http://www.nba.com/playerfile/chuck_hayes/index.html Chuck Hayes leads the NBA in Rebounds Per 48 Minutes with 16.9. He is Offensive Rebounds Per 48 Minutes with 6.2. He is also 16th in the NBA in Steals Per 48 Minutes. I know these stats are really inflated but why wasn't playing more. Everygame he plays, he has a big impact. Give him 20 minutes, he is almost a lock to get 10 rebounds. I also loves his defense. He is undersized but he knows how to use that as advantage is terms of quickness. I see let him guard Gasol and Duncan and lets see what he does against them. I guarantee you it will be better than what Howard and Swift do. He should be ahead of Deke and Stro in the depth chart a long time ago IMO if it wasn't for Van Idiot. JVG keeps saying he wants tough minded players and he has one but refuses to play him. This is from Dennis Lindsey latest blog on Chuck Hayes on Rockets.com http://www.nba.com/rockets/news/Dennis_Lindsey_Blog_April_edi-175647-822.html Chuck Hayes is the latest example of the PIT working to provide the NBA with good, solid role players. We, like every other team in the NBA, had Chuck way down the priority list when we worked our draft rankings in April. Dean Cooper is a big proponent of overall team winning percentage for all draft prospects, and Chuck Hayes led all prospects in that one measure; we took note, but no question in hindsight we underestimated Chuck’s positive impact on the scoreboard when he plays. Chuck went on to become MVP of the PIT, leading his team to the championship of the tournament. It was then that we decided that we should bring him in for an individual workout. Measuring at 6-6 is typically a kiss of death for a power forward that has NBA aspirations (outside of Charles Barkley) if you study the history of the NBA, but looking back Chuck had some unique qualities that have allowed him to overcome his height at this stage of his young career. Chuck has what we call a “unique combination” of traits – he is very strong, fast, quick, has great hands, possess elite toughness, and he is a player who is both instinctive and smart. With all that information we still did not see him as draft-able since only one other team brought him in for a workout. Hayes then went on to play well at the Chicago Pre-Draft Camp, and would you believe his team went on to be undefeated? We brought Chuck in for a second workout thinking that he would provide good competition for other “priority big men;” needless to say, he did very well again. We then decided Chuck would be a good rookie free agent since we felt like he was going to be un-drafted; so we decided to bring him to summer league and possibly Veteran’s Camp since he is smart and competitive. He helped our summer league entry go undefeated, and we brought him to Veteran’s Camp in October. He stood out during the camp and in short minutes he received in preseason games.
Also left this out Protrade.com did some interesting statistical work on this year’s NBA Rookies using different measures, and minute per ratios; currently both of our rookies (Head & Hayes) rank high in Protrade’s overall rookie evaluations. In addition, Chuck has our third best plus/minus score output for our team behind Tracy and Yao. Lastly, for you John Hollinger/PER (Player Efficiency Rating) fans, Chuck has hovered around 17.00, which is a very solid PER for most players, and an especially good number for a rookie power forward. Remember that Chuck has a relatively small number of minutes played, so one has to be cautious about future predictions/forecasts, but certainly Chuck’s early returns on our investment in scouting him have been solid.
Why do you think his stats are definitely inflated? The sample (approaching 500 minutes on the season) is adequate to getting a good idea of his production. Actually if you check, he's tended to be more productive, per minute, in games the more minutes he got. I've made dozens of posts here regarding Chuck's stats and why I think he's a hidden gem on the roster. Here's a post I made a couple days ago in another thread, comparing Hayes to Rodman while he was with Detroit: More on the Rodman vs. Chuck Hayes comparison ... This is purely a comparison between their "box score stats". I wanted to compare Rodman in his first 7 years with the Pistons to Chuck Hayes. To make it a balanced comparison, I made each stat per minute, and I also adjusted for pace (B-R.com and 82games.com shows possessions per game for teams). Even though the Pistons were one of the slowest pace teams in the league while Rodman was there, they still played at a faster pace than the current Rockets. So, the numbers below can be viewed as a pace-adjusted per-40 minute stats. Note the wide disparity in minutes played between Chuck Hayes and Rodman during his time with the Pistons. Some might claim that there isn't enough of a sample for Hayes to make the comparison meaningful. But actually, basketball stat people say that 250+ minutes is usually sufficient to get a good guage on how productive a player would be per minute. Hayes has played over 400 minutes this season, so it isn't unreasonable to expect similar per-minute production with more minutes. Code: [SIZE=2]OFFENSIVE STATS ---------------- min PTS AST TO FG FGA 3P 3PA FT FTA ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- 1987 1155 17.14 1.92 3.19 7.30 13.41 0.00 0.03 2.54 4.32 1988 2147 18.06 2.08 2.96 7.54 13.44 0.09 0.32 2.88 5.38 1989 2208 13.94 1.88 2.39 5.99 10.07 0.11 0.49 1.84 2.94 Rodman 1990 2377 12.82 1.28 1.60 5.13 8.84 0.02 0.16 2.53 3.87 1991 2747 10.60 1.35 1.49 4.37 8.87 0.10 0.48 1.76 2.79 1992 3301 10.58 2.53 1.85 4.52 8.40 0.42 1.34 1.11 1.85 1993 2410 8.37 1.82 1.84 3.27 7.67 0.27 1.30 1.56 2.91 ----- ------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- total 16345 12.48 1.85 2.06 5.19 9.67 0.17 0.68 1.92 3.24 min PTS AST TO FG FGA FG3 FG3A FT FTA ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- Hayes 2006 435 12.54 1.15 0.94 4.91 9.09 0.00 0.10 2.72 4.28[/SIZE] Code: REBOUNDING/DEFENSIVE STATS -------------------------- min ORB DRB TRB STL BLK PF ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- 1987 1155 5.59 5.79 11.38 1.30 1.65 5.69 1988 2147 6.03 7.52 13.55 1.42 0.85 5.17 1989 2208 6.20 8.44 14.64 1.04 1.44 5.54 Rodman 1990 2377 5.99 8.13 14.12 0.93 1.07 4.92 1991 2747 5.72 10.54 16.26 1.03 0.87 4.45 1992 3301 6.92 13.32 20.24 0.90 0.93 3.28 1993 2410 6.56 13.67 20.23 0.86 0.80 3.59 ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- total 16345 6.22 10.19 16.41 1.04 1.03 4.48 min ORB DRB TREB STL BLK PF ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- Hayes 2006 435 5.64 10.24 15.88 2.09 1.04 6.58 Statistically, Hayes certainly compares well to what Dennis Rodman did over his first 7 years. Specifically, Hayes has better rebounding numbers as a rookie than Rodman did his first four years, while Rodman was a more involved scorer early on. Hayes has been adept at getting steals, but he's also been called for a lot of fouls. Rodman also fouled at a high rate early on, though not quite at the same extent. Of course, more fouls are called in general in today's NBA than back in the late 80s.
This isn't really accurate. 250+ minutes is needed to gain some semblance of statistical significance. This is not to say Hayes would continue to rebound at this rate with increased minutes - as players tire, they become less productive. As an energy player specifically, I would expect Hayes per minute production to decrease if given more minutes. This is not to say I don't expect him to be productive - just not 16 reb/48 type productive. Even if he made a a pretty significant 25% drop off down to 12 reb/48 mins, that's still top 25 in the NBA. Hayes has put up impressive numbers and done it in enough time to say that it's not exactly a fluke. I would be curious to see how his production is impacted if given regular minutes consistently.
i think he could be a nice backup at the 4 for a long time. the problem is, will he have to wait for jho to retire before becoming the #2 PF on the team? if so, will he stick around that long? i think there is a reason that the team seems so set on keeping stro. the reason being deke is set to retire. if he comes back next season he will get limited minutes at best. stro is being kept as the backup center. hayes may crack the rotation! stro comes in for jho to play 18 MPG, hayes comes in for yao to play about 10 MPG. when yao is out stro moves to center and all is good. what a great find! i hope it all works out with chuck.
Hayes is still young, and increased stamina comes with more playing time. It may be probable that his rebound rate will decrease, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if it stayed the same. Consider the chart below, which plots all his games this season in which he played more than 5 minutes. The Game Rating is Hollinger's formula for a single game performance (based on the box score numbers) adjusted to 40 minutes played. As you can see, his overall statistical production tended to be better with more playing time, though there was a slight dip in rebounds.
Agree, also if he were a regular rotation player, Hayes would be a big part of the opposing teams scouting report and game plan. They would lock in on his weaknesses and strengths. I do know that would definetly effect his production.
What will stat-man Morey make of all this? SHould be helpful for Hayes. I'm reminded of my HS basketball career- benchwarmer. I'd get a minute or two every fourth game or something like that. Then one game, I got to play a whole quarter. I got 4PT, 6 RBS, and 2 ASSISTS. Then it was back to the bench.
I was thinking the same thing, he might give Hayes a 6 year, 42 million dollar contract for that one.
please...!!! . head SUX so bad... I think we should've picked Chucky or Langford in the 34th pick.. but that's the NBA, u need to have luck and Head had a really good luck .. he should be in the NBDL right now..
everybody would like SHAQ to hit his free throws , but he still cant hit them, and he is still the most dominant center in League... and dont forget Karla Malone, when he came to the league he shot terribly from the FT line.. but after 3 years his % went up dramatically.. I am sure they can work on Chuck's release and he will get better...
I am not a believer in stats, because they dont show u everything.. and I think the worst way to judge Chucky is by looking at his stats ..I think Hayes has a significant impact on the court that his stats dont show... he is a great player, great rebounder, good D (he'll improve, and dont forget the block on Hinrich in the final secs of that game).. and the most important thing about him is that he can CATCH THE BALL.. he doesn't fumble it like a p**** like Swift and JHO... and he can finish really strong under the basket (he doesn't miss JHO's layups !)
You're saying that we should have drafted two guys who went undrafted at a pick that we didn't have (Luther went #24, not #34). You know all "rookies" are on probation, and I'm wondering if you've EVER said anything that wasn't frenetically nonsensical, or displayed any level of logic. I guess you're fortunate that I'm not in charge of who gets to stay.
Yeah I definitely don't understand what is up with Van Gundy not playing Hayes. He has hustle and gets rebounds quickly. Seems like a good hardworking guy too. Hopefully we resign him for the next few years.
first, I know it's the 24th pick but that was a typing error,.. second, I said chuck and Langford should've been drafted because they derserve to play in the NBA and they play at a higher level than HEad.. that's the only thing i said mr. m_cable... I didn't say that we should've drafted them, I just said that they deserve to be drafted and Head should be an NBDL player except for that he had good luck.... so please, next time u wanna attack somebody, try to read (and understand) his post first...
luck? he has skills... thats why hes getting payed money for playing basketball... You don't need luck to be in the NBA... look at Tracy, Yao, Kobe, etc... head has been one of the only upside of this side. i might say yes... hes lucky that he get to play alot since none of u expected him to play more than 5 mintues a game... but in the draft? i would say he was unlucky... he could have been picked before us...
