Trade Ideas Thread

[SmartWentCrazy]

Well Hayward is probably out for the season now. You'd think he would defiantly opt in to his last year 34 mil now right?

I think he would. But I also think he’d think long and hard about a 4/90 extension as well.

[CelticsPride18]

Well Hayward is probably out for the season now. You'd think he would defiantly opt in to his last year 34 mil now right?

I think he would. But I also think he’d think long and hard about a 4/90 extension as well.

I get confused with extensions. If we do that does that include the 34m for next season or the extension is 4 years on top of his old contract?

[themoneyteam2]

I wonder if Hayward's injury makes him more inclined to accept something along the lines of 3 yr/70 or 4 yr/90 extensions now just to have the financial security. I believe he'd opt into the $34 million option but you never know.

[djFan71]

Well Hayward is probably out for the season now. You'd think he would defiantly opt in to his last year 34 mil now right?

I think he would. But I also think he’d think long and hard about a 4/90 extension as well.

Do you still offer that if you're Danny? We got picks galore that we eventually need PT for. And even down at $20M+ it doesn't leave much room for bench behind Jays/Kemba/Smart salaries. It's tough, cuz he's so damn good when he's healthy and attacking. But, we just haven't seen that enough and even that new price is a lot to pay for a 4th wheel.

[snowman]

I have been on don't trade Hayward all season. But I'm now leaning toward shipping him out. He can't stay healthy. He is only going to get older, and with more injury concerns. We can't have 25+ mil (not to mention 34Mil) tied up in a player only able to play 60 - 70 % of the season.

[bucknersrevenge]

I say you shop him next year at the deadline if he's doing well and see what he's worth. If you don't like anything, don't push it. Just play the season out and move on. We should have at least the MLE to add another player of some quality. Next season is Hayward's last here. That's how it should be.

[Parliament10]

That Hayward for Gobert idea is sounding better and better.
If we Traded them this offseason, would we get Gobert's Bird Rights?

[Ernest]

Well Hayward is probably out for the season now. You'd think he would defiantly opt in to his last year 34 mil now right?

I think he would. But I also think he’d think long and hard about a 4/90 extension as well.

Do you still offer that if you're Danny? We got picks galore that we eventually need PT for. And even down at $20M+ it doesn't leave much room for bench behind Jays/Kemba/Smart salaries. It's tough, cuz he's so damn good when he's healthy and attacking. But, we just haven't seen that enough and even that new price is a lot to pay for a 4th wheel.

I'm thinking the same thing, but I can't tell to what extent me being pissed off is clouding my thinking. We have so muh money tied up in a few players, but we're not good enough to attract ring chasers to cheaply fill out the bench.

[SmartWentCrazy]

Well Hayward is probably out for the season now. You'd think he would defiantly opt in to his last year 34 mil now right?

I think he would. But I also think he’d think long and hard about a 4/90 extension as well.

Do you still offer that if you're Danny? We got picks galore that we eventually need PT for. And even down at $20M+ it doesn't leave much room for bench behind Jays/Kemba/Smart salaries. It's tough, cuz he's so damn good when he's healthy and attacking. But, we just haven't seen that enough and even that new price is a lot to pay for a 4th wheel.

Yes. I absolutely still offer that. It’d be a great deal for us and hopefully the long term security convinces him to sign.

If you would've like that extension a week ago, a rolled ankle shouldn't convince you elsewise.

[SmartWentCrazy]

Well Hayward is probably out for the season now. You'd think he would defiantly opt in to his last year 34 mil now right?

I think he would. But I also think he’d think long and hard about a 4/90 extension as well.

I get confused with extensions. If we do that does that include the 34m for next season or the extension is 4 years on top of his old contract?

Can structure it either way— opt in and extend [tack on 3/~60 on the back end] or opt out and extend at 4/~90.

[ConstableGeneva]

I think he would. But I also think he’d think long and hard about a 4/90 extension as well.

I get confused with extensions. If we do that does that include the 34m for next season or the extension is 4 years on top of his old contract?

Can structure it either way— opt in and extend [tack on 3/~60 on the back end] or opt out and extend at 4/~90.

The first one is an extension. The second one is a totally new contract. No longer considered an extension since he becomes an FA as soon as he opts out.

[SmartWentCrazy]

I get confused with extensions. If we do that does that include the 34m for next season or the extension is 4 years on top of his old contract?

Can structure it either way— opt in and extend [tack on 3/~60 on the back end] or opt out and extend at 4/~90.

The first one is an extension. The second one is a totally new contract. No longer considered an extension since he becomes an FA as soon as he opts out.

For sure, it is technically a new deal — my assumption is that he wouldnt opt out without something pre-negotiated and I loosely used extension based on that.

[ConstableGeneva]

Can structure it either way— opt in and extend [tack on 3/~60 on the back end] or opt out and extend at 4/~90.

The first one is an extension. The second one is a totally new contract. No longer considered an extension since he becomes an FA as soon as he opts out.

For sure, it is technically a new deal — my assumption is that he wouldnt opt out without something pre-negotiated and I loosely used extension based on that.

Yep, that would indeed be the case. Maybe I've being naive, but I don't think this will be similar to Kyrie/Horford who left us hanging. Because of Hayward's history with his coach, his injury history, and the uncertainty surrounding NBA next season, he'd be more open to discussing his options with his current club. There could even be an option where he agrees to said new contract or an extension knowing full well he could be traded to a desired destination.

I only pointed out the distinction to avoid the confusion in discussion.

[SmartWentCrazy]

The first one is an extension. The second one is a totally new contract. No longer considered an extension since he becomes an FA as soon as he opts out.

For sure, it is technically a new deal — my assumption is that he wouldnt opt out without something pre-negotiated and I loosely used extension based on that.

Yep, that would indeed be the case. Maybe I've being naive, but I don't think this will be similar to Kyrie/Horford who left us hanging. Because of Hayward's history with his coach, his injury history, and the uncertainty surrounding NBA next season, he'd be more open to discussing his options with his current club. There could even be an option where he agrees to said new contract or an extension knowing full well he could be traded to a desired destination.

I only pointed out the distinction to avoid the confusion in discussion.

Honestly, the biggest thing to me was that he sold his SD house and moved to the Boston suburbs to live full-year— thats not something you do if you’re not planning on sticking around past the current contract.

Its possible he gets offered a max this offseason but I doubt it given everything going on in the world— that makes it likely he stays IMO.

I think he sticks around for something between 4/90 and 4/100 [i.e. something below what Jaylen makes because these things matter unfortunately] with an under the table ‘don’t trade me without my consent’.

[100proof]

That Hayward for Gobert idea is sounding better and better.
If we Traded them this offseason, would we get Gobert's Bird Rights?

Should get them.

I would do that in a heart beat.

The thought of Rudy defending the paint with excellent defenders on the wing. Wow. Gamebreaking defense imo.

[RickyDizzle]

That Hayward for Gobert idea is sounding better and better.
If we Traded them this offseason, would we get Gobert's Bird Rights?

Should get them.

I would do that in a heart beat.

The thought of Rudy defending the paint with excellent defenders on the wing. Wow. Gamebreaking defense imo.

And the jazz consider this why? Are we adding Theis or Rob Will and multiple 1sts?

[100proof]

To GSW
Hayward and #14

to Chicago
Wiggins, Langford, Edwards, Poirier, #20, #30

To Boston
#1, Markannen, Porter Jr and Dragon Bender


GSW moves down alot in the draft, but adds a vet on a 1 year deal who will add to their star power. Move prevents future lux tax problems

Chicago takes a gamble on another young scorer in Wiggins, adds a guy they love in Langford, Turns their pick into 2 picks and adds some cheap depth. Move away from Porter Jr's waste of money contract.

Boston takes on Porters waste of a contract but turns an expiring hayward, Langford and depth into The top pick and Lauri Markannen. Porter can be used for the season off the bench, or flipped elsewhere for further cap savings. Boston shed about 5 mill in salary.

Draft either Edwards or Wiseman depending on who shows better to Danny and Brad.

Kemba/Smart
Brown/
Tatum/Porter Jr
Lauri/Grant W
Theis/Timelord

[hugepatsfan]

Well Hayward is probably out for the season now. You'd think he would defiantly opt in to his last year 34 mil now right?

I think he would. But I also think he’d think long and hard about a 4/90 extension as well.

I get confused with extensions. If we do that does that include the 34m for next season or the extension is 4 years on top of his old contract?

Either way works. Extension rules are strict if you're offering a player a raise. It's limited to 120% of what he makes int he last year of his current deal. But for Hayward, not really an issue since his next deal isn't going to be as much as his option. Just as an example, let's say the number they agree on is 4 years, $90M. It could be structured two ways:

1) He opts in and we add on years to his current deal:

'20-21 - $34.2M (player option)
'21-22 - $17.3M
'22-23 - $18.6M
'23-24 - $20.0M

2) He opts out and re-signs for a new deal:

'20-21 - $20.1M
'21-22 - $21.7M
'22-23 - $23.3M
'23-24 - $25.0M

Either way, he gets $90M over 4 years.

I think in the first scenario, Hayward would rather hit FA next year. I think he'd gamble that he can sign for more than 3 years, $56M by waiting it out.

In the second scenario, the same thing applies. However, we can offer him a lot more in this scenario than 4 years, $90M and get below the tax. Let's say we upped the '20-21 salary to $25M. Now he'd have the following salaries:

'20-21 - $25.0M
'21-22 - $27.0M
'22-23 - $29.0M
'23-24 - $31.0M

That's a 4 year, $112M. For Hayward to turn that down, he'd be gambling that he can sign for more than 3 years, $87M next year. I think that'd be enough money for him to take the security.

Now for us, I think that's more than we want to pay Hayward down the line. But it sheds his salary by almost $10M in '20-21 which means we can avoid the luxury tax another year. Down the line that means no repeater tax before Kemba expires. So overall it would save us lots of money vs letting Hayward re-sign for less next year. So there's incentive for us to do this.

The disincentive is that it ruins potential max cap space in the '23-24 offseason. If we avoid committing to Hayward for that year, we should have max cap space to sign a player with Jayson/Jalen/Marcus/rookie scale guys. So it's a balance of if we want ot take the short term hit of letting Hayward walk and really hurting the current window to help us open the next one.

The ideal scenario for us is that Hayward opts out and signs a new THREE year deal. That way we can get below the tax, keep Hayward for the 3-year-Kemba-window and then have max cap space for the next core player. But for only 3 years, not sure we can get enough money for Hayward to opt out. From the numbers I've crunched this is ABOUT the most money we can offer him on a new 3 year deal and stay below the tax:

'20-21 - $28.0M
'21-22 - $30.24M
'22-23 - $32.48M

That's a 3 year, $90.72M deal. I think we can get below the tax if with that if we make some other cost cutting moves. That means relying on young guys off the bench next year (Timelord, Romeo, draft pick). But it would let us keep Hayward for another 3 years with Kemba so we have our core. We won't have to worry about repeater tax. And we have max cap space in the 2023 offseason to add a core piece.

We can also add a partially guaranteed fourth year for Hayward. The total amount on the extension above would be $34.72M in '23-24. But let's say it's guaranteed for $9M. We could then waive Hayward and stretch the $9M over 3 years for the cap. So it'd only count $3M in that offseason which should preserve cap space. But for Hayward, that raises it to a 3 year, $99.72M deal. So it maybe adds that extra juice to push us over the top.

This is all about trying to play best-of-all-worlds of keeping Hayward for the next 3 years with Kemba, not paying repeater tax, adding a max FA to play with Jayson/Jaylen/Marcus down the road.

[SmartWentCrazy]

I think he would. But I also think he’d think long and hard about a 4/90 extension as well.

I get confused with extensions. If we do that does that include the 34m for next season or the extension is 4 years on top of his old contract?

Either way works. Extension rules are strict if you're offering a player a raise. It's limited to 120% of what he makes int he last year of his current deal. But for Hayward, not really an issue since his next deal isn't going to be as much as his option. Just as an example, let's say the number they agree on is 4 years, $90M. It could be structured two ways:

1) He opts in and we add on years to his current deal:

'20-21 - $34.2M (player option)
'21-22 - $17.3M
'22-23 - $18.6M
'23-24 - $20.0M

2) He opts out and re-signs for a new deal:

'20-21 - $20.1M
'21-22 - $21.7M
'22-23 - $23.3M
'23-24 - $25.0M

Either way, he gets $90M over 4 years.

I think in the first scenario, Hayward would rather hit FA next year. I think he'd gamble that he can sign for more than 3 years, $56M by waiting it out.

In the second scenario, the same thing applies. However, we can offer him a lot more in this scenario than 4 years, $90M and get below the tax. Let's say we upped the '20-21 salary to $25M. Now he'd have the following salaries:

'20-21 - $25.0M
'21-22 - $27.0M
'22-23 - $29.0M
'23-24 - $31.0M

That's a 4 year, $112M. For Hayward to turn that down, he'd be gambling that he can sign for more than 3 years, $87M next year. I think that'd be enough money for him to take the security.

Now for us, I think that's more than we want to pay Hayward down the line. But it sheds his salary by almost $10M in '20-21 which means we can avoid the luxury tax another year. Down the line that means no repeater tax before Kemba expires. So overall it would save us lots of money vs letting Hayward re-sign for less next year. So there's incentive for us to do this.

The disincentive is that it ruins potential max cap space in the '23-24 offseason. If we avoid committing to Hayward for that year, we should have max cap space to sign a player with Jayson/Jalen/Marcus/rookie scale guys. So it's a balance of if we want ot take the short term hit of letting Hayward walk and really hurting the current window to help us open the next one.

The ideal scenario for us is that Hayward opts out and signs a new THREE year deal. That way we can get below the tax, keep Hayward for the 3-year-Kemba-window and then have max cap space for the next core player. But for only 3 years, not sure we can get enough money for Hayward to opt out. From the numbers I've crunched this is ABOUT the most money we can offer him on a new 3 year deal and stay below the tax:

'20-21 - $28.0M
'21-22 - $30.24M
'22-23 - $32.48M

That's a 3 year, $90.72M deal. I think we can get below the tax if with that if we make some other cost cutting moves. That means relying on young guys off the bench next year (Timelord, Romeo, draft pick). But it would let us keep Hayward for another 3 years with Kemba so we have our core. We won't have to worry about repeater tax. And we have max cap space in the 2023 offseason to add a core piece.

We can also add a partially guaranteed fourth year for Hayward. The total amount on the extension above would be $34.72M in '23-24. But let's say it's guaranteed for $9M. We could then waive Hayward and stretch the $9M over 3 years for the cap. So it'd only count $3M in that offseason which should preserve cap space. But for Hayward, that raises it to a 3 year, $99.72M deal. So it maybe adds that extra juice to push us over the top.

This is all about trying to play best-of-all-worlds of keeping Hayward for the next 3 years with Kemba, not paying repeater tax, adding a max FA to play with Jayson/Jaylen/Marcus down the road.

I get what youre saying, but I dont think theres a chance in hell we offer Hayward a deal above what Jaylen is making from an AAV perspective. Yes, this stuff shouldnt matter, but players are human and I’m willing to bet most wouldnt take kindly to Hayward exceeding Brown.

[djFan71]

Well Hayward is probably out for the season now. You'd think he would defiantly opt in to his last year 34 mil now right?

I think he would. But I also think he’d think long and hard about a 4/90 extension as well.

Do you still offer that if you're Danny? We got picks galore that we eventually need PT for. And even down at $20M+ it doesn't leave much room for bench behind Jays/Kemba/Smart salaries. It's tough, cuz he's so damn good when he's healthy and attacking. But, we just haven't seen that enough and even that new price is a lot to pay for a 4th wheel.

I was on the fence before, but I do think you can use one more injury to rethink things. It's part "it can happen to anyone", but also part "it keeps happening to him". Tatum landed on someone's foot in the seeding games the same way and was fine. Rozier did it all the time. Some guys are just tougher, and others get dinged up. He'll probably recover fine from it, but it gives me pause committing another 3 years and an additional $56M to him.

We can't go long term with 3 maxes, a $20M+ and Smart contract and still be able to build a team around them. We could take the lux tax hit next year, and then be free to rework things without him. Or, if next year is amazing and we want to resign him, we have rights, and we'd be in the driver's seat. I know you could end up paying more, but the flexibility of not boxing ourselves in to having him is probably worth it to me at this point.