if Hayward and Hill leave...

[NUMBERICA]

Sign-and-trades have to work for three parties with varying interests, so I have a tough time taking those into consideration as viable. In the scenario with Boston, I'm not sure how attractive Boston is without getting Butler (but I'm also not sure Hayward would love to play with Butler). If they have to get Butler first, it limits their ability to offer Hayward their max, so I guess in this scenario there is something to play with. I'm just not sure how the salary-matching would work.

I guess in that specific scenario, there is cause for exploring the idea.

 

[SCS]

Blow it up. Everything goes except Gobert, the young guys on rookie deals and our draft picks this year. Accumulate as many assets and as much cap space as possible. Hopefully in the 2018 and 2019 offseasons we'll have good picks and be able to do some damage on the FA market to retool around Rudy quickly.

 

[gomretat]

First you say no Hill, then you say keep Hill. Which is it?

Anyway, I disagree with not wanting Hill if Hayward leaves. A healthy year from Hill and somebody else stepping up could still give us a pretty good year. I don't agree that the ship falls off the edge of the world without Hayward.

I don't think the ship falls off the edge if Gordon leaves. Not at all. There is not a GM on the planet let alone the NBA that would not love Rudy as the cornerstone to build around. But I still would not spend the money to bring Hill back. I would spend it other places and try and find a serviceable PG for a two year deal and see if Exum steps up. Signing Hill basically means Exum is gone.