What's new
By:

For People Who Think Hayward's Decision was Predetermined

NUMBERICA said:
I suppose it can be viewed as "understandable" for someone else. Humility and sensibility don't suggest that is understandable, and I wouldn't share his viewpoint.

If he's mad we stuck with Corbin, well, that's something, but it's not something to hold onto for three years. I wish we would've hired Stevens, regardless of how much I love Quin. Passing on Stevens and Budenholzer just to have the right coach to tank with, let Carroll and Millsap walk, and then end up with Exum as the "prize" is a tremendous kick in the pants and a lesson to be learned on how difficult and risky it is to tank.

This team easily could've been Hayward, Millsap, Giannis, and Gobert coached by Stevens. Rough to think about, but we got Mitchell, Gobert, and Quin, so that's pretty sweet.
Click to expand...

I think when you leave a place that has generally been good to you, you need excuses... pointing to the negotiations, coaching issues, not moving the rebuild along is fair but those are pretty vanilla complaints... anytime you have a 6-7 year relationship there will be some baggage and bad experiences.

His criticisms were valid but show some short sightedness... we sruck with you built around you and paid you... a lot of what he became was in part because of what we did to help him.

The real reason he left... he wanted to be with his coach, he wanted to make more all star teams, and he thought he’d have an easier path to the finals. It is easier to point at someone else’s mistakes and let them accept the blame.
 
silesian said:
How do we get Gianis and Gobert without the tank?
Click to expand...
Jazz had picks 14 and 21 that year. Giannis lasted to 15, Gobert to 27. If they don't trade for Burke, they could've just drafted both.

I'm not as critical of the organization for drafting Burke as many, and I'm not as certain that Corbin called the shot to go after Burke, but I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. In short, I don't know if they would've drafted Giannis at 14, but I'm about positive they would've gotten Gobert at 21, and I think Corbin exerted some significant influence in going after Burke.

The point is; they were both there. Jazz could've had both.
 
Ron Mexico said:
I disagree. Plenty of GMs have goodwill with each other and look for win wins for each team. Gms deal with each other all the time and look to build good relations when possible especially when it does not effect their own team. Ainge is different than that though. He does not care about burning bridges.
Click to expand...

Regarding the speculation that DL would have given up a 2nd for a trade exception, that would be fine if true. But the scenario we were discussing is very different. Many naive fans believe that Hayward should have used his leverage to force Ainge's hand to force an SNT. The SNT structure would be a win only for the Jazz (a win-blank). Why would Ainge even waste his time structuring that deal, when he just signs Hayward? If DL offered an asset (e.g., 2nd rounder) for the SNT, that is a completely different scenario.

Goodwill does have value, but have you ever seen a GM give up an asset for free just to help his buddy? There has to be some tangible value in return.
 
silesian said:
Goodwill does have value, but have you ever seen a GM give up an asset for free just to help his buddy? There has to be some tangible value in return.
Click to expand...
Lebron and Bosh in '10 (Miami had the outright cap space). Boozer in '10 (Chicago had the outright cap space).

There is a tangible value in exercising goodwill. Even though Boston won the Cleveland trade, they still gave up more than they had to at first glance and I think a lot of that is GMs don't like how Ainge operates. He's openly complained that the asking price from the Celtics on the trade market is higher. Sure, some of that is probably that they know Boston have more to pay with, but I think some of that is Ainge is a **** and nobody wants to do business with him.
 
silesian said:
Regarding the speculation that DL would have given up a 2nd for a trade exception, that would be fine if true. But the scenario we were discussing is very different. Many naive fans believe that Hayward should have used his leverage to force Ainge's hand to force an SNT. The SNT structure would be a win only for the Jazz (a win-blank). Why would Ainge even waste his time structuring that deal, when he just signs Hayward? If DL offered an asset (e.g., 2nd rounder) for the SNT, that is a completely different scenario.

Goodwill does have value, but have you ever seen a GM give up an asset for free just to help his buddy? There has to be some tangible value in return.
Click to expand...
Is there really a question of whether DL would trade a second rounder to be able to obtain a $30M TPE? We've ended up selling 2nd rounders for money because we don't use them. And the tangible return to Ainge would get him 1) the ability not only to land a free agent, but pick up a free second rounder for doing so, 2) help his son's campaign, 3) stay in the good graces of Utah should they deal together in the future.

You'd have to be going out of your way to be an *** to look past all that, which is what he appears to have clearly done.
 
silesian said:
Regarding the speculation that DL would have given up a 2nd for a trade exception, that would be fine if true. But the scenario we were discussing is very different. Many naive fans believe that Hayward should have used his leverage to force Ainge's hand to force an SNT. The SNT structure would be a win only for the Jazz (a win-blank). Why would Ainge even waste his time structuring that deal, when he just signs Hayward? If DL offered an asset (e.g., 2nd rounder) for the SNT, that is a completely different scenario.

Goodwill does have value, but have you ever seen a GM give up an asset for free just to help his buddy? There has to be some tangible value in return.
Click to expand...

Like I said its not giving up an asset. If it hurt Boston in anyway I understand why he didnt do it. But if it was indifferent to them then its just being spiteful and unwilling to cooperate. If the only reason he didnt do it is because its extra paperwork that is pretty lol worthy and a silly reason. Also it could have helped Boston to do a sign and trade. Instead they had to do a different deal to create space.

Also if this deal was isolated maybe it was just how it worked out but Ainge is notorious for burning bridges in the NBA and a disliked GM by other teams.
 
JustTheTip said:
I don’t get why it’s so hard for people to get this.
Click to expand...
Me neither. So imagine the following scenario: Boston and Utah are both after the same player(s). Team X needs or wants to shed salary as well as get picks and prospects in return. Boston only has players with 1 or more years left on their contracts. Utah has a $30m trade exception.

Now that gentleman's move by Ainge comes back to bite him in the ***. Ainge is the smartest and mosy ruthless GM in the business. Despite his reputation other GM's keep dealing with him. I hate the guy, but he gets my vote for GM of the year.
 
Ron Mexico said:
Like I said its not giving up an asset. If it hurt Boston in anyway I understand why he didnt do it. But if it was indifferent to them then its just being spiteful and unwilling to cooperate. If the only reason he didnt do it is because its extra paperwork that is pretty lol worthy and a silly reason. Also it could have helped Boston to do a sign and trade. Instead they had to do a different deal to create space.

Also if this deal was isolated maybe it was just how it worked out but Ainge is notorious for burning bridges in the NBA and a disliked GM by other teams.
Click to expand...

If it is just the gentleman's thing to do to give up a TPE for nothing, then why did Chicago require a 2nd in the Boozer deal? DL had a great relationship with the Bulls front office, why did they screw him by requiring a 2nd?
 
silesian said:
If it is just the gentleman's thing to do to give up a TPE for nothing, then why did Chicago require a 2nd in the Boozer deal? DL had a great relationship with the Bulls front office, why did they screw him by requiring a 2nd?
Click to expand...
DL? You mean KOC? I'm all in on getting a TPE for a second rounder, so you could strike the argument of "do it for nothing."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top