Hayward --> Celtics ?

[Stifle Tower]

And this is precisely why I get so frustrated with those who just wanted KOC and now want DL to just do a deal. Let's not back ourselves into a corner like the Knicks, Celtics, etc. who have bad contracts on their books. Taking on 1-yr for unneeded cap space? Smart. Taking on multiple years....unless the return is overwhelming? Dumb.

 

[bovice]

If we trade Hayward to Boston, we should offer him 14 mil/yr for 3 years in the summer just to **** with Boston haha

 

[fallenchicken]

I'm the biggest Hayward partisan here--but the Celts #1, you'd have to do that. For nothing else though: I don't want Rondo, I don't want no ****-butt jeff green, i want an unprotected #1. I doubt the Celts would do it, but if they like Hayward that much... worth a shot.

 

[The Midnight]

We aren't getting their 1st round pick guys... It's says that they are reluctant on giving any of the 1st rounders that they have. I would say no to any trade that didn't involve their pick though. Hayward is way better then that. Just imagine them next year if they had Rondo, Hayward, and a top 5 pick. They would be good fast and we would be in an even worse position.

Boston are currently 6th worst and who knows some teams might even out tank them.


If they slip down to 8th or worse, I think that's a fair deal on both sides for a straight swap with Hayward. (you're looking at Aaron Gordon, Garry Harris, etc)

 

[Sexual Favors]

Boston are currently 6th worst and who knows some teams might even out tank them.


If they slip down to 8th or worse, I think that's a fair deal on both sides for a straight swap with Hayward. (you're looking at Aaron Gordon, Garry Harris, etc)

You're undervaluing Hayward. Hayward next to a real #1 (which Boston could easily attract given it's location/legacy), he is a legit #2. Pure point forward skills are possessed only by Kevin Durant/ Lebron James (Hayward is not anywhere near those players offensively, but that is how rare the rest of his skill set is).

 

[The Midnight]

You're undervaluing Hayward. Hayward next to a real #1 (which Boston could easily attract given it's location/legacy), he is a legit #2. Pure point forward skills are possessed only by Kevin Durant/ Lebron James (Hayward is not anywhere near those players offensively, but that is how rare the rest of his skill set is).

Well you have to also factor in the fact that if BOS finished 8th worse, there is a chance of a top 3 pick (if the pick is unprotected). So that's the opportunity that BOS will be forgoing by trading for Hayward.

 

[Sexual Favors]

Boston are currently 6th worst and who knows some teams might even out tank them.


If they slip down to 8th or worse, I think that's a fair deal on both sides for a straight swap with Hayward. (you're looking at Aaron Gordon, Garry Harris, etc)

You're undervaluing Hayward. Hayward next to a real #1 (which Boston could easily attract given it's location/legacy), would be a legit #2. Pure point forward skills are possessed only by Kevin Durant/ Lebron James and the Gordon Hayward's of the league (Hayward is not anywhere near those players offensively, but that is how rare the rest of his skill set is).

 

[green]

Here is my trade:

Kanter, Hayward, Biedrens for Wallace and Green and Boston's 2014 first and Brooklyn's 2016 and 2017 firsts.

This is a swing for the fences move for both franchises and might seem dumb at first, but could pay off big time.

Why Boston does it:

They now have $33 million on the books next year. Add in Hayward and it is around 43-45 million. That puts them 13-15 under the cap AND 27 million under the tax line. This also gives them this nucleus:

PG - Rondo
SG - Hayward
SF - ???
PF - Sullinger
C - Kanter

So, they have a ton of cap room, and an opening at SF...This puts them in the LeBron sweepstakes. As good as Parker or Wiggins may be, I'd take LeBron. They could convince LeBron to come to Boston with this YOUNG team, and win 3 more titles, and do it in Boston, where great players win titles.

Why Boston doesn't do it:

They don't think they can get LeBron.

Why Utah does it:

This give Utah two top 10 picks this year, and six unprotected picks the next three years. Utah maximizes their chance for a superstar, because Utah realizes that without drafting a top player, they have no shot at a title, and Utah wants to win a title. Utah could end up with Parker, McDermott and Gordon out of this draft.

Why Utah doesn't do it:

They are admitting that Hayward and Kanter aren't good enough. If they keep Hayward and Kanter, add a bench and a coach, they can get back to their bottom half playoff seeds/money making ways. No risk to stand pat. No title either.

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

The thing is that Boston will be pissed if they trade a pick for Hayward that turns out to be top 3 in this upcoming draft. That would be an epic blunder on their part. Boston will want protection and contingencies on the pick, and that will be the deal breaker.

 

[Stifle Tower]

Yea or nay on this deal:
Hayward and Williams for Wallace and their lottery pick (unrestricted).

Hayward essentially traded for the pick. Jazz get a top-10 player in the draft on a rookie deal (and maybe improve their own pick a couple of spots). Don't have to fork out $10-$12M for Gordon. Wallace is dead weight but have room for his salary due to not paying out big money for Hayward. He can eat up some mins next season as the backup to whoever DL gets as a starter - either a pick or free agent.

Boston hates to give up their pick, but they get perhaps their only chance to dump Wallace's salary and still get a great player. Chance goes up to re-sign Rondo because of the immediate improvement to their team. Yes, they'd kick themselves if the pick turned out to be top-3. But Hayward at 16/6/5 will give them better immediate returns than Wiggins or Parker.

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

@green: I wouldn't move Kanter in a deal whose value is that speculative. No way.

 

[David Stern]

Why don't we just trade him for some kind of pick now, then sign him to a max deal in free agency?