Woj: Celtics working to land both Gordon Hayward and Paul George

[framer]

If we lose Hayward and Hill, why do you want Beverley? What does he accomplish for us, besides making our pick next year worse and taking away an OKC pick we can use to move up if we are not at the very top? We have Exum and Mitchell who are both defensive minded prospects and we get Beverley to clog their minutes in a year when we are not fighting for anything realistically?

Because Beverly on his contract is a better asset than the OKC pick. If OKC gets drummed out of the playoffs, that OKC pick turns into two second rounders, no?

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Here is the plan... you tell Rudy look we've got Dante, Donovan, and Hood (let's be honest he plays 50-60 games per year) we need them to catch up and it will take some learning. This is your team... you are their leader but we likely drop some games because of development time. We gonna collect some assets and go at this hard in year 1 or 2. If we become 50 win team magically we will supplement some vets to help, but otherwise we might not win 30 games.

You are the leader though... we need you to buy in to take us there. Can you do that for us?

PS we need to wait out GS a little too, so let's chill just a bit.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Because Beverly on his contract is a better asset than the OKC pick. If OKC gets drummed out of the playoffs, that OKC pick turns into two second rounders, no?

Exactly... it is doing something that can benefit us either way.

Beverly is fun as hell too... we'd be the most exciting 45 win team ever.

 

[Shocker00]

It doesn't help that Boston former players keep throwing championship pieces their way.

 

[r_u_s_t_b_u_c_k_e_t]

Pretty much this. I just don't think we can tank with Gobert. We might get to 35 wins. I don't think Gobert will go in on the plan if we somehow manage to rid ourselves of enough talent to get less than 35 wins. So the point is it's better to try to stay in the 45-50 win range than the 35 win range and hope that in the meantime we can get someone else to step up like Hayward and Gobert have so far.

Losing Hayward would cost the Jazz 15+ wins? No player is that valuable. His VORP last season was just 4.0.

http://www.basketball-reference.com..._is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&order_by=vorp

 

[margodydek]

I expected this to happen, Boston trying to get better while the Jazz sit on their hands doing nothing. There is absolutely no reports on the Jazz pursuing PG13 but all the rest of the contenders in the league were attempting to get him. The Jazz already threw in the towel. I said this about a month ago the one that gets PG13 gets Hayward. This league has become about superteams, you need three all stars on your team and then the veterans is willing to sign for cheap. Jazz are about being good and not great!

Would you rather be on a team that's proactive or one that wants to stay home and bake the cake?

I still think Lindsey is trying to go after Lillard. Seems like he could have already pulled the trigger on a Beverly or Rubio deal, but I think he's going to do his best to get us in the "super team" discussion. I think we can all agree that Beverly or Rubio may not move the needle for Hayward, but Lillard definitely would. Portland is in salary cap hell. I don't know if we have enough, but we'll probably have to send Exum+Hood+Favors and a pick or two, and we'll also have take on one of their horrible contracts. But this is the kind of deal that I think Lindsey is working towards.

 

[stitches]

Here are the options:

- Try to fill the holes... leads to Treadmill City population Us.
- Earnestly tank... this would include trading Rodney and anything else that might make us too good... including Gobert maybe (I can't do the Gobert trade... I've thought about it and it makes me so sad).
- Half *** tank... maybe Gobert gets suspended for PEDs or maybe we sit him every time we are on a winning streak. I just can't see us losing more than 30 games with Gobert.

Long term the right answer is to tank the eff out of the B, but how do you sell that to Gobert? He wants to be DPOY and that ain't happening where we will be record wise.

He's too much of a competitor to sign on to some dumb fake injury type plan. Basically Hayward leaving us screws us in the worst way possible.

I do not think they will have the stomach to tank... we likely get Rudy Gay or some other stupid thing.

If Hayward leaves we should play Dante and Mitchell and Bolomboy 45 minutes a night, but we won't.

Yep... agree with almost everything here. Rudy Gay/Iggy to replace Hayward, trade assets to replace Hill and be on the treadmill for the next 4 years, then lose Gobert for nothing... then we can go to the thing we should have been doing from the very start - get high end talent from the draft.

 

[stitches]

Losing Hayward would cost the Jazz 15+ wins? No player is that valuable. His VORP last season was just 4.0.

http://www.basketball-reference.com..._is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&order_by=vorp

It's not just Hayward. It's Hill too. It also has ramifications down the roster.

I think we can be around 40-44 wins team if they indeed go on and try to patch things up. The question is - is this what we want? For the next 4 years? What's the chance Rudy bolts after 4 Charlotte Hornets type years?

 

[mellow]

Losing Hayward would cost the Jazz 15+ wins? No player is that valuable. His VORP last season was just 4.0.

http://www.basketball-reference.com..._is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&order_by=vorp

I won't speak ill of current jazzmen, I won't speak ill of current jazzmen,I won't speak ill of current jazzmen,I won't speak ill of current jazzmen,I won't speak ill of current jazzmen,I won't speak ill of current jazzmen,if he leaves I will comment on your post,I won't speak ill of current jazzmen,I won't speak ill of current jazzmen,I won't speak ill of current jazzmen.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

It's not just Hayward. It's Hill too. It also has ramifications down the roster.

I think we can be around 40-44 wins team if they indeed go on and try to patch things up. The question is - is this what we want? For the next 4 years? What's the chance Rudy bolts after 4 Charlotte Hornets type years?

Why'd you pick the Hornets... nothing makes me more limp than them.

He's right though the difference is substantial when you incorporate Hill.

 

[Ron Mexico]

Wow. Sounds like a great way to lose both players and a bunch of assets. This is giving Hayward way too much power. Breaking the bank for George so Hayward stays and then giving him a 1+1? cmon now.

All reports are that Hayward prefers a longer contract regardless of where he goes. What gives you the idea that he wants to sign a 1 +1? I wouldn't trade Exum but all the other assets are disposable ones that won't set us back if they are gone. We will be in the same boat.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Yep... agree with almost everything here. Rudy Gay/Iggy to replace Hayward, trade assets to replace Hill and be on the treadmill for the next 4 years, then lose Gobert for nothing... then we can go to the thing we should have been doing from the very start - get high end talent from the draft.

So let's say Hayward leaves...

Go get every disappointing wing from the last few years... bring me stanley johnson, Mario Hezonja, TJ Warren, James Young (that would be like 5 losses by himself) give me some other dudes in bad situations Julius Randle, Bruno Cabocolo... put our development staff at work and uncover some potential.