Hayward Undecided

[TheOGJabroni]

Is there any possible way danny could form a superteam with griffin and haywarf?

Really highly doubtful. The point of preserving so much cap space was to sign a max player without having to give up serious assets in a trade. We would have to do so in order to open up 30 more million to get both. You do that if it's LeBron/Wade in free agency like a few years back, not when it's Hayward/Griffin. Take one and adjust the roster from there.

[Slartibartfast]

“I do hear, this isn’t coming from Hayward’s camp so it’s under the gossip category and not the necessarily reporting category, but I do hear that Hayward has significant concerns about playing with Isaiah Thomas. In other words he wants the ball in his hands, he doesn’t just want to watch Isaiah dribble around and do his thing.”

Soooo, it's coming from your ass?

He says right in the quote that it's gossip. Sometimes there's smoke there. I find it intriguing that it is a rumor going around NBA writer circles at least. Would make it easier to trade IT as grabbing Hayward was one of my main arguments in favor of keeping IT.

Yeah, I'd be way more excited about adding Hayward if I felt it didn't mean maxing IT.

[Gant]

“I do hear, this isn’t coming from Hayward’s camp so it’s under the gossip category and not the necessarily reporting category, but I do hear that Hayward has significant concerns about playing with Isaiah Thomas. In other words he wants the ball in his hands, he doesn’t just want to watch Isaiah dribble around and do his thing.”

Soooo, it's coming from your ass?

Isaiah can play off the ball.

This goes in the same file as "How will Isaiah and Fultz play together?" The answer is: it won't be a problem.

[ConstableGeneva]

Horford not one to troll though. Offseason has started.

[OFWGKTA]

Horford not one to troll though. Offseason has started.

Crowder seeing IT and Horford follow Hayward:

[Slartibartfast]

“I do hear, this isn’t coming from Hayward’s camp so it’s under the gossip category and not the necessarily reporting category, but I do hear that Hayward has significant concerns about playing with Isaiah Thomas. In other words he wants the ball in his hands, he doesn’t just want to watch Isaiah dribble around and do his thing.”

Soooo, it's coming from your ass?

Isaiah can play off the ball.

This goes in the same file as "How will Isaiah and Fultz play together?" The answer is: it won't be a problem.

IT can shoot and attack closeouts so yes he can play off the ball, but doesn't mean you want him to. His value is as a guy who can crank his usage up to 30+ % and actually increase his efficiency. Drop him down to the secondary role he had in Sacramento/Phoenix and he doesn't harbor as much value.

And the guy playing next to him will necessarily have to up his defensive energy due to the frequent need to relieve IT of the duty of guarding scoring PGs.

[klemen4]

I do not think there is a way we can get both Hayward and Griffin.

Ok you sign Hayward in cap space...lets say Rozier is trade for future pick, Hayward agrees to 29,9 million instead of 30.3.

...than if we combine AB, Crowder, Smart we are at 20.1 million...still short, but imo that is a package Doc would take no doubt...but that woud mean Griffin would have to sign for around 25 per year, not happening imo. And we have nothing to add in salary to get to around 25 million.

it/fultz
brown/fultz
hayward
griffin
horford/zizic

NOt possible but...man

[KGboss]

I do not think there is a way we can get both Hayward and Griffin.

Ok you sign Hayward in cap space...lets say Rozier is trade for future pick, Hayward agrees to 29,9 million instead of 30.3.

...than if we combine AB, Crowder, Smart we are at 20.1 million...still short, but imo that is a package Doc would take no doubt...but that woud mean Griffin would have to sign for around 25 per year, not happening imo. And we have nothing to add in salary to get to around 25 million.

it/fultz
brown/fultz
hayward
griffin
horford/zizic

NOt possible but...man

Banner 18

[165bows]

Is there any possible way danny could form a superteam with griffin and haywarf?

The possibility has been covered pretty in-depth by caveman and myself. It would be difficult but outside shot of it being theoretically possible.

[Darth Celtic]

I know trades where both team are under the tax, it is currently within 50% for salary right? making trades much easier in the new CBA? Is that true for sign and trades?

[Captain_Caveman]

I know trades where both team are under the tax, it is currently within 50% for salary right? making trades much easier in the new CBA? Is that true for sign and trades?

The issue was with BYC implications for the incoming players. As both Griffin and Hayward were getting raises of more than 20%, they would be subject to base year compensation rules, I believe?

Meaning that they would have a much different cap number in trades on Utah's and LAC's sides. As in, they count for $30m coming our way in the deal, but only $15-20m on their sides. Or something. BYC is admittedly a blind spot for me in the CBA rules, but Andrew's info there appears to be correct. This would likely vastly complicate matters over my proposed scenario in which Amir/Zeller/Jerebko were given Keith Bogans deals to help match numbers without gutting our core (Olynyk as a sign-and-trade is also a possibility, with its own extensive cap rules and associated challenges there).

If that is in fact the case, I think Griffin is more of a backup plan to Hayward. Or, not and. Either would be signed outright with cap room IMO, meaning that we would need to dump some ballast to get there. Crowder is one possibility, but the intriguing one to me is Bradley, who we will quite possibly not resign in a year anyways. Dumping Bradley could allow us a max slot plus the ability to retain Olynyk, or alternately, a max slot and possibly a pick in the 5th-10th overall range (should we include other assets).

I'm definitely still open to landing both Hayward and Griffin, but think it would take serious acrobatics and possibly get up the the level of dumping core guys like IT in addition to the usual suspects of Bradley and/or Crowder and/or Smart.

[chrisab123]

Is there any possible way danny could form a superteam with griffin and haywarf?

The possibility has been covered pretty in-depth by caveman and myself. It would be difficult but outside shot of it being theoretically possible.

I would think it would have to involve a S&T of KO...or would he already have been renounced to bring on Hayward?

I have Rozier/Smart/Bradley/Crowder/Mickey/Jackson in a S&T to LA for Blake.

[VeryMuchWoke]

Yeah, I'd be way more excited about adding Hayward if I felt it didn't mean maxing IT.

Why would signing Hayward mean maxing IT?

I understand you sell Hayward on playing with IT, but Hayward will absorb all the remaining cap-space this year, so he automatically rules out an extension at higher money, ensuring IT will be a free agent. At that point, Hayward's scoring will make us far less reliant on ITs, so we'll be in a significantly better negotiating position. We'll also be a better team, which makes a hometown discount more likely.

It's been reported, by Jared Weiss, that IT is willing to take less money to resign. That's more likely to be true if we're (a) a better team and (b) up against the tax.

[chrisab123]

I know trades where both team are under the tax, it is currently within 50% for salary right? making trades much easier in the new CBA? Is that true for sign and trades?

The issue was with BYC implications for the incoming players. As both Griffin and Hayward were getting raises of more than 20%, they would be subject to base year compensation rules, I believe?

Meaning that they would have a much different cap number in trades on Utah's and LAC's sides. As in, they count for $30m coming our way in the deal, but only $15-20m on their sides. Or something. BYC is admittedly a blind spot for me in the CBA rules, but Andrew's info there appears to be correct. This would likely vastly complicate matters over my proposed scenario in which Amir/Zeller/Jerebko were given Keith Bogans deals to help match numbers without gutting our core (Olynyk as a sign-and-trade is also a possibility, with its own extensive cap rules and associated challenges there).

If that is in fact the case, I think Griffin is more of a backup plan to Hayward. Or, not and. Either would be signed outright with cap room IMO, meaning that we would need to dump some ballast to get there. Crowder is one possibility, but the intriguing one to me is Bradley, who we will quite possibly not resign in a year anyways. Dumping Bradley could allow us a max slot plus the ability to retain Olynyk, or alternately, a max slot and possibly a pick in the 5th-10th overall range (should we include other assets).

I'm definitely still open to landing both Hayward and Griffin, but think it would take serious acrobatics and possibly get up the the level of dumping core guys like IT in addition to the usual suspects of Bradley and/or Crowder and/or Smart.

I would hate to see Olynyk on this team next year. He's great 1 game and useless for the next 10.

[Green_teamer]

I know trades where both team are under the tax, it is currently within 50% for salary right? making trades much easier in the new CBA? Is that true for sign and trades?

The issue was with BYC implications for the incoming players. As both Griffin and Hayward were getting raises of more than 20%, they would be subject to base year compensation rules, I believe?

Meaning that they would have a much different cap number in trades on Utah's and LAC's sides. As in, they count for $30m coming our way in the deal, but only $15-20m on their sides. Or something. BYC is admittedly a blind spot for me in the CBA rules, but Andrew's info there appears to be correct. This would likely vastly complicate matters over my proposed scenario in which Amir/Zeller/Jerebko were given Keith Bogans deals to help match numbers without gutting our core (Olynyk as a sign-and-trade is also a possibility, with its own extensive cap rules and associated challenges there).

If that is in fact the case, I think Griffin is more of a backup plan to Hayward. Or, not and. Either would be signed outright with cap room IMO, meaning that we would need to dump some ballast to get there. Crowder is one possibility, but the intriguing one to me is Bradley, who we will quite possibly not resign in a year anyways. Dumping Bradley could allow us a max slot plus the ability to retain Olynyk, or alternately, a max slot and possibly a pick in the 5th-10th overall range (should we include other assets).

I'm definitely still open to landing both Hayward and Griffin, but think it would take serious acrobatics and possibly get up the the level of dumping core guys like IT in addition to the usual suspects of Bradley and/or Crowder and/or Smart.

I would hate to see Olynyk on this team next year. He's great 1 game and useless for the next 10.

I'd be willing to take him back only if we completely strike out in free agency.

[Captain_Caveman]

The issue was with BYC implications for the incoming players. As both Griffin and Hayward were getting raises of more than 20%, they would be subject to base year compensation rules, I believe?

Meaning that they would have a much different cap number in trades on Utah's and LAC's sides. As in, they count for $30m coming our way in the deal, but only $15-20m on their sides. Or something. BYC is admittedly a blind spot for me in the CBA rules, but Andrew's info there appears to be correct. This would likely vastly complicate matters over my proposed scenario in which Amir/Zeller/Jerebko were given Keith Bogans deals to help match numbers without gutting our core (Olynyk as a sign-and-trade is also a possibility, with its own extensive cap rules and associated challenges there).

If that is in fact the case, I think Griffin is more of a backup plan to Hayward. Or, not and. Either would be signed outright with cap room IMO, meaning that we would need to dump some ballast to get there. Crowder is one possibility, but the intriguing one to me is Bradley, who we will quite possibly not resign in a year anyways. Dumping Bradley could allow us a max slot plus the ability to retain Olynyk, or alternately, a max slot and possibly a pick in the 5th-10th overall range (should we include other assets).

I'm definitely still open to landing both Hayward and Griffin, but think it would take serious acrobatics and possibly get up the the level of dumping core guys like IT in addition to the usual suspects of Bradley and/or Crowder and/or Smart.

I would hate to see Olynyk on this team next year. He's great 1 game and useless for the next 10.

I'd be willing to take him back only if we completely strike out in free agency.

I was talking about keeping Olynyk while adding a max free agent. We are not going to be particularly deep in the frontcourt, and will not have the means to do much about that if we add Hayward with cap room.

P.S. Kelly won us our biggest game in like 5 years just a month ago.

[Green_teamer]

I would hate to see Olynyk on this team next year. He's great 1 game and useless for the next 10.

I'd be willing to take him back only if we completely strike out in free agency.

I was talking about keeping Olynyk while adding a max free agent. We are not going to be particularly deep in the frontcourt, and will not have the means to do much about that if we add Hayward with cap room.

P.S. Kelly won us our biggest game in like 5 years just a month ago.

We have to renounce him to get max cap space. Assuming we sign hayward how would we resign him? I figure he's gonna get around 15m a year.

[SparringPartner]

Yeah, I'd be way more excited about adding Hayward if I felt it didn't mean maxing IT.

Why would signing Hayward mean maxing IT?

I understand you sell Hayward on playing with IT, but Hayward will absorb all the remaining cap-space this year, so he automatically rules out an extension at higher money, ensuring IT will be a free agent. At that point, Hayward's scoring will make us far less reliant on ITs, so we'll be in a significantly better negotiating position. We'll also be a better team, which makes a hometown discount more likely.

It's been reported, by Jared Weiss, that IT is willing to take less money to resign. That's more likely to be true if we're (a) a better team and (b) up against the tax.

Link? I thought Weiss reported IT4 didn't mind waiting till next year, not that he would take a discount. I could be wrong


Sent from my iPad using RealGM Forums

[Slartibartfast]

Yeah, I'd be way more excited about adding Hayward if I felt it didn't mean maxing IT.

Why would signing Hayward mean maxing IT?

I understand you sell Hayward on playing with IT, but Hayward will absorb all the remaining cap-space this year, so he automatically rules out an extension at higher money, ensuring IT will be a free agent. At that point, Hayward's scoring will make us far less reliant on ITs, so we'll be in a significantly better negotiating position. We'll also be a better team, which makes a hometown discount more likely.

It's been reported, by Jared Weiss, that IT is willing to take less money to resign. That's more likely to be true if we're (a) a better team and (b) up against the tax.

Because I'm doubting whether Ainge would let him walk for nothing when he's already spending $60 mil on Hayward and Horford and he doesn't have the flexibility to replace him for the same money. Ainge wasn't having any of that with Perk, Rondo, Pierce or KG. Not even Jeff Green. And he took losing TA and Ray really hard.

With IT, I think it's either we trade him now/at the deadline or we resign him. And the conventional wisdom, one conjectural rumor that Hayward doesn't want to play with him notwithstanding, is that adding Hayward is contingent on IT being here (and would make trading IT at the deadline very awkward).

As for IT leaving money on the table, I'm skeptical. A mil or two under the max maybe, but I'd be very surprised at anything else. He made league minimum for 3 years and he'll be coming up off 4 years of barely over the MLE. 29 years old, undersized, with a game based on quickness and slashing/drawing fouls... We're talking about his only chance at a big payday by NBA standards.

But if he's down for another bargain contract, sign me up. Just don't see any compelling reason why he would or should. We aren't the Spurs. We don't get insane, borderline sketchy discounts.

[OFWGKTA]

I know trades where both team are under the tax, it is currently within 50% for salary right? making trades much easier in the new CBA? Is that true for sign and trades?

The issue was with BYC implications for the incoming players. As both Griffin and Hayward were getting raises of more than 20%, they would be subject to base year compensation rules, I believe?

Meaning that they would have a much different cap number in trades on Utah's and LAC's sides. As in, they count for $30m coming our way in the deal, but only $15-20m on their sides. Or something. BYC is admittedly a blind spot for me in the CBA rules, but Andrew's info there appears to be correct. This would likely vastly complicate matters over my proposed scenario in which Amir/Zeller/Jerebko were given Keith Bogans deals to help match numbers without gutting our core (Olynyk as a sign-and-trade is also a possibility, with its own extensive cap rules and associated challenges there).

If that is in fact the case, I think Griffin is more of a backup plan to Hayward. Or, not and. Either would be signed outright with cap room IMO, meaning that we would need to dump some ballast to get there. Crowder is one possibility, but the intriguing one to me is Bradley, who we will quite possibly not resign in a year anyways. Dumping Bradley could allow us a max slot plus the ability to retain Olynyk, or alternately, a max slot and possibly a pick in the 5th-10th overall range (should we include other assets).

I'm definitely still open to landing both Hayward and Griffin, but think it would take serious acrobatics and possibly get up the the level of dumping core guys like IT in addition to the usual suspects of Bradley and/or Crowder and/or Smart.

I just looked it up on the CBA FAQ and it says its the higher number between their previous salary and 50% of their new salary, so for Hayward it would be $16,073,140 outgoing from Jazz POV, $20,140,828 outgoing from LAC POV. Blake seems simple enough, as we could do something like Amir at 14 mil (and not trigger the BYC), Jerebko at 4ish, and Crowder (25 mil total). For Hayward it's trickier, the more I look at it, the more it seems like a third team would have to get involved to take some of the salary, I think Bradley and Zeller going to Utah (matches from the Jazz side), then Olynyk at 17 mil/yr to a third team(counts as 8.5 going out for us due to BYC) to a team that can just absorb him with cap space. I think doing it this way would work.

edit: gonna write it out...


Celtics out: Amir, Jerebko, Crowder, Bradley, Zeller, Olynyk (8.5 from our side) = ~50.5 mil total
Celtics in: Hayward, Griffin, conditional 2nd = ~60 mil

Clippers out: Griffin (20.142 Clippers POV)
Clippers in: Amir, Jerebko, Crowder (25 mil)

Utah out: Hayward (16.1 mil Jazz POV)
Utah in: Bradley, Zeller (17 mil)

Brooklyn for example in: Olynyk (17 mil)
Brooklyn out: conditional 2nd rounder


IT/Fultz/Rozier
Brown/Smart
Hayward/Brown
Griffin/Horford/Yabu
Horford/Zizic/Griffin