smith2373 wrote:SichtingLives wrote:Sunday - "THIS TEAM IS WAY BETTER WITH HAYWARD AND I'LL FIGHT YOU ABOUT IT"
Monday - "WE'VE GOT TO TRADE HAYWARD"
This forum needs to consume more fiber for consistency
In a way, both things can be true.
It can be true that this team as currently constructed is way better with Hayward. It can also be true that for next season trading Hayward might be our best option to give us the flexibility to make meaningful improvements in other areas.
Beware thinking that Ainge or Stevens knows how to do that. Ainge is the ultimate moneyball GM, he knows how to deal for value. Trading Hayward for a championship configuration isn't what he does. If anything he moves Hayward for cap relief and draft picks. Hayward was the central figure to their entire rebuilding strategy and Danny didn't have a backup plan, as evidenced by him still being a key component all the way through the injuries. Kyrie was a coup but Hayward was the real golden goose for Ainge and Stevens, the HC on the court, their guy who plays the game the way they want and yada yada. And they still love him that much. Until Tatum and Brown take major leaps as playmakers (neither of which may happen), he's a necessary point forward next year. It's been an issue with this team construction for years, our team offense IQ is not very high nor is our HC a great offensive coach. We're currently in a bind on that. This rebuild is officially blown when Tatum walks out that door which is a very real possibility if Danny doesn't start playing chess. Dumping the broken leg guy with the bloated expiring deal seems like the obvious move on the surface but in reality it might just be the next blunder.
Two questions you need to ask - One: are we actually trying to be a contender next year and two: how do we realistically improve our offense next year by moving Hayward? Not an easy answer there.