[Grades] Grades v. Wolves 2/7/12

Who was the King of Fugly tongiht?

  • John Dribble Dribble Dribble Chuck! Salmons

    Votes: 7 16.3%
  • Jason What the Hell Was I Thinking Thompson

    Votes: 4 9.3%
  • DeMarcus I Just Got My *** Kicked By Who? Cousins

    Votes: 8 18.6%
  • Tyreke Dead Legs Evans

    Votes: 7 16.3%
  • Chuck I Used This Move in Junior High Hayes

    Votes: 17 39.5%

  • Total voters
    43
  • Poll closed .
subjective?

TS%- Hayes: 55.4%, Dally: 50.9%
eFG% Hayes: 52.7%, Dally: 47.3%
TRB%: Hayes: 16.3%, Dally: 19.3%
Ast%: Hayes 14.3%, Dally 7.5%
Stl%: Hayes 1.5%, Dally 1.3%
Blk%: Hayes 1.6%, Dally 4.3%
TOV%: Hayes 14.3%, Dally 17.3%
O-RTG: Hayes: 120, Dally: 100
D-RTG: Hayes- 106, Dally 105
WS/48: Hayes .148, Dally, .072

Hayes was by far a superior offensive player, slightly worse rebounder and obviously a much worse shotblocker. This doesn't take into account how much better of a mentor/team leader he is than Dally ever was for us. So i'll say again. Hayes was by far a superior player to Dally when both were healthy


Considering that we're in much greater need of a shotblocker than we are a ground bound, undersized PF, I stand by my comment that Dally was/is a better fit on the court. I agree that Chuck is a better mentor off the court. Offensively, there is no way Chuck is superior. Perhaps he only shot last year when he had an open lay up, but that hasn't been the case in some games this year. I'm not complaining about Chuck, just putting things into perspective. I couldn't care less about those statistics (which, BTW, are much closer than you're letting on offensively). The team would be better with someone who can protect the rim and neutralise other teams biggest threat in the frontcourt. Hayes can only do a little of that. Again, this isn't really about Chuck. But Dalembert is a superior player.
 
Last edited:
You act like thats a bad thing. Kyle Lowry is damn good, and K-Mart+Scola are brilliant #2+#3 options.

people need to understand what the words "sample size" means. Hayes was by far the superior player last season to Dally. It's obvious he's not 100% healthy right now

It's not a bad thing....but compared to big threes of other above .500 teams i would say its lacking. For instance a big three of Evans, Thorton, and Cousins sounds better than a Lowry, Scola, and Martin to me. That being said they deserve credit for winning games.
 
subjective?

TS%- Hayes: 55.4%, Dally: 50.9%
eFG% Hayes: 52.7%, Dally: 47.3%
TRB%: Hayes: 16.3%, Dally: 19.3%
Ast%: Hayes 14.3%, Dally 7.5%
Stl%: Hayes 1.5%, Dally 1.3%
Blk%: Hayes 1.6%, Dally 4.3%
TOV%: Hayes 14.3%, Dally 17.3%
O-RTG: Hayes: 120, Dally: 100
D-RTG: Hayes- 106, Dally 105
WS/48: Hayes .148, Dally, .072

Hayes was by far a superior offensive player, slightly worse rebounder and obviously a much worse shotblocker. This doesn't take into account how much better of a mentor/team leader he is than Dally ever was for us. So i'll say again. Hayes was by far a superior player to Dally when both were healthy



That's really a very silly position to take and defies everything we know about NBA basketball. Not to mention everything the rest of the NBA knows about NBA basketball. There were no contenders lined up to make Hayes their starting center even at the MLE level. Why? It doesn't work. Too short, too incompetent offensively. There were a number who would have gladly taken Dalembert at that level. His problem was that he was greedy (and after seeing what DeAndre Jordan made, maybe he should have been).

Its also of course blatantly disingenuous as last year Dalembert started the season hurt and got off to a bad offensive start competely out of line with his entire history. He's a 51-52% shooter year in and year out, and does that doing things on offense Hayes cannot ever hope to. he's got a facing jumper, a post game, the ability to finish alley oops and lobs with dunks. Its like claiming Tyson Chandler is a better offensive player than DeMarcus Cousins. More efficient? Sure. Better? Not remotely. Hitting a couple of layups on garbage and in Chandler's case an alley oop or two a game does not make you a good offensive player. Just one who plays within your limitations. If Chuck played within his offensive limitations he would have zero shot attempts a game.

And BTW when a defensive center is "only" better at shotblocking and rebounding, not to mention being taller than his PG, over another defensive center, he's pretty much just better.
 
Last edited:
Considering that we're in much greater need of a shotblocker than we are a ground bound, undersized PF, I stand by my comment that Dally was/is a better fit on the court. I agree that Chuck is a better mentor off the court. Offensively, there is no way Chuck is superior. Perhaps he only shot last year when he had an open lay up, but that hasn't been the case in some games this year. I'm not complaining about Chuck, just putting things into perspective. I couldn't care less about those statistics. The team would be better with someone who can protect the rim and neutralise other teams biggest threat in the frontcourt. Hayes can only do a little of that. Again, this isn't really about Chuck. But Dalembert is a superior player.

lol, who's being subjective now? I just provided evidence that when healthy, Chuck has proven to be better than Dally (you're nuts if you think he's close to 100% now) and yet you don't care about statistics?
 
That's really a very silly position to take and defies everything we know about NBA basketball. Not to mention everythign the rest of the NBA knows about NBA basketball. Tehre were no contenders lined up to make Hayes their starting center even at the MLE level. Why? It doesn't work. Too short, too incompetent offensively. There were a number who would have gladly taken Dalembert at that level. His porblem was that he was grerdy.

Its also of course blatantly disingenuous as last year Dalembert started the season hurt and got off to a bad offensive start comepltely out of line with his entire history. He's a 51-52% shooter year ina nd year out, and does that doing things Hayes cannot ever hope to. Its like claiming Tyson Chandler is a better offensive player than DeMarcus Cousins. More efficient? Sure. Better? Not remotely. Hitting a couple of layups on garbage and in Chandler's case an alley oop or two a game does not make you a good offensive player. Just one who plays within your limitations. If Chuck played within his offensive limitations he would have zero shot attempts a game.

And BTW when a defensive center is "only" better at shotblocking and rebounding, not to mention being taller than his PG, over another defensive center, he's pretty much just better.

Well said. We miss that presence big time.
 
That's really a very silly position to take and defies everything we know about NBA basketball. Not to mention everything the rest of the NBA knows about NBA basketball. There were no contenders lined up to make Hayes their starting center even at the MLE level. Why? It doesn't work. Too short, too incompetent offensively. There were a number who would have gladly taken Dalembert at that level. His problem was that he was greedy ()adn after seeing waht DeAndre Jordan made, maybe he should have been)

Its also of course blatantly disingenuous as last year Dalembert started the season hurt and got off to a bad offensive start competely out of line with his entire history. He's a 51-52% shooter year in and year out, and does that doing things on offense Hayes cannot ever hope to. he's got a facing jumper, a post game, the ability to finish alley oops and lobs with dunks. Its like claiming Tyson Chandler is a better offensive player than DeMarcus Cousins. More efficient? Sure. Better? Not remotely. Hitting a couple of layups on garbage and in Chandler's case an alley oop or two a game does not make you a good offensive player. Just one who plays within your limitations. If Chuck played within his offensive limitations he would have zero shot attempts a game.

And BTW when a defensive center is "only" better at shotblocking and rebounding, not to mention being taller than his PG, over another defensive center, he's pretty much just better.

Because Dally had so many teams lining up to sign him right? Oh wait.

I love the hypocrisy that Dally gets a pass for "being hurt and getting off to a bad offensive start" when that's exactly what has happened to Hayes thus far this year. I call utter bull**** on what Dally can do offensively. He has no offensive game! The guy is an average NBA Center with 0 offensive game and an incredibly low bball IQ. There's no way in hell, i'd pay him more than Chuck
 
It also makes me laugh that no one seems to care about statistical evidence that Hayes was a much better player last year. "ZOMG DALLY BLOCKZ DA SHOTS"
 
lol, who's being subjective now? I just provided evidence that when healthy, Chuck has proven to be better than Dally (you're nuts if you think he's close to 100% now) and yet you don't care about statistics?

You're always talking about sample size, so it's odd that you cherry pick Hayes' best year and pit it against Dalembert's worst year. Over their Careers Dalembert is better in every single category except assists and steals. Dalembert is a better rebounder, better scorer, and better shotblocker. I'm not taking sides here, I wish they Kings had of signed them both, but your argument that Hayes is the better player holds no water.
 
lol, who's being subjective now? I just provided evidence that when healthy, Chuck has proven to be better than Dally (you're nuts if you think he's close to 100% now) and yet you don't care about statistics?

Very subjective! Want to compare them over their respective careers or does that blow your argument out of the water too much?!
 
You're always talking about sample size, so it's odd that you cherry pick Hayes' best year and pit it against Dalembert's worst year. Over their Careers Dalembert is better in every single category except assists and steals. Dalembert is a better rebounder, better scorer, and better shotblocker. I'm not taking sides here, I wish they Kings had of signed them both, but your argument that Hayes is the better player holds no water.

I'm only talking about last year.
 
Last edited:
Very subjective! Want to compare them over their respective careers or does that blow your argument out of the water too much?!

How does that make any sense whatsoever? Dally isn't the same player he was 4 years ago and neither is Chuck. Comparing careers and comparing the present day players are two totally different things
 
I know. I just don't see what that's supposed to prove though. Careers stats are much more important.

How? Players skills evolve or digress as they get older. That's like saying Kobe is better than D-Wade right now because Kobe has had the better career. Using the previous 1-2 years gives a much greater indication of a player than using the entire career
 
How does that make any sense whatsoever? Dally isn't the same player he was 4 years ago and neither is Chuck. Comparing careers and comparing the present day players are two totally different things

Daly has better career stats, and also presently has better stats as well. If you want to talk about present day, why are you holding up stats ending last April, ten months ago?
 
Daly has better career stats, and also presently has better stats as well. If you want to talk about present day, why are you holding up stats ending last April, ten months ago?

2 reasons:
1. Chuck's been hurt a majority of the year
2. Sample size isn't large enough
 
How? Players skills evolve or digress as they get older. That's like saying Kobe is better than D-Wade right now because Kobe has had the better career. Using the previous 1-2 years gives a much greater indication of a player than using the entire career

Dalembert is 30 and Hayes 28. Not quite old enough to say that one is on the decline and the other on the rise. But even at that, Hayes was only "better" last year if you look only as field goal % and assists. Dalembert was still the better rebounder, free throw shooter, and shot blocker.
 
Thunder just beat the Warriors. That's good. I'd always rather play a good team when they're coming off a win than when they're coming off a loss.
 
This entire argument is just stupid. When talking about valuable bigs, Dally is a better player than chuck hayes, period. If you have to pick a bunch on non-big stats from one season to try and prove otherwise, you're reaching.

Now, i like chuck as a hard worker/leader but the facts are that even when healthy, he's offesnsively challenged, short and not a great team defender. Continued arguments to the contrary are getting old. And yes, i get it that the dally ship has sailed. It doesnt change the facts about the two players that keep getting compared to each other. Frankly, it isnt fair to hayes. He shouldnt even be compared to dally but unfortunately, our front office forced that issue.
 
This entire argument is just stupid. When talking about valuable bigs, Dally is a better player than chuck hayes, period. If you have to pick a bunch on non-big stats from one season to try and prove otherwise, you're reaching.

Now, i like chuck as a hard worker/leader but the facts are that even when healthy, he's offesnsively challenged, short and not a great team defender. Continued arguments to the contrary are getting old. And yes, i get it that the dally ship has sailed. It doesnt change the facts about the two players that keep getting compared to each other. Frankly, it isnt fair to hayes. He shouldnt even be compared to dally but unfortunately, our front office forced that issue.

It's now my new mission in life to prove Chuck>Dally
 
It's now my new mission in life to prove Chuck>Dally

Methinks you need a new mission. Besides, why? Chuck is a work horse, a good character guy and a tough man to man defender on certain bigs. Let him be that. Trying to prove he's a better starting center than a guy that's a proven rebounder, shot blocker and not totally useless (though far too confidant for his own good) offensive player is a pointless excersise.
 
I don't even get why you guys are still arguing about this. Dally is gone and i don't see him ever coming back here. Ya, he was a great fit for our team last year and i was disappointed also when we lost him but its time to move on.
 
I don't even get why you guys are still arguing about this. Dally is gone and i don't see him ever coming back here. Ya, he was a great fit for our team last year and i was disappointed also when we lost him but its time to move on.

Its time to see some heads roll....
 
So how much longer until we go find a decent SF and get rid of this joke of a player in John Salmons? It seems like 2 out of every 3 games he scores like 4 points and has minimal rebounds and assists. How can somebody suck so bad yet keep getting significant minutes let alone STARTING?
 
Back
Top