-06-2011, 02:55 PM
Isnt it safe to assume that George has more upside potential but Hayward may be a little better right now?
I'm not sure that's safe.

Paul George is posting better numbers... what makes you say Hayward is better right now? One good game against the Lakers?

vnzla81
04-06-2011, 02:59 PM
I think is also time to thanks Utah one more time for taking him in front of PG :D

Trophy
04-06-2011, 03:04 PM
As far as being the better leader/franchise player, I think Paul has more potential to be that and he'll give us the better chance to win more.

As far as Hayward, yes he would sell tickets, but would he make us a winning team or be a leader. He wasn't the answer for a team like us first trying to get back into the playoffs, but when he was first drafted by the Jazz when they still had Williams and Sloan and still looked to be playoff contenders, Hayward seemed like a solid fit in their rotation by adding some decent scoring off the bench.

Either way, more tickets will be sold to come out and see Paul, who can be something the Pacers haven't had in a long time and most likely be good enough to make us competitors for years to come which seems to be the solution to getting large crowds or see a former local college standout who would most likely, not solve anything.

Psyren
04-06-2011, 03:12 PM
<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/vGggGD-l34I" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

debate settled.



So wait....

If that video means that Hayward > PG

Then

Courtney Lee > LeBron :whoknows:

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/RmvUVUGrftY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

graphic-er
04-06-2011, 03:28 PM
So wait....

If that video means that Hayward > PG

Then

Courtney Lee > LeBron :whoknows:


LOL don't take it so literal, i was just giving my boy Hayward some props when it came to the whole Hayward vs George debate.

If you are just looking at the stats that were posted earlier. George is essentially a 3pter better than Hayward in a 5minute difference. + a couple of rebounds.

But if you look a this game logs, more often than not when he gets minutes above his average he really produces, and he has had limited opportunities all year long. So going forward I think the future looks real bright for Hayward.

Day-V
04-06-2011, 03:31 PM
I think is also time to thanks Utah one more time for taking him in front of PG :D

I don't even believe in God, and yet I wake up every day praying to God and thanking him for Utah taking Gordon 1 pick ahead of us so we could then grab George.

vnzla81
04-06-2011, 04:09 PM
I don't even believe in God, and yet I wake up every day praying to God and thanking him for Utah taking Gordon 1 pick ahead of us so we could then grab George.

:laugh:

troyc11a
04-06-2011, 04:16 PM
I'm not sure that's safe.

Paul George is posting better numbers... what makes you say Hayward is better right now? One good game against the Lakers?

Hayward is playing on a better team with more talent around him. If he had the opportunities that George has had I am sure he would be posting better numbers. Watch they way he carries himself on the court compared to George. Paul often looks like a deer caught in the headlights. Gordon did look that way but has matured faster. Again, I think Paul has a chance to be the better player. I just dont think he is right now.

ChristianDudley
04-06-2011, 04:30 PM
Gordon Hayward will be a solid player, probably like a Mike Dunleavy, over the course of his NBA career. His ceiling isn't as high as Paul George and he just doesn't have the potential that Paul has to be a superstar in this league. Hayward will be one of those good players that is just underrated and undervalued in the NBA, even though he'll get the job done on both ends of the court. Paul on the other hand has the potential to be one of those types that can turn into "something special."

BRushWithDeath
04-06-2011, 04:39 PM
Hayward is better right now. Paul could be better in the future.

Hayward: higher floor/lower ceiling.

George: lower floor/higher ceiling.

Both were good picks.

graphic-er
04-06-2011, 04:47 PM
Gordon Hayward will be a solid player, probably like a Mike Dunleavy, over the course of his NBA career. His ceiling isn't as high as Paul George and he just doesn't have the potential that Paul has to be a superstar in this league. Hayward will be one of those good players that is just underrated and undervalued in the NBA, even though he'll get the job done on both ends of the court. Paul on the other hand has the potential to be one of those types that can turn into "something special."

LOL, what would give you the idea that Hayward doesn't have just as high potential as Paul George? Both players were sophomores in college. Both players are the same age. Both players are 6-8/6-9. Both players have pretty much even ball handling skills. Both have pretty much even shooting abilities. Is George faster than Hayward? I've not seen any evidence of that this year so far.

I guess George can jump out of gym and get Alley Oops, and Hayward can only tomahawk slam it over George, and the entire Lakers front line. :rolleyes:

One of them had alot of success at the college level though...

daschysta
04-06-2011, 05:03 PM
LOL don't take it so literal, i was just giving my boy Hayward some props when it came to the whole Hayward vs George debate.

If you are just looking at the stats that were posted earlier. George is essentially a 3pter better than Hayward in a 5minute difference. + a couple of rebounds.

But if you look a this game logs, more often than not when he gets minutes above his average he really produces, and he has had limited opportunities all year long. So going forward I think the future looks real bright for Hayward.

Weak argument. Common sense dictates that when a rookie is playing well he gets more minutes, when he is not he gets fewer. It completely accounts for "games when he gets more minutes he produces more". It's the opposite, especially since the jazz have had the luxury of bringing him along incrementally over the course of the year.

graphic-er
04-06-2011, 05:05 PM
Weak argument. Common sense dictates that when a rookie is playing well he gets more minutes, when he is not he gets fewer. It completely accounts for "games when he gets more minutes he produces more". It's the opposite, especially since the jazz have had the luxury of bringing him along incrementally over the course of the year.

Well i guess Sloan wasn't using common sense was he then...Cause Haywards minutes were all over the chart. He'd play 5 minutes one game, 15 the next, over 30 here and there. No pattern what so ever.

Scot Pollard
04-06-2011, 05:08 PM
The only reason I'd want Hayward would be for attendance.

Eventually in the near future, we'll reach 16,000+ or so per game because of our success.

Hayward isn't a franchise guy and won't be a potential star like Paul seems to be.

In the home game against the Jazz this season, the place was packed with Hayward fans, but I did see many of the #20s clap and cheer for the Pacers.

The only Indiana standout I'd take who would most likely lead us to be a winning team is Eric Gordon and getting him would sell the place out every game.

ilive4sports
04-06-2011, 05:11 PM
I think there is a reason people have been saying that PG could very well end up being the steal of this draft class and not Gordon Hayward. His ceiling is Tracy McGrady. Hayward's is like Mike Dunleavy.

Stop kidding yourself if you think they have the same amount of potential.

Ozwalt72
04-06-2011, 05:16 PM
One of them had alot of success at the college level though...

One was on a significantly better team than the other as evidenced by Butler's return to the national championship game. Their stats though, comparable.

presto123
04-06-2011, 05:20 PM
Not even commenting on Hayward as I haven't watched him much this year but I think a lot of you may be over estimating George. He has shown me nothing so far that makes me think he is a future franchise player or All Star for that matter. Is he even in the top 10 of his rookie class right now?

vnzla81
04-06-2011, 05:33 PM
I think there is a reason people have been saying that PG could very well end up being the steal of this draft class and not Gordon Hayward. His ceiling is Tracy McGrady. Hayward's is like Mike Dunleavy.

Stop kidding yourself if you think they have the same amount of potential.

Thank you, is pretty much like asking a team, who do you rather have with the 9th pick Tmac or Dunleavy?

troyc11a
04-06-2011, 05:41 PM
They both seem to be 4th options when on the court. The only difference is that the other 3 on Utah are way better than the 3 ahead of George. George should get more opportunities. Let's just be rooting for both to exceed expectations!

BRushWithDeath
04-06-2011, 05:42 PM
Thank you, is pretty much like asking a team, who do you rather have with the 9th pick Tmac or Dunleavy?

That could not be further from the truth.

It was a choice between a guy who could conceivably turn into a T-Mac but is more likely to have an upside as Trevor Ariza and a guy who would at worst be a Mike Dunleavy and could conceivably be a better defensive version of Mike Dunleavy.

If both players hit their peak, George is better. But both players are a long way from their peak.

If Utah had the draft over, they wouldn't take George over Hayward. And we are probably still happy about that.

BringJackBack
04-06-2011, 06:10 PM
A couple things:

-If Utah could do the draft over, they'd take George over Hayward.

-Paul George is better than Gordon Hayward right now. Fact.

-Paul George's ceiling is 10x higher than Hayward's.

-The same people that are praising Hayward while dumping on George just happen to be the same people that are saying that Matt Howard is a legit NBA prospect and comparable to Tyler Hansbrough. Hmm...

PacersHomer
04-06-2011, 06:11 PM
I love Gordon Hayward but Paul George is probably the better fit for the Pacers. George's ceiling is way higher.

I've been to 3 Pacers games (including the Jazz game) this year and I'll be honest that I would have gone to a few more games if Hayward was on the team.

xBulletproof
04-06-2011, 06:18 PM
Well i guess Sloan wasn't using common sense was he then...Cause Haywards minutes were all over the chart. He'd play 5 minutes one game, 15 the next, over 30 here and there. No pattern what so ever.

You completely missed the point. His minutes were likely all over the place because he was that inconsistent.

If he played 5 minutes and didn't play well, he doesn't play anymore in that game. If he played well for those 5 minutes, then he will be given more playing time on that day. That doesn't require a pattern, and it doesn't mean Sloan wasn't using common sense. Hence the strange idea that people get sometimes about "when he gets minutes, he plays well!", when the fact is he got the minutes because he was playing well. Otherwise he'd have played 5 minutes like the game before.

BRushWithDeath
04-06-2011, 06:18 PM
A couple things:

-If Utah could do the draft over, they'd take George over Hayward.

They wouldn't.


-Paul George is better than Gordon Hayward right now. Fact.

Not a fact.


-Paul George's ceiling is 10x higher than Hayward's.

Higher? Yes. 10x? Not at all.


-The same people that are praising Hayward while dumping on George just happen to be the same people that are saying that Matt Howard is a legit NBA prospect and comparable to Tyler Hansbrough. Hmm...

I did say Hansbrough's game and Howard's games are comparable. Because they are. I also said I didn't think he was an NBA prospect because he's smaller and less athletic than the comparable guy who is already small and unathletic in the NBA.

And nobody is dumping on George.

PacersHomer
04-06-2011, 06:23 PM
If Brian Cardinal can play in the NBA for over a decade, Matt Howard can be an NBA prospect.

beast23
04-06-2011, 06:24 PM
It is true that only buying a ticket to 1 game is a lot easier than a full season, but I'd imagine that some of the people who bought a ticket to see him would consider it.

The posted attendance of that game was 16,205. The average attendance on the season has been 13,458.

From being there, I'd say it was in the top 5 biggest crowds of the season. Unlike the average, which is probably actually much lower, I'd say that single game was pretty close to the actual number of seats filled. Keep in mind, that was a Jazz team that had just traded its best player, so it wasn't like that would be a hot ticket normally.

Many, many of those people who showed up that night were there to see Hayward. Did you go to that game by any chance?Come on, Mackey.

The reason that game was sold out is that it was the only opportunity to see Hayward play in person this season for a lot of folks. So, sure it's going to be a hot ticket.

If you put Hayward in a Pacer uniform and provide the fans with the opportunity to see him for 4 preseason games, 41 regular season games and a couple of playoff games, then there would have been 47 opportunities to see him play. So, viewing it from that perspective, the average attendance for home games would not have been affected nearly as much as for the one game. Since our record would probably be about the same whether we had George or Hayward, I doubt the attendance would have been affected much at all.

BringJackBack
04-06-2011, 06:27 PM
They wouldn't.

If they wouldn't than the front office should be unemployed.



Not a fact.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/georgpa01.html

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/haywago01.html

I'm going to let the numbers speak for themselves, not to even mention that Paul George can play defense, rebound, pass, and create his own shot better than Gordon Hayward.


Higher? Yes. 10x? Not at all.

Which is an obvious exaggeration. It's probably 3x.


I did say Hansbrough's game and Howard's games are comparable. Because they are. I also said I didn't think he was an NBA prospect because he's smaller and less athletic than the comparable guy who is already small and unathletic in the NBA.

Fair enough, but I just don't see the comparison because overall Tyler was just better. More of a banger with better PPG totals and better percentages. Not to mention for the bulk of Matt's career he had foul problems.

Shade
04-06-2011, 06:35 PM
Still doubting Gordon Hayward?

Yes.

Sookie
04-06-2011, 06:36 PM
Come on, Mackey.

The reason that game was sold out is that it was the only opportunity to see Hayward play in person this season for a lot of folks. So, sure it's going to be a hot ticket.

If you put Hayward in a Pacer uniform and provide the fans with the opportunity to see him for 4 preseason games, 41 regular season games and a couple of playoff games, then there would have been 47 opportunities to see him play. So, viewing it from that perspective, the average attendance for home games would not have been affected nearly as much as for the one game. Since our record would probably be about the same whether we had George or Hayward, I doubt the attendance would have been affected much at all.

Right.
Connecticut has a WNBA team. Everytime one of the former players come to town, (The big ones, Taurasi and Bird) it sells out.

They have pretty good attendance in general for that league, but it's not a sell out (there's about a 4000 person difference, I'd say) The Connecticut team has 2 currently (and 4 last season) former Huskies. One of which was an All American point guard, and the other, until this season, held the school record in points and rebounds and was ROY in the WNBA.

People come to see their favorite player once they go pro, if it's a rare opportunity. They won't do it enough to make an impact if you can always go.

idioteque
04-06-2011, 07:42 PM
For the love of all things holy, I really like Gordon Hayward but his fanboys are so incredibly annoying. The amount of fellating he gets on this board and in Indiana overall is amazing. The fact that people here claim to be Pacers fans while simultaneously touting a video of him posterizing one of our players makes me sick.

That being said, I'd love to get him tacked on to a Jefferson trade in the offseason if we go that route.

MarvelousMarvin
04-06-2011, 08:05 PM
Paul George clearly saw this thread.

ilive4sports
04-06-2011, 08:08 PM
Paul George tonight, 16 points, 3 boards, 2 assists, 1 block, 1 steal in the first half.

Pacergeek
04-06-2011, 08:16 PM
Not even commenting on Hayward as I haven't watched him much this year but I think a lot of you may be over estimating George. He has shown me nothing so far that makes me think he is a future franchise player or All Star for that matter. Is he even in the top 10 of his rookie class right now?

i'm not even sure if PG is in the top 20 right now. If Paul George has shown potential to be a "superstar" then Jordan Crawford has shown potential to be better than Jordan.

idioteque
04-06-2011, 08:21 PM
Yeah, because careers are decided completely on the rookie season.

No one expected Paul George to even come off the bench this year. He was a consensus project among all scouts. Any statistics he can produce are just gravy.

BringJackBack
04-06-2011, 08:23 PM
Not to even mention that now is not the time to troll on George.

xBulletproof
04-06-2011, 08:25 PM
i'm not even sure if PG is in the top 20 right now. If Paul George has shown potential to be a "superstar" then Jordan Crawford has shown potential to be better than Jordan.

Yeah Crawford and his 37% from the field is scaring the **** out of Jordan and his place in the NBA history books right now.

Dr. Awesome
04-06-2011, 08:42 PM
Yeah Crawford and his 37% from the field is scaring the **** out of Jordan and his place in the NBA history books right now.

POTY Nomination?

pwee31
04-06-2011, 09:19 PM
Hayward had a really good game last night on the road against a really good team.

It was nice to see from the local kid.

Pretty much sums up this subject I think? Good talk, see you out there

Frostwolf
04-06-2011, 09:31 PM
POTY Nomination?

almost as awesome as your namesake, sir.

if PG got 20 shots a game like crawford is doing on a ****ty wizards team, he'd be averaging crawfords ppg, and then some too.

Phree Refill
04-06-2011, 09:33 PM
Did you guys see PG's last shot? The basketball gods willed it into the hoop just so he could surpass Hayward's point total last night by one and make Graphic-er eat crow.

Speed
04-06-2011, 09:47 PM
As Nelson from the Simpsons would say about this thread...

HA, HA!

ilive4sports
04-06-2011, 09:49 PM
He pretty much matched him in every stat. Had one more point, but one less assist. 3 less TO's though. Oh and 8 less minutes.

Anthem
04-06-2011, 09:56 PM
a guy who would at worst be a Mike Dunleavy and could conceivably be a better defensive version of Mike Dunleavy.
Gordon's worst case scenario is Mike Dunleavy? I find that pretty optimistic. And I'm not down on Gordon, I just don't think there are many rookies whose "worst case" is Mike Dunleavy.

Mono
04-06-2011, 10:17 PM
Okay. As someone who has seen every Utah game this season, and the slight majority of Pacers games this season, I feel as if I need to weigh in on this thread.

Paul George is no better than Gordon Hayward right now, and vice versa. Both have had predictably inconsistent seasons. They're rookies. Both have had many flashes of brilliance, and games where they simply looked lost.

I don't have the numbers to back this up, but I suspect if you were to look at the stats, you would find that George has had a better season from start to finish, but that Hayward has been the better player during the second half of the season.

For the first half of the season, Hayward simply looked scared. He couldn't hit a shot, he turned the ball over, he did not look good. The funny thing was, he could get open. He was always in the right spot. He always seemed to have the right idea -- but he simply could not make the plays. His shooting percentage was in the high 20's.

In the second half of the season, he has become a scintillating player. To take his shooting percentages from the 20's to where they are now, (about 45% overall and 45% from 3 point range) is a remarkable turnaround. He has really found his touch.

In terms of skills, I think Hayward and George can do similar things. They can both put the ball on the floor. They can both rebound. They can both pass. They can both shoot the 3. They both show signs of deceptiveness and intelligent play. George is clearly the more explosive player, although Hayward has shown surprising athleticism at times.

From here, I think they will develop in different directions. George will likely end up as a 20+ ppg scorer and a potential all-star. I think Hayward will be more of a point forward, a role-player, a Ginobili type. (Though perhaps he will never be as good as Ginobili was during his best seasons.) He'll be an opportunity scorer and distributor. I doubt he ever averages more than 17 points a game. Yet I think he can average 6 assists or so.

As a Jazz fan and (secondarily) a Pacers fan, I think the future is bright for both players. I think they're both on the teams that fit them best.

graphic-er
04-06-2011, 10:22 PM
Did you guys see PG's last shot? The basketball gods willed it into the hoop just so he could surpass Hayward's point total last night by one and make Graphic-er eat crow.

LOL.....uh yeah against the Wizards.... get back to me when George does it against a team like the Lakers. I mean geez that was an epic fail by you. The Wiz don't have any pride at all.

graphic-er
04-06-2011, 10:24 PM
Gordon's worst case scenario is Mike Dunleavy? I find that pretty optimistic. And I'm not down on Gordon, I just don't think there are many rookies whose "worst case" is Mike Dunleavy.

Kobe compared him to Jeff Hornacek. I think thats a pretty good goal.

BringJackBack
04-06-2011, 10:27 PM
LOL.....uh yeah against the Wizards.... get back to me when George does it against a team like the Lakers. I mean geez that was an epic fail by you. The Wiz don't have any pride at all.

I think I smell some jealousy, and I think you want Paul George to fail which is just sad.

cdash
04-06-2011, 10:28 PM
Am I the only one who isn't picking sides here? I love Paul George, but I want to root for Hayward to succeed as well. It's not an either/or thing for me. I want both of them to thrive.

BringJackBack
04-06-2011, 10:30 PM
It'd be that way for me if bhaas and graphic-er didn't make me want to dislike him..

graphic-er
04-06-2011, 10:30 PM
Am I the only one who isn't picking sides here? I love Paul George, but I want to root for Hayward to succeed as well. It's not an either/or thing for me. I want both of them to thrive.

Of Course not, I'm totally rooting for PG too, I want him to turn out to be a good player....so we can trade him for Gordon Hayward.

cdash
04-06-2011, 10:33 PM
It'd be that way for me if bhaas and graphic-er didn't make me want to dislike him..

Yeah that's kind of why I have been avoiding this thread honestly.

Phree Refill
04-06-2011, 10:59 PM
Am I the only one who isn't picking sides here? I love Paul George, but I want to root for Hayward to succeed as well. It's not an either/or thing for me. I want both of them to thrive.

I take the overall feel of this thread as not to be taken too seriously and its fun to bust balls either way but I honestly feel the same as you in that I truly hope they both succeed in the NBA as both seem to be class players that are very intelligent young men who love the game of basketball and its hard not to root for people like that.

Trader Joe
04-06-2011, 11:46 PM
All I have to say is LOLZ.

Here's something Paul George can say that Hayward can't...his team made the playoffs.

Day-V
04-06-2011, 11:50 PM
LOL.....uh yeah against the Wizards.... get back to me when George does it against a team like the Lakers. I mean geez that was an epic fail by you. The Wiz don't have any pride at all.


I think I smell some jealousy, and I think you want Paul George to fail which is just sad.

I think you're both off your rockers.

Mono
04-06-2011, 11:52 PM
All I have to say is LOLZ.

Here's something Paul George can say that Hayward can't...his team made the playoffs.

You know the Jazz have a better record than The Pacers right now, don't you?

Trader Joe
04-06-2011, 11:54 PM
You know the Jazz have a better record than The Pacers right now, don't you?

You know that they're not in the playoffs right now don't you? And they will be the first team to ever start 27 and 13 to not make the playoffs. 10 and 28 after that. Right now we're 36-43 and they're 37-41. Based on current trends they may not even finish with a better record than us.

Last year Gordon Hayward's team was a playoff team, this year it isn't.

Last year Paul George's team wasn't a playoff team, this year it is.

Paul George has had a better rookie season than Hayward in every sense. Period.

daschysta
04-07-2011, 12:08 AM
Also mono, surely you have to take into account that gordons improved minutes have largely coincided with the massive nosedive the jazz have taken.

Since the all-star break or so they have been a far worse team than the pacers, the jazz if I recall correctly started like 27-13 and are giong to end up with a sub .500 record.

Of course gordon isn't to blame for the teams woes, but you also can't trumpet the fact that the jazz are a better team than the pacers as a plus to hayward, when hayward has largely emerged post-jazz breakdown.

Trader Joe
04-07-2011, 12:15 AM
Not to mention Paul has seen an increase in minutes ever since Vogel has been hired and we are 3 games over .500 in that timeperiod. If we win out (not a Redick-ulous thought), we'd be 22-16 under Vogel. Paul has slumped recently, this game not with standing, but he and his team have out achieved the Jazz since the end of January quite easily.

vnzla81
04-07-2011, 12:17 AM
Not to mention Paul has seen an increase in minutes ever since Vogel has been hired and we are 3 games over .500 in that timeperiod. If we win out (not a Redick-ulous thought), we'd be 22-16 under Vogel. Paul has slumped recently, this game not with standing, but he and his team have out achieved the Jazz since the end of January quite easily.

Waiting for somebody to bring the "weak schedule argument" in 3...2...1....

Mono
04-07-2011, 12:17 AM
You know that they're not in the playoffs right now don't you? And they will be the first team to ever start 27 and 13 to not make the playoffs. 10 and 28 after that. Right now we're 36-43 and they're 37-41. Based on current trends they may not even finish with a better record than us.

Last year Gordon Hayward's team was a playoff team, this year it isn't.

Last year Paul George's team wasn't a playoff team, this year it is.

Paul George has had a better rookie season than Hayward in every sense. Period.

Of course the Pacers are the better team right now. After all, Utah did trade away a top 5 NBA player for potential, lost their hall of fame coach, are finishing the season with four injured starters, etc. But I just figured if you were going to take such an obnoxious attitude about the Pacers supposed superiority, I may as well point out the obvious: it is silly to gloat about the Pacers being in the playoffs when the team you're comparing them to has a better record.

To further point out the obvious, Paul George is not solely responsible for the Pacers being in the playoffs, nor is Gordon Hayward responsible for the Jazz not being in the playoffs. The fact that one team is in the playoffs* while the other is not is totally irrelevant to which player is better.

I said earlier I thought both players were about equal, and I explained why. Then again -- I've actually seen more than 42 games from each team this season, so I know what I'm talking about. I sincerely doubt you can make the same claim. If you had anything more to offer than a say-so, I might take you seriously.

(*note: I am thrilled the Pacers are in the playoffs, and I am a fan of Paul George and I know he is going to have a lot of success in the NBA.)

Mono
04-07-2011, 12:20 AM
Also mono, surely you have to take into account that gordons improved minutes have largely coincided with the massive nosedive the jazz have taken.

Since the all-star break or so they have been a far worse team than the pacers, the jazz if I recall correctly started like 27-13 and are giong to end up with a sub .500 record.

Of course gordon isn't to blame for the teams woes, but you also can't trumpet the fact that the jazz are a better team than the pacers as a plus to hayward, when hayward has largely emerged post-jazz breakdown.

I'm not really trumpeting anything. To be honest, my point is not to celebrate the Jazz. They're not a very good team right now. I just think it's silly to gloat that the Pacers are in the playoffs and the Jazz aren't when the Jazz have a better record than the Pacers.

Trader Joe
04-07-2011, 12:21 AM
Such an obnoxious superiority?

I was merely replying in the same obnoxious tone that spawned this thread. One good game from Hayward and we have some running to a PACERS board to preen about him? Give me a break.

Bhaas and everyone else slurping the Hayward kool aid should have known the obnoxious posts were going to come.

Especially when posts like this


by the way, has Paul hit for 22 this season?

Were used as some sort of evidence that Hayward is the clearly superior player...Well Paul has hit for 23 so clearly the debate is settled. He is better. Lock the thread.

Also, I love the "I've watched the X number of games argument, can you make the same claim? I don't think so." argument especially when accusing me of having an obnoxious superiority.

Trader Joe
04-07-2011, 12:24 AM
I'm not really trumpeting anything. To be honest, my point is not to celebrate the Jazz. They're not a very good team right now. I just think it's silly to gloat that the Pacers are in the playoffs and the Jazz aren't when the Jazz have a better record than the Pacers.

Well the NBA rules state that this is how it will work. So tough cookies for you. Do you think the Jazz would trade places with the Pacers right now to be in the playoffs better record or not? I'd have to think so, unless they're tanking.

Mono
04-07-2011, 12:26 AM
Such an obnoxious superiority?

I was merely replying in the same obnoxious tone that spawned this thread. One good game from Hayward and we have some running to a PACERS board to preen about him? Give me a break.

Bhaas and everyone else slurping the Hayward kool aid should have known the obnoxious posts were going to come.

Especially when posts like this



Were used as some sort of evidence that Hayward is the clearly superior player...Well Paul has hit for 23 so clearly the debate is settled. He is better. Lock the thread.

Well, I suppose it's fair enough to respond to obnoxiousness in kind, if that was the point of what you were doing, but my point is that I don't think there's a clear distinction between the two players, in terms of one being better than the other right now. George averages more points, Hayward shoots better percentages. They're both going to be good players.

Trader Joe
04-07-2011, 12:28 AM
Could very well be (that they're both good player), but the point of this thread IMO ,guised as it may have been, was to troll. So they're getting it right back now that Paul has hit for 23 and Hayward has only hit for 22 the debate has clearly been settled since that was the benchmark established by bhaas himself earlier in the thread.

Trader Joe
04-07-2011, 12:30 AM
My main point (and this isn't directed at you Mono) is that any Pacers fan who is going to come here and point out every time Hayward has had a good game (and they have done that) shouldn't be surprised when something like this comes flying right back at them.

I don't understand why we need the constant Gordon Hayward updates. As an IU fan, you don't see me posting every time Eric Gordon has a good game. I don't see Purdue fans posting every time Carl Landry has a good game, but every time Gordon Hayward has even an OK game we get a thread about it or repeated comments about it. It's weird.

Mono
04-07-2011, 12:32 AM
Well the NBA rules state that this is how it will work. So tough cookies for you. Do you think the Jazz would trade places with the Pacers right now to be in the playoffs better record or not? I'd have to think so, unless they're tanking.

I... Of course. Look, I'll try to make this clear: I am not complaining that the Pacers are in the playoffs. I'm thrilled that they are. I am not saying the Jazz are a better team. I know they aren't.

I was pointing out the hollowness of your original post. Keep this in mind: it's fantastic to celebrate your own accomplishments. It's lousy to put other people down. You don't have to run down the Jazz because you love the Pacers, or Gordon Hayward because you love Paul George. It's not necessary.

Trader Joe
04-07-2011, 12:33 AM
Was this thread not created to run down the Pacers/Paul George and lift up Gordon Hayward? If it wasn't, it's hard for me to fathom it's purpose. It is, after all, a Pacers/NBA forum, but we don't get updates from Bhaas or graphic-er when any other rookie has a good game, only when Hayward has a good game.

pacer4ever
04-07-2011, 12:34 AM
My main point (and this isn't directed at you Mono) is that any Pacers fan who is going to come here and point out every time Hayward has had a good game (and they have done that) shouldn't be surprised when something like this comes flying right back at them.

I don't understand why we need the constant Gordon Hayward updates. As an IU fan, you don't see me posting every time Eric Gordon has a good game. I don't see Purdue fans posting every time Carl Landry has a good game, but every time Gordon Hayward has even an OK game we get a thread about it or repeated comments about it. It's weird.

Well you would be pretty busy if u did. He played awful 2nite


Or Brian Cardinal :lol2:

Mono
04-07-2011, 12:36 AM
My main point (and this isn't directed at you Mono) is that any Pacers fan who is going to come here and point out every time Hayward has had a good game (and they have done that) shouldn't be surprised when something like this comes flying right back at them.

I don't understand why we need the constant Gordon Hayward updates. As an IU fan, you don't see me posting every time Eric Gordon has a good game. I don't see Purdue fans posting every time Carl Landry has a good game, but every time Gordon Hayward has even an OK game we get a thread about it or repeated comments about it. It's weird.

All right. That kind of thing goes on at the Utah Jazz message boards, (we have a particularly egregious pro-Boozer troll) and I agree it's incredibly irritating and worth fighting against. This isn't my primary basketball message board, so I guess I don't spend enough time here to recognize it. I understand where you're coming from if that's what's going on.

Mono
04-07-2011, 12:39 AM
Was this thread not created to run down the Pacers/Paul George and lift up Gordon Hayward? If it wasn't, it's hard for me to fathom it's purpose. It is, after all, a Pacers/NBA forum, but we don't get updates from Bhaas or graphic-er when any other rookie has a good game, only when Hayward has a good game.

Could be. I didn't take it as such. If the point of the original post in this thread is to run down Paul George, then your position is valid. I think I'll go re-read it to gain some much-needed perspective.

Trader Joe
04-07-2011, 12:45 AM
Could be. I didn't take it as such. If the point of the original post in this thread is to run down Paul George, then your position is valid. I think I'll go re-read it to gain some much-needed perspective.

Very first post in this thread



http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/recap?gid=2011040513

i know graphic-er never had any doubts about Gordon. What about the rest of you? Still think we got over on Utah by drafting Paul George?

Mentions George by name. Then goes onto point out George hadn't scored 22 points this season (since this is the best way to measure a player, obviously).

Even more mind numbing, the idea that we could even "get one over" on Utah by selecting George as if we picked him over Hayward. Hayward was GONE. We didn't pass on him, and I do not think under any circumstances Hayward will be significantly enough superior to George to warrant us trading up to get him and giving up extra assets. Yet Gordon fans end up so butt hurt like we passed on him and he's going to turn into the next Larry Bird.

Look the kid has some great basketball skills that will keep him in this league for many years, his ceiling though is probably like a Mike Dunleavy. George has gotten comparisons to T-Mac. (I think that's maybe a little over board but whatever...) Point being they might both be good, and hey if we were getting weekly updates on John Wall, Eric Bledsoe, Evan Turner, and other members of the draft class maybe the Hayward threads and comments wouldn't seem so trollish. But all we ever get is Hayward threads and Hayward comments...why is that? Seems like it's to troll or to try and run down George. We even had the you tube video of Gordon dunking on Paul. (Which Paul even congratulated Gordon on via twitter after the game, that jackass)

Mono
04-07-2011, 12:47 AM
Also, I love the "I've watched the X number of games argument, can you make the same claim? I don't think so." argument especially when accusing me of having an obnoxious superiority.

It seems like we've mostly made peace -- so be aware that I'm not asking this in an argumentative tone. I went back and re-read the thread. The one thing that stuck out, that has not been addressed, is the above quote.

Do you genuinely not think that someone who has more information about a topic is better equipped to comment on it than someone who has less information? I'm having trouble understanding what you think is obnoxious about that.

Trader Joe
04-07-2011, 12:50 AM
It was obnoxious that you just flat out assumed that I haven't watched the Jazz that much this year. When actually I have watched them quite a bit. At least as much as I can without becoming queasy to my stomach because of that horrible bright green they use for the seats in their arena. :)

Mono
04-07-2011, 12:56 AM
It was obnoxious that you just flat out assumed that I haven't watched the Jazz that much this year. When actually I have watched them quite a bit. At least as much as I can without becoming queasy to my stomach because of that horrible bright green they use for the seats in their arena. :)

Oh. So then you know all about how Hayward started the season shooting in the 20% range and how during the second half of the season he's shooting in the high 50's and the massive improvements he's made in a single season and how he now looks remarkably better than he did during the first half of the season, and how he's leading the rookie class in 3 point percentage. You've seen all his amazing blocked shots and you've seen how active and aggressive he has become lately. You know he's solid on both sides of the ball. So I'm sure you have no doubt that he is going to be a solid pro. Because it sounded like you were all, "Paul George is better in every way. Period." Even though that's not true. My mistake, then. :)

Trader Joe
04-07-2011, 01:01 AM
My exact quote was..."Paul George has had a better rookie season in every way. Period."

Not "Paul George is better in every way. Period"

Was my quote hyperbole? Perhaps. But it was responding in kind to a lot of the Hayward hyperbole we saw earlier in the thread. Hayward has certainly improved as the season has progressed. He has proven to be a good team defender and can still shoot the basketball.

Paul has managed to carve out a niche as a starter on a playoff team. He has had some incredible highlights himself (I would say more than Hayward, but that's up for debate). Paul has put up respectable first season stats (Actually pretty comparable to Granger's first year). And he has shown a ton of improvement on the defensive end.

I suppose we can never say definitively who had the better rookie year, but I think Hayward would trade his class leading 3 point percentage for a playoff berth. Just my opinion though.

pacer4ever
04-07-2011, 01:01 AM
Oh. So then you know all about how Hayward started the season shooting in the 20% range and how during the second half of the season he's shooting in the high 50's and the massive improvements he's made in a single season and how he now looks remarkably better than he did during the first half of the season, and how he's leading the rookie class in 3 point percentage. You've seen all his amazing blocked shots and you've seen how active and aggressive he has become lately. You know he's solid on both sides of the ball. So I'm sure you have no doubt that he is going to be a solid pro. Because it sounded like you were all, "Paul George is better in every way. Period." Even though that's not true. My mistake, then. :)

Hayward's not a good defender. Thats the main differnce they both have looked lost this year on offense. Paul looked like the kid out of Fresno 2nite actually agressive and making his shot. He has been way way to passive for my liking tonight he was attacking. But Paul when he isnt fouling plays lockdown D major differnce.

ECKrueger
04-07-2011, 01:04 AM
This thread is dumb and makes me like Gordon less.

Mono
04-07-2011, 01:06 AM
Hayward's not a good defender. Thats the main differnce they both have looked lost this year on offense. Paul looked like the kid out of Fresno 2nite actually agressive and making his shot. He has been way way to passive for my liking tonight he was attacking. But Paul when he isnt fouling plays lockdown D major differnce.

Hayward is a good defender. I haven't noticed that George is substantially better, but he could be. I don't think Hayward is a "lock-down" type defensive player, so if George is, then that would make him a better defender than Hayward by default.

The only thing I can really offer here, is that Hayward is actually a good man-to-man defender. What makes you say he's a bad defender?

ilive4sports
04-07-2011, 01:07 AM
Hayward's not a good defender. Thats the main differnce they both have looked lost this year on offense. Paul looked like the kid out of Fresno 2nite actually agressive and making his shot. He has been way way to passive for my liking tonight he was attacking. But Paul when he isnt fouling plays lockdown D major differnce.

Honestly I think Paul hitting the rookie wall was being put in with the starters. Which I still think is the right move, it just takes time to adjust to a new role.

Trader Joe
04-07-2011, 01:10 AM
Hey you know if Gordon turns into an all star for the Jazz no skin off my back and congrats to him because I'm pretty ****ing happy with Paul George. I just don't need an update from his boyfriends every time he has a good game. I can check ESPN on my own. That's my bottom line.

pacer4ever
04-07-2011, 01:13 AM
Hayward is a good defender. I haven't noticed that George is substantially better, but he could be. I don't think Hayward is a "lock-down" type defensive player, so if George is, then that would make him a better defender than Hayward by default.

The only thing I can really offer here, is that Hayward is actually a good man-to-man defender. What makes you say he's a bad defender?

I havent watch Utah on LP since they let Dwill fired Sloan but the kid looked terrible. He obviously is improving but i dont like his defensive upside.

El Pacero
04-07-2011, 01:14 AM
I heard the Pacers just made the playoffs for the first time in five freaking years... who is this Gordon Hayward that you speak of?

pacer4ever
04-07-2011, 01:17 AM
Honestly I think Paul hitting the rookie wall was being put in with the starters. Which I still think is the right move, it just takes time to adjust to a new role.

I dont care about his rookie wall it s just the way he has played all season. Fresno Paul and Pacer Paul is very very different. He was so agressive in college he has been passive so far. I relixze he doesnt want to step on other peoples feet. But he better play like Fresno Paul in the next few years he has a scorer mentalty he just has to be agressive.

pacer4ever
04-07-2011, 01:18 AM
Gordon Hayward ?

He is as skinney as El Pacero

Pacergeek
04-07-2011, 08:50 AM
i started this thread not to rip Paul George, he is a Pacer, and I will support him. I think that he has had a decent rookie season, and has shown that he belongs in the NBA. However, I am sick and tired about all of this future superstar talk. Paul is fine as a rotational player, and could hopefully evolve as a reliable second or third scoring option. This is actually a strong rookie class this season, and George is in the middle of the pack. If you told me that guys like Greg Monroe, Demarcus Cousins, etc are future superstars, then I would listen.

I also started this thread because people on this board have said that Gordon won't make it in the NBA. Said that he isn't worthy of a lottery pick. Said that Utah screwd up by drafting him. Said that he was a bust. All of this talk is nonsense and it ticked me off how sure some of you thought that you were in ripping him.

15th parallel
04-07-2011, 09:11 AM
i started this thread not to rip Paul George, he is a Pacer, and I will support him. I think that he has had a decent rookie season, and has shown that he belongs in the NBA. However, I am sick and tired about all of this future superstar talk. Paul is fine as a rotational player, and could hopefully evolve as a reliable second or third scoring option. This is actually a strong rookie class this season, and George is in the middle of the pack. If you told me that guys like Greg Monroe, Demarcus Cousins, etc are future superstars, then I would listen.

I also started this thread because people on this board have said that Gordon won't make it in the NBA. Said that he isn't worthy of a lottery pick. Said that Utah screwd up by drafting him. Said that he was a bust. All of this talk is nonsense and it ticked me off how sure some of you thought that you were in ripping him.

What's wrong with the future superstar talk when you see the skill set of Paul George? Yes, he's drafted at the middle of the top 20 in a strong draft class. But it doesn't mean he can only be a second or third option at best. Just ask Steve Nash. Who would've thought that he'd be a two-time MVP and a future HOFer? He was picked 15th overall in a strong draft class featuring AI, Ray Allen and Kobe. He should've been just a rotational player, right?

graphic-er
04-07-2011, 10:03 AM
To be fair to me....i don't think I've ever started a thread with updates on Gordon Hayward. So all those people saying I do can shove it.

I have posted some of his results in the on going NBA thread, where it belongs.

And as to why people are talking about Hayward on a PACERS forum. Well he is the only Indiana Kid from an Indiana team to make it to the National Championship game and be a lottery pick in the NBA over the last decade. So since all you always say that you are a Pacers fan because its the Indiana team, it seems pretty appropriate to also talk about Indiana players.

People dont talk about Eric Gordon, because a he is not a rookie any longer, there was never any real doubt that he could make it in the league, and there was never any chance that he could have landed on the Pacers. When EJ gets close to free agency I'm sure there will be countless threads about him coming to the Pacers.

graphic-er
04-07-2011, 10:08 AM
Hey you know if Gordon turns into an all star for the Jazz no skin off my back and congrats to him because I'm pretty ****ing happy with Paul George. I just don't need an update from his boyfriends every time he has a good game. I can check ESPN on my own. That's my bottom line.

Hey man nobody is shoving it down your throat, you don't have to read it. My Gosh grow up a bit. I swear... young people :rolleyes:

Trader Joe
04-07-2011, 10:09 AM
Hey man nobody is shoving it down your throat, you don't have to read it. My Gosh grow up a bit. I swear... young people :rolleyes:

Young people? :rolleyes:

Speed
04-07-2011, 10:12 AM
To be fair to me....i don't think I've ever started a thread with updates on Gordon Hayward. So all those people saying I do can shove it.

I have posted some of his results in the on going NBA thread, where it belongs.

And as to why people are talking about Hayward on a PACERS forum. Well he is the only Indiana Kid from an Indiana team to make it to the National Championship game and be a lottery pick in the NBA over the last decade. So since all you always say that you are a Pacers fan because its the Indiana team, it seems pretty appropriate to also talk about Indiana players.

People dont talk about Eric Gordon, because a he is not a rookie any longer, there was never any real doubt that he could make it in the league, and there was never any chance that he could have landed on the Pacers. When EJ gets close to free agency I'm sure there will be countless threads about him coming to the Pacers.

I'd agree, I think you've shown great restraint on the board in general. I like your enthusiasm and I expected a Hayward thread every other game, but you've restrained, imo. So I give you credit there.

Although, I don't know if its part of the 100 feet or more distance that you have to maintain that makes you also limit your thread count on him, so who knows. :D Yes, I'm kidding. :)

graphic-er
04-07-2011, 10:12 AM
Young people? :rolleyes:

You're 23 right? It just seems like you are displaying a common trait of a young person.
If something exists that you dont like, you have to constantly berate it.

Trader Joe
04-07-2011, 10:20 AM
You're 23 right? It just seems like you are displaying a common trait of a young person.
If something exists that you dont like, you have to constantly berate it.

Are you serious right now?

graphic-er
04-07-2011, 10:25 AM
I'd agree, I think you've shown great restraint on the board in general. I like your enthusiasm and I expected a Hayward thread every other game, but you've restrained, imo. So I give you credit there.

Although, I don't know if its part of the 100 feet or more distance that you have to maintain that makes you also limit your thread count on him, so who knows. :D Yes, I'm kidding. :)

Thank you, I'm just a fan of the kid. To me he emboldens everything about Indiana basketball. So I dont know why everyone wants to bust my balls about it. Infact the majority of the time when the name Gordon Hayward comes up on this board it is in contempt of something I've said earlier, as a way to dig at me. Then their trolling remarks get thanked?

Yet I'm the one labeled a troll for arguing with a doctor over something that wasn't even provable on either side. This board dumbfounds me sometimes.

Trader Joe
04-07-2011, 10:27 AM
Thank you, I'm just a fan of the kid. To me he emboldens everything about Indiana basketball. So I dont know why everyone wants to bust my balls about it. Infact the majority of the time when the name Gordon Hayward comes up on this board it is in contempt of something I've said earlier, as a way to dig at me. Then their trolling remarks get thanked?

Yet I'm the one labeled a troll for arguing with a doctor over something that wasn't even provable on either side. This board dumbfounds me sometimes.

You argued with a doctor about a medical condition. I swear...Old people :rolleyes:

graphic-er
04-07-2011, 10:34 AM
Are you serious right now?

I'm Sorry if that offends you, its just the vibe I get from the majority of your posts. Many times you are the first one to launch a flaming bag of **** with some personal attack.

graphic-er
04-07-2011, 10:36 AM
You argued with a doctor about a medical condition. I swear...Old people :rolleyes:

Well a Doctors opinion over the internet should not be taken as an actual medical assessment. Every doctor would agree.

Dr. Hibbert
04-07-2011, 10:52 AM
I miss the days when Butler fans weren't annoying.

BRushWithDeath
04-07-2011, 10:53 AM
And as to why people are talking about Hayward on a PACERS forum. Well he is the only Indiana Kid from an Indiana team to make it to the National Championship game and be a lottery pick in the NBA over the last decade.

Jared Jefferies.

Still within a decade for one more year.

Pacergeek
04-07-2011, 10:55 AM
Thank you, I'm just a fan of the kid. To me he emboldens everything about Indiana basketball. So I dont know why everyone wants to bust my balls about it. Infact the majority of the time when the name Gordon Hayward comes up on this board it is in contempt of something I've said earlier, as a way to dig at me. Then their trolling remarks get thanked?

Yet I'm the one labeled a troll for arguing with a doctor over something that wasn't even provable on either side. This board dumbfounds me sometimes.

i don't get why so many people are against Hayward either. I had a thread asking if we should draft him last season, and i was quite suprised by the overall negative feedback. people actually thought and believed that Gordon wasn't a pro prospect. saying that Hayward was or is a bust is balderdash. now after this season, where Gordon has recently somewhat proved himself, people around here are still bashing him. he is a good young prospect as well as Paul George. they both have equal ceilings in the NBA, and should have good productive careers.

Trader Joe
04-07-2011, 11:03 AM
I'm Sorry if that offends you, its just the vibe I get from the majority of your posts. Many times you are the first one to launch a flaming bag of **** with some personal attack.

Doesn't offend me. I just find the "You're just too young" or the "You're just too old" line in all of its variations to be a sign of not having much else to say so you revert to the lowest common denominator.

graphic-er
04-07-2011, 11:13 AM
Doesn't offend me. I just find the "You're just too young" or the "You're just too old" line in all of its variations to be a sign of not having much else to say so you revert to the lowest common denominator.

Not all all, it was a direct response to your whining about the existence of a Gordon Hayward thread. The young people comment was in reference to your maturity of having to attack the very existence of the thread as if its being shoved in your face. Like I said you don't have to read it.