Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Gordon Hayward to visit Hornets next week.

PantherBrew

By PantherBrew,
in Charlotte Hornets

Recommended Posts

MedellinHeel Newbie

MedellinHeel

Posted
Posted

I never said sign Lance to a max. I actually believe that a 3x10 would be perfect for Lance.

I'd also like to ask where this notion that Lance is a bad locker room presence is coming from?

He was always a little quirky but he had no problems before Evan Turner was acquired. Might I remind you that the only reason that the Pacers won a game against the Heat in the playoffs was due to Lance (by the way, Turner didn't play in that game).

Finally you don't give out max contracts to just any old player. If he's (Hayward) not a top five player at his position he's not worth a max and without that three point shot.... he's not a top five player at his position.

Realistically, giving Hayward a max is more of a risk than signing Lance to a 3x10 because that max contract will be 25% of our total salary for the next four years.

 

Who is coming to Cha in the next few years who is better than Hayward? 

 

Hayward is projected to be a 18/5/5 guy. Very smart and skilled. I dont mind paying for guys like that so long as its obvious we can not sign the Lebrons, Durants, Melos, of the world. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TANTRIC-NINJA Collaborator

TANTRIC-NINJA

Posted
Posted

I never said sign Lance to a max. I actually believe that a 3x10 would be perfect for Lance.

I'd also like to ask where this notion that Lance is a bad locker room presence is coming from?

He was always a little quirky but he had no problems before Evan Turner was acquired. Might I remind you that the only reason that the Pacers won a game against the Heat in the playoffs was due to Lance (by the way, Turner didn't play in that game).

Finally you don't give out max contracts to just any old player. If he's (Hayward) not a top five player at his position he's not worth a max and without that three point shot.... he's not a top five player at his position.

Realistically, giving Hayward a max is more of a risk than signing Lance to a 3x10 because that max contract will be 25% of our total salary for the next four years.

Apparently some of the exit interviews reveal some finger pointing pointing to Lance being the issue toward the end of Indy's season.

.. He was trying to stat pad and was jumping over teamates backs for rebounds and yelling at guys missing shots bc he was so concerned with getting his triple double...he had some moments of tuning out the coach and totally ignored Birds advice to stop his playoff antics..HE IGNORED the guy who will be in charge of paying him..in a contract year..thats his best behavior.

That Indy collapse was a few guys imo but he had a big hand into that if Chris Ford was accurate about those exit interviews and team sources.

I dont see Lance becoming more mature in Charlotte...he has made huge strides..is a fun to watch two way guy. I like his firey attitude as well..but he showed you should at least hesitate about making him a cornerstone player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CarolinaPanthers8789 Newbie

CarolinaPanthers8789

Posted
Posted

Who is coming to Cha in the next few years who is better than Hayward?

Hayward is projected to be a 18/5/5 guy. Very smart and skilled. I dont mind paying for guys like that so long as its obvious we can not sign the Lebrons, Durants, Melos, of the world.

Personally I'd rather hold on to the money and give LaMarcus Aldridge a max before giving a max to Gordon Hayward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MedellinHeel Newbie

MedellinHeel

Posted
Posted

Personally I'd rather hold on to the money and give LaMarcus Aldridge a max before giving a max to Gordon Hayward.

 

Didnt we just draft 2 PF's in the lottery? 

 

I am not for holding on to money in the slight chance that a player will come a few yrs down the line, esp when we already invested heavily into that position.

 

We have to strike when the iron is hot. 

 

Hayward is a proven smart skilled damn good player. He would be an excellent 2nd or 3rd option on a title team. 

 

Its not like we would be signing a bum or average player. Hayward is the real deal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cbarrier90 Newbie

cbarrier90

Posted
Posted

Didnt we just draft 2 PF's in the lottery? 

 

I am not for holding on to money in the slight chance that a player will come a few yrs down the line, esp when we already invested heavily into that position.

 

We have to strike when the iron is hot. 

 

Hayward is a proven smart skilled damn good player. He would be an excellent 2nd or 3rd option on a title team. 

 

Its not like we would be signing a bum or average player. Hayward is the real deal. 

 

So you're giving the maximum salary to a guy would ideally be a "2nd or 3rd option..."

 

The detraction has nothing to do with the guy's skill and everything to do with his price tag.

 

You keep addressing the skill and completely ignore the price tag like it won't be there for the next FIVE YEARS if you're giving him a max deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ThinkAboutIt Newbie

ThinkAboutIt

Posted
Posted

Need more specifics bud. Tell us why (specifically) Hayward can not play SG effectively. 

 

I knew you were looking for what will never be "specific" enough for you, which is why I dismissed your request. 

 

http://youtu.be/2aa6_sdCgOs?t=6m36s

 

Definitely not a max guy. Prefer Lance Stephenson any day of the week. Much fewer holes in Stephenson's game, he's a much better defender, and he's going to score even if his shot isn't falling. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CarolinaPanthers8789 Newbie

CarolinaPanthers8789

Posted
Posted

So you're giving the maximum salary to a guy would ideally be a "2nd or 3rd option..."

The detraction has nothing to do with the guy's skill and everything to do with his price tag.

You keep addressing the skill and completely ignore the price tag like it won't be there for the next FIVE YEARS if you're giving him a max deal.

That was going to be my point.

Why are we giving a max to someone that's a "2nd or 3rd option?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...