Any "stat" that told you that Chuck Hayes was the top big man on the floor in that game should be thrown away forever!! As I said Smooth, leave the number crunching to Morey bro. Stick to your unyielding loyalty to Chuck Hayes. Please watcha game. Blatche got the rebounds that mattered & Chuck was unable to challenge his shot!
With Hill in te game with backup scrubs and Hayes in with the starters right? Ok take your slanted stants out the door son before I spank you.
uh.. no actually Hill was in with all the starters except Yao... Chuck came in with the bench to replace Scola. I think I'm confused with exactly what your question is here.
Some stats factor in with what rotation you are in with. Who takes what stats away and the momentum of the game at the time eah player is in. With each rotation. Slanted unless you have a large sample size. Hills minutes are limited sample size VS Chuck Hayes. So we dont know what exactly each can do vs one another. Without a larger minutes sample for Hill.
You're looking for information that isn't there. Hill hasn't played enough this season to show that we can win more games with him than Chuck Hayes. However why is there a need to first prove that JH could have done a better job before you play him? Its obvious that Hayes isn't up to par this season. Isn't trying out the unknown the logical thing to do when the known variable is lacking? The worst that could happen is you get the same result as with Chuck: a lose. Arguing that its better to stick with Chuck when you keep losing games with him playing C sounds kinda' useless to me. Like I said this whole 100% confidence you have on RA is wrong. Just because he's a head coach doesn't mean he won't make mistakes.
Too small sample size. Prior to his 16 minute breakout game Jordan Hill has played a total of 7 minutes in 5 games. You can't apply statiscal analysis based on just one or two games.
durvasa = morey jk :grin: i see your points about Chuck LAST YEAR and thats great. U believe in Chuck and you love seeing him out there in crunch time, but when he gives you NO offense and when he is getting out-rebounded why not try Hill. Sure he was "bad" in the first half, but play him and if he makes more mistakes in the second half bench him. Bottom Line Chuck wasnt working Try another option shoot thats why Morey aquired so many big men, right??
god! for the future, for the future, for the future!!!!!! does anybody know what the future is? put JH to the court, dont give time for Miller or Hayes at center
lmao cocaine is one hell of a drug wow someone is obsessed the wagon he out rebounded hill because he plays more than him ,blocks have u seen this season games hill has done more with less minutes that chuck has with more i like chuck but i know he's a bench player all the way to the end beach player si stop it with this nonsense of chuck he is what he is a situational player not a closer not a star not even a 2nd back up he's a third stringer and he's the best at it that's it your defending the guy like he's kobe he's chuck
Washington plays 2 soft PFs down the stretch, Chuck had success defensively against Blatche last time he faced them, Hill sucked in the first half. So what's the thought process of the coach supposed to be? People always want to talk about what the coach should have done after a loss, in hindsight. At what point do you determine "Chuck isn't working"? He played the entire 4th, and midway through we took a lead. Is that when he should have been taken out? Or maybe you think Adelman should have put in Hill with under 5 minutes to go, even though his sloppy and uninspired play in the first half did not warrant it. To what end? Was Adelman supposed to anticipate that one of the worst rebounding frontlines in the NBA would grab some offensive rebounds in a few key possessions down the stretch, and preemptively insert Hill even though his pick-and-roll D in the first half was awful and John Wall is their primary option? Why is that the smarter choice, in the moment? And who's to say, even in hindsight, that it would have made any difference?
We lost. All arguments refer to 1-6 as to the counter argument to the Chuck and Battier defenders of the world. To whether we should be making moves? Refer to 1-6 start. Whether Yao is to be relied on? Refer to 1-6 with Yao out. Not saying panic. Just saying lets start talking about options civil without the homers worrying about new ideas as a team hatred method instead of just fresh ideas which they are. I dont see whats uncivil about replacements for players not performing during losses. To me it seems more uncivil that some people attack any notions of ideas to start winning.
Hill only played 9 mins., got 3 rebounds and 4 pts. and, according to you, he sucked in the 1st half??? I was screaming "play Hill" the entire game. I finally got my wish with less than 1 minute to go. Those offensive rebounds were not just down the stretch. They were pulling them down the entire game. Chuck is not a feared rebounder. Hill will be when Trick Adelman let's the kid play.
I'm referring to the normalized stats. Rebounding percentage is independent of minutes played. Chuck not only led in defensive rebounding percentage this game, he is ahead for the year. He is ahead in total rebound percentage and slightly behind in ORb%. If you need a defensive rebound, and you're choosing between Hayes and Hill, then Hayes has a better chance of grabbing it. Perhaps Hill SHOULD be a better rebounder, but right NOW, he's NOT. I don't know what to tell you guys. I wish Hill was better, but so far it just isn't so.
Hey, you're right! Wow, great stats! Check those stats to see how many minutes Chuck has played each game as opposed to Hill.
One question: what is the team reboudning percentage with Hayes and Jordan. I think that's the key to understanding why Jordan Hill actually is quite good. I feel he usually just blocks out the opponent then waits for help if the ball is secure. He doesn't actually grab the rebound, he just secures it. Do advanced stats show these? imho these advanced stats are bogus. I mean they are certainly better than boxscore which shows about nothing, but these are far from truly relevant. E.g. in rebounding situations, you should make clusters depending on how difficult the situation is, how contested the rebound is, how 'clutch' the rebound is, etc. On the downside, one would need a larger sample size for these to be reliable. Anyway, I am a Jordan Hill fanboy since he arrived, he has HUGE potential, but I perfectly understand Adelman's reasoning here. Jordan should get better with his ~20 minutes until May. No one should ask for more, only if we decide to tank, which hopefully won't happen.
You can not conclusively say that Chuck Hayes is NOT working. NO PLAYER is "working" so far. Jordan Hill represents a change of pace because Hayes has been around and "you know what you're getting" there. Thats intriguing enough to consider on a struggling team in need of a jolt, especially with Hill having good athletic measurables. But I don't think Hill has moved out Hayes from the rotation simply because he's a badass in waiting. You CAN say Jordan Hill has outplayed Brad Miller. Or that Budinger has outplayed Battier. I just don't see Chuck Hayes stinking up the joint so much that it makes Hill a MUST PLAY over him, at the moment
I agree with you. I firmly believe that eventually Hill will outplay him in the second part of the season, but right now Chuck is slightly better. Not THAT much better as some flawed 'advanced' stats show, but better.
Do you think Hill is wondering why Chuck Hayes is playing ahead of him? If so, he should read this thread. Could help him target his efforts to get on the court more.
