Hayward Likely to OPT-IN to final year of contract!

[GoCeltics123]

Jamaal Magloire was an all star. Drummond is terrible.

Respectfully disagree.

Drummond is 18ppg and 15rebs and the reigning Rebound champ 4 years in a row and two time all star.

Magloire was a one hit wonder.

Drummond would be the big who could put pressure on the rim offensively for Boston and defend the other bigs in the conference like Bam and Embiid.

He’s light years better than what Celtics have now and would put Theis back in his preferred role as an energy big off the bench.

if you are hanging onto drummond being a good player you are stuck in an era from over 10 years ago.

Drummond is an empty stats guy.

Doesn't help you win whatsoever, but gets his stats. Also Theis on defense>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Drummond. Drummond is a god awful defender who never got better on either end.

[UnFadeable21]

Drummond was traded to the cavs for 2 expiring contracts of players who won't be on the pistons team and a 2023 second round pick. That is his worth.

Detroit was afraid he was going to opt out and leave for nothing like Durant did to OKC.

[UnFadeable21]

Respectfully disagree.

Drummond is 18ppg and 15rebs and the reigning Rebound champ 4 years in a row and two time all star.

Magloire was a one hit wonder.

Drummond would be the big who could put pressure on the rim offensively for Boston and defend the other bigs in the conference like Bam and Embiid.

He’s light years better than what Celtics have now and would put Theis back in his preferred role as an energy big off the bench.

if you are hanging onto drummond being a good player you are stuck in an era from over 10 years ago.

Drummond is an empty stats guy.

Doesn't help you win whatsoever, but gets his stats. Also Theis on defense>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Drummond. Drummond is a god awful defender who never got better on either end.

Not true, he helped Detroit make the playoffs a few times so that is winning. He wouldn’t have to be the first option on Boston either which takes pressure off of him and just focus on rebounding, defense and tip ins.

As I stated earlier

Kemba
Smart
Tatum
Brown
Drummond

That team can beat the Heat and Raptors.

[SmartWentCrazy]

Drummond was traded to the cavs for 2 expiring contracts of players who won't be on the pistons team and a 2023 second round pick. That is his worth.

Detroit was afraid he was going to opt out and leave for nothing like Durant did to OKC.

They were afraid he was going to opt in, not out

[UnFadeable21]

Drummond was traded to the cavs for 2 expiring contracts of players who won't be on the pistons team and a 2023 second round pick. That is his worth.

Detroit was afraid he was going to opt out and leave for nothing like Durant did to OKC.

They were afraid he was going to opt in, not out

The Ringer and Sporting News says Detriot was afraid he was going to Opt Out.

Detroit traded center Andre Drummond on Thursday to the Cavaliers for ... John Henson, Brandon Knight and a second-round pick.

Even though Drummond was likely to decline his $28.7 million player option and hit free agency this summer, it was a stunningly light return for a two-time All-Star who is only 26 years old.

[Captain_Caveman]

Read on Twitter

Bernadoni is completely on point here. Can anyone explain why an opt-out and resign for like 3y/85-90m is not the move for both sides here? It saves us $6-7m on the cap this year, without actually costing him $6-7m this year. It increases his trade value, and eliminates his flight risk this offseason or next. And a guy with an injury history gets some more financial security, rather than rolling the dice to wait a year for free agency.

Even if the eventual move is to flip him or depth or a big, or to reduce payroll to make room for Tatum's extension next year, you do that IMO.

[Celts17Pride]

Read on Twitter

Bernadoni is completely on point here. Can anyone explain why an opt-out and resign for like 3y/85-90m is not the move for both sides here? It saves us $6-7m on the cap this year, without actually costing him $6-7m this year. It increases his trade value, and eliminates his flight risk this offseason or next. And a guy with an injury history gets some more financial security, rather than rolling the dice to wait a year for free agency.

Even if the eventual move is to flip him or depth or a big, or to reduce payroll to make room for Tatum's extension next year, you do that IMO.

If Hayward wants to stay in Boston and opt out and resign for 3-4 years that is the best case for both Hayward and the Celtics. Hayward is a damn good player.

My fear is Hayward wants to leave Boston which in that case the Celtics need to move him and get something for him unless he opts out all together

[Fencer reregistered]

Read on Twitter

Bernadoni is completely on point here. Can anyone explain why an opt-out and resign for like 3y/85-90m is not the move for both sides here? It saves us $6-7m on the cap this year, without actually costing him $6-7m this year. It increases his trade value, and eliminates his flight risk this offseason or next. And a guy with an injury history gets some more financial security, rather than rolling the dice to wait a year for free agency.

Even if the eventual move is to flip him or depth or a big, or to reduce payroll to make room for Tatum's extension next year, you do that IMO.

The argument is that an apparent $10 million reduction in one year's pay, for example, might wind up being a true $6-7 million reduction instead.

I'm not sure how much difference that actually makes to Hayward's calculations.

That said, the whole confusion could help push Hayward to a mindset that:
-- He can't accurately optimize his future income.
-- He has vastly more money than he and his kids will ever spend anyway.
-- He should just do what feels right to him across multiple considerations and accept whatever the financial ramifications turn out to be.

[Captain_Caveman]

Read on Twitter

Bernadoni is completely on point here. Can anyone explain why an opt-out and resign for like 3y/85-90m is not the move for both sides here? It saves us $6-7m on the cap this year, without actually costing him $6-7m this year. It increases his trade value, and eliminates his flight risk this offseason or next. And a guy with an injury history gets some more financial security, rather than rolling the dice to wait a year for free agency.

Even if the eventual move is to flip him or depth or a big, or to reduce payroll to make room for Tatum's extension next year, you do that IMO.

The argument is that an apparent $10 million reduction in one year's pay, for example, might wind up being a true $6-7 million reduction instead.

I'm not sure how much difference that actually makes to Hayward's calculations.

I hear you, but it doesn't need to be much with the numbers I am talking about. Bigger question is what he feels his earning potential is next offseason. I think the chances are pretty good that he can make more money by taking the $34m and waiting than signing a 3y/85-90m now, but he's not Giannis and there is a lot of risk for him on that dice roll.

[floyd]

Read on Twitter

Bernadoni is completely on point here. Can anyone explain why an opt-out and resign for like 3y/85-90m is not the move for both sides here? It saves us $6-7m on the cap this year, without actually costing him $6-7m this year. It increases his trade value, and eliminates his flight risk this offseason or next. And a guy with an injury history gets some more financial security, rather than rolling the dice to wait a year for free agency.

Even if the eventual move is to flip him or depth or a big, or to reduce payroll to make room for Tatum's extension next year, you do that IMO.

The argument is that an apparent $10 million reduction in one year's pay, for example, might wind up being a true $6-7 million reduction instead.

I'm not sure how much difference that actually makes to Hayward's calculations.

That said, the whole confusion could help push Hayward to a mindset that:
-- He can't accurately optimize his future income.
-- He has vastly more money than he and his kids will ever spend anyway.
-- He should just do what feels right to him across multiple considerations and accept whatever the financial ramifications turn out to be.

I thought the article actually made no sense at all. “It’s better to lose 30% of 20 million than 34 million”. Said another way “it’s better to make 14 million than 23.8 million” which no one would agree with.

I get opting out for long term security but the escrow doesn’t factor in much imo. He’s going to opt out for 90 over 3 years just so he puts 9 million in escrow this year instead of 10.2? He’d do it for the long term security (if he did it).

[playa-hater]

This link explains most of every possibility concerning GH.
https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/celtics-offseason-preview-one-gordon-hayward-trade-destination-stands-out-but-his-fate-is-still-in-question/

[threrf23]

I'd be a little surprised if Hayward opts out.

Possible conjecture:

He's 30 years old and his market value is at a low point. He wants to earn another big contract, and this season is his chance to maximize that contract.

He feels that he has let the Celtics down (and/or experienced bad luck) over the past three seasons, and he additionally feels that he and coach have unfinished business dating back to Butler. He wants to stay with the C's for at least another season, and would rather opt in than be forced to consider weighing his options just yet.

He has a newborn son, and is rehabbing his ankle, and recently spent time away from his family in the bubble. And Covid is still a thing. And he may not have much time off leading up to the start of next season. He doesn't want to have to even think about free agency or contract negotiations at the moment.

30% discount or not, the cap may be low this offseason, and it's not clear that there will be much spending in FA (relative to next year).

[ConstableGeneva]

Read on Twitter

[ddb]

Whether Hayward wants to return to Boston or not, it's going to be very difficult leaving that 34+ million on the table. Even if he goes the Horford route and signs a 4/100 type deal, he's still giving up millions because he could simply opt in and stay, opt in and get traded, and either way he's a UFA next summer and could very likely get that same deal.
I have a pretty good sense that Hayward/Stevens/Ainge are all on the same page right now regarding his situation right now. Remember, he has a pretty significant trade kicker too....so he does have some protection....If Ainge approaches him about a trade to a location that he doesn't want to go, that trade kicker will either A. scare the team away or B. he gets even MORE money to go play 1 season in a city he doesn't really want to be... But if it's a trade to a city where he wants to be long-term, then he can waive that kicker making it easier to get the deal done.
If Hayward is to get opt in and then get traded, I highly doubt Ainge is sending him somewhere he doesn't want to go. It would very likely be to a city he wants to be even if it requires bringing in a third team.

[SmartWentCrazy]

Read on Twitter

Bernadoni is completely on point here. Can anyone explain why an opt-out and resign for like 3y/85-90m is not the move for both sides here? It saves us $6-7m on the cap this year, without actually costing him $6-7m this year. It increases his trade value, and eliminates his flight risk this offseason or next. And a guy with an injury history gets some more financial security, rather than rolling the dice to wait a year for free agency.

Even if the eventual move is to flip him or depth or a big, or to reduce payroll to make room for Tatum's extension next year, you do that IMO.

Because a 28-30M AAV for the next three years leaves us with nearly 130M locked up in Hayward, Tatum, Brown and Kemba and would ultimately cost us Smart while still resulting in us having a ~40 to 50M tax bill after this season? And people would recognize how **** we were [much like with Philly now] and demand a pound of flesh to take on our salaries?

[SmartWentCrazy]

From the oft mentioned hawks fan insider:

He is hearing the same thing others are about Gordon Hayward. He is looking to opt-out. He is looking to resign or find an SnT deal to Dallas. This one is Boston's to lose. He seems to want to resign but with more years and a less competitive market than 2021.

Can get re-signing for a 4/80 type. Dont think he’d do it, but understand the long term certainty itd give him. Also think a deal to Dallas to clear their books makes sense. They have a lot of good bench pieces and could look to bring in Hayward and another max guy.

[ConstableGeneva]

If he opts out...

I'm topped out at 100/4 yrs or 80/3 yrs. Will try to haggle that last year (if 4 yrs) to have a team option and/or partial guarantee. Work in bonuses so assured salary wouldn't be too high.

Hayward on a longer deal gets us a better return. Cs can also decide who to keep after next year if they don't win the chip. I personally would trade Kemba first.


If he opts in...

I don't expect a Myles Turner or Aaron Gordon level of player in return. I just don't see it.

[grindtime22]

Bernadoni is completely on point here. Can anyone explain why an opt-out and resign for like 3y/85-90m is not the move for both sides here? It saves us $6-7m on the cap this year, without actually costing him $6-7m this year. It increases his trade value, and eliminates his flight risk this offseason or next. And a guy with an injury history gets some more financial security, rather than rolling the dice to wait a year for free agency.

Even if the eventual move is to flip him or depth or a big, or to reduce payroll to make room for Tatum's extension next year, you do that IMO.

The argument is that an apparent $10 million reduction in one year's pay, for example, might wind up being a true $6-7 million reduction instead.

I'm not sure how much difference that actually makes to Hayward's calculations.

That said, the whole confusion could help push Hayward to a mindset that:
-- He can't accurately optimize his future income.
-- He has vastly more money than he and his kids will ever spend anyway.
-- He should just do what feels right to him across multiple considerations and accept whatever the financial ramifications turn out to be.

I thought the article actually made no sense at all. “It’s better to lose 30% of 20 million than 34 million”. Said another way “it’s better to make 14 million than 23.8 million” which no one would agree with.

I get opting out for long term security but the escrow doesn’t factor in much imo. He’s going to opt out for 90 over 3 years just so he puts 9 million in escrow this year instead of 10.2? He’d do it for the long term security (if he did it).

The point is that future money is more than current money in a deal. It may not make a difference, but that is all this is really trying to say. The math is different. Lets say we offered 4/100 (I'm making that number up). The starting point in team Hayward's thinking would usually be, would i do significantly better than 3/66 next year? It isn't that simple. If you could chose when to have your biggest number, it would be a future year.

So 34,22,22,22 is less than 25,25,25,25. It isn't a massive difference. You are probably talking only 3 to 4 million less in that example. If it is an escalating contract, it would be slightly more. It may not be a big enough difference to really matter, but it is a factor. Security would be a bigger factor.

[GoCeltics123]

From the oft mentioned hawks fan insider:

He is hearing the same thing others are about Gordon Hayward. He is looking to opt-out. He is looking to resign or find an SnT deal to Dallas. This one is Boston's to lose. He seems to want to resign but with more years and a less competitive market than 2021.

Can get re-signing for a 4/80 type. Dont think he’d do it, but understand the long term certainty itd give him. Also think a deal to Dallas to clear their books makes sense. They have a lot of good bench pieces and could look to bring in Hayward and another max guy.

Maybe THJ and Curry for Hayward and a first or two? Could make sense for both sides.

[Darth Celtic]

Bernadoni is completely on point here. Can anyone explain why an opt-out and resign for like 3y/85-90m is not the move for both sides here? It saves us $6-7m on the cap this year, without actually costing him $6-7m this year. It increases his trade value, and eliminates his flight risk this offseason or next. And a guy with an injury history gets some more financial security, rather than rolling the dice to wait a year for free agency.

Even if the eventual move is to flip him or depth or a big, or to reduce payroll to make room for Tatum's extension next year, you do that IMO.

The argument is that an apparent $10 million reduction in one year's pay, for example, might wind up being a true $6-7 million reduction instead.

I'm not sure how much difference that actually makes to Hayward's calculations.

I hear you, but it doesn't need to be much with the numbers I am talking about. Bigger question is what he feels his earning potential is next offseason. I think the chances are pretty good that he can make more money by taking the $34m and waiting than signing a 3y/85-90m now, but he's not Giannis and there is a lot of risk for him on that dice roll.

Well, it's about escrow and how players get paid. They might be on a deal that pays 34m, but it's about % of profits, so the league guesses on what profits might be worst case and holds some salary from all players, usualy 5-10% in escrow. It gets paid out at league end if they made all the money expected, if not it's held and paid to owners to get that actual BRI split.

Because of huge loss in money that 34m might have 30% removed this year he won't get back. So 24m is actual pay out this year on 1 year. Now what if next year we get fans back, profits go way up and they have 0% back to owners. And he signs 3 years at 70m. he ends up with 94m actual money but risks injury and ending with a 3 year 45m contract or worse.

If he opts out and goes 4 years 25m with increased money each year. 22m, 24m, 26m, 28m. And the 22 only gives 15m, he ends up with 15 plus 24 plus 26 plus 28 = 93m. Same as above basically with security against another injury.

Boston saves money and avoids tax. He gets same long term money opting out because this year so much is going back to owners where in the future it's unlikely that high.