ImageImageImage

Trade Ideas Thread

Moderators: Froob, sully00, The Comedian, Parliament10, ParticleMan, djFan71, canman1971

hugepatsfan
Junior
Posts: 320
And1: 264
Joined: May 28, 2020
       

Re: Trade Ideas Thread 

Post#121 » by hugepatsfan » Mon Jun 29, 2020 6:16 pm

Celts17Pride wrote:Aaron Gordon is a very bad basketball player that has never made any kind of difference in Orlando. Gordon Hayward for Aaron Gordon is about a negative 6-8 games in the standings. Aaron Gordon is that bad


This is silly, Gordon is not bad. He's a complimentary player. He excels at defending multiple spots and providing playmaking from the 4. ORL isn't built for him to play a complimentary role because he's miscast as a focal point.

Hayward is definitely a better player but that's not why anyone is suggesting a trade. A lot of Celtics fans want to bury their heads in the sands when it comes to finances. Keeping Hayward long term as the 4th option might just not be financially feasible. People are suggesting trades for guys like Aaron Gordon knowing it makes us worse but because it helps make the current configuration of the team more financially feasible long term.

Maybe Wyc is fine paying the tax this year, next year and then repeater tax the following year. That's what it would take to keep Hayward the next 3 years. You add up all the tax and it's going to end up to a LOT of money. If you also try and keep guys like Theis and use the MLE to add other depth then you're talking about over $100M of taxes over the next 3 years. Moving Hayward for a guy like Gordon can help get under the tax for one more year and avoid paying any repeater tax because of the relief from Kemba's deal coming off the books before we get to that.
bucknersrevenge
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,136
And1: 4,411
Joined: Jul 05, 2012
Location: Philly
Contact:
         

Re: Trade Ideas Thread 

Post#122 » by bucknersrevenge » Mon Jun 29, 2020 6:43 pm

hugepatsfan wrote:
Celts17Pride wrote:Aaron Gordon is a very bad basketball player that has never made any kind of difference in Orlando. Gordon Hayward for Aaron Gordon is about a negative 6-8 games in the standings. Aaron Gordon is that bad


This is silly, Gordon is not bad. He's a complimentary player. He excels at defending multiple spots and providing playmaking from the 4. ORL isn't built for him to play a complimentary role because he's miscast as a focal point.

Hayward is definitely a better player but that's not why anyone is suggesting a trade. A lot of Celtics fans want to bury their heads in the sands when it comes to finances. Keeping Hayward long term as the 4th option might just not be financially feasible. People are suggesting trades for guys like Aaron Gordon knowing it makes us worse but because it helps make the current configuration of the team more financially feasible long term.

Maybe Wyc is fine paying the tax this year, next year and then repeater tax the following year. That's what it would take to keep Hayward the next 3 years. You add up all the tax and it's going to end up to a LOT of money. If you also try and keep guys like Theis and use the MLE to add other depth then you're talking about over $100M of taxes over the next 3 years. Moving Hayward for a guy like Gordon can help get under the tax for one more year and avoid paying any repeater tax because of the relief from Kemba's deal coming off the books before we get to that.


Image
There is no statute of limitation on Twitter. Remember that...
User avatar
Parliament10
Forum Mod - Celtics
Forum Mod - Celtics
Posts: 27,182
And1: 27,136
Joined: Jul 24, 2009
       

Re: Trade Ideas Thread 

Post#123 » by Parliament10 » Mon Jun 29, 2020 10:10 pm

bucknersrevenge wrote:
hugepatsfan wrote:
Celts17Pride wrote:Aaron Gordon is a very bad basketball player that has never made any kind of difference in Orlando. Gordon Hayward for Aaron Gordon is about a negative 6-8 games in the standings. Aaron Gordon is that bad


This is silly, Gordon is not bad. He's a complimentary player. He excels at defending multiple spots and providing playmaking from the 4. ORL isn't built for him to play a complimentary role because he's miscast as a focal point.

Hayward is definitely a better player but that's not why anyone is suggesting a trade. A lot of Celtics fans want to bury their heads in the sands when it comes to finances. Keeping Hayward long term as the 4th option might just not be financially feasible. People are suggesting trades for guys like Aaron Gordon knowing it makes us worse but because it helps make the current configuration of the team more financially feasible long term.

Maybe Wyc is fine paying the tax this year, next year and then repeater tax the following year. That's what it would take to keep Hayward the next 3 years. You add up all the tax and it's going to end up to a LOT of money. If you also try and keep guys like Theis and use the MLE to add other depth then you're talking about over $100M of taxes over the next 3 years. Moving Hayward for a guy like Gordon can help get under the tax for one more year and avoid paying any repeater tax because of the relief from Kemba's deal coming off the books before we get to that.


Image

I'm in Agreement with Trading Hayward, and bringing in 2 lesser players.
We all know that Hayward is good. He just doesn't belong in a 4th-Option Role. On any team.

But, that's all he is here. And to the tune of $34M next season. The money is not good.
Time to move on.


Edit:
I also think that Aaron Gordon will do much better in our system.
We need a 4 and a 5. Not another Starting 3.
"It's not about me, it's about the Team."
~ Marcus Smart
hugepatsfan
Junior
Posts: 320
And1: 264
Joined: May 28, 2020
       

Re: Trade Ideas Thread 

Post#124 » by hugepatsfan » Mon Jun 29, 2020 10:54 pm

Parliament10 wrote:
bucknersrevenge wrote:
hugepatsfan wrote:
This is silly, Gordon is not bad. He's a complimentary player. He excels at defending multiple spots and providing playmaking from the 4. ORL isn't built for him to play a complimentary role because he's miscast as a focal point.

Hayward is definitely a better player but that's not why anyone is suggesting a trade. A lot of Celtics fans want to bury their heads in the sands when it comes to finances. Keeping Hayward long term as the 4th option might just not be financially feasible. People are suggesting trades for guys like Aaron Gordon knowing it makes us worse but because it helps make the current configuration of the team more financially feasible long term.

Maybe Wyc is fine paying the tax this year, next year and then repeater tax the following year. That's what it would take to keep Hayward the next 3 years. You add up all the tax and it's going to end up to a LOT of money. If you also try and keep guys like Theis and use the MLE to add other depth then you're talking about over $100M of taxes over the next 3 years. Moving Hayward for a guy like Gordon can help get under the tax for one more year and avoid paying any repeater tax because of the relief from Kemba's deal coming off the books before we get to that.


Image

I'm in Agreement with Trading Hayward, and bringing in 2 lesser players.
We all know that Hayward is good. He just doesn't belong in a 4th-Option Role. On any team.

But, that's all he is here. And to the tune of $34M next season. The money is not good.
Time to move on.


Edit:
I also think that Aaron Gordon will do much better in our system.
We need a 4 and a 5. Not another Starting 3.


Not sure the practicality of trading him for 2 players. It just recreates the financial issue except now you're spending on depth instead of starpower. Let's use ORL as an example and say we trade Hayward for Gordon + Terrence Ross. That lands us two good players for reasonable prices instead of a very good/great player on a big overpayment. Who cares though? Because with those two we'll still be over the luxury tax for '20-21, '21-22 and most likely '22-23 (unless we let Gordon and Smart walk after 2 years). Depth wins regular season games but come playoff time the guys on the top of your roster take more responsibility for getting it done. So I would rather be spending money on a dime instead of two nickels.

I still think priority A should be to do the type of scenario I posted a few pages back where you lock in Hayward for 2 additional years (3 total) and then make the other ancillary moves to get under the tax. I think Wyc would sign off on a plan of staying under the tax for one more year with mostly this same team except a cheaper backup center and then Ainge saying "ok, I got Kemba/Hayward for 2 years, let me spend regular tax dollars (no repeater rate) to really push with this group. Then we let Kemba/Hayward walk before repeater rates kick in for the 3rd year which not only gets us out from the tax, but even below the cap so we can add younger piece(s) around Tatum/Brown for another wave of contending". Spending on Hayward over 2 lesser players for roughly the same amount is a better path to contending these next few years IMO in a league where the top of your roster means more.

For me, the talk of trading Hayward only comes into play if Wyc is putting financial pressure on Danny and nothing can be worked out with Hayward for a reasonable extension that gets us under the tax. If we can't get under the tax for '20-21 then keeping Hayward beyond next year means luxury tax at repeater rates down the line. If Wyc won't sign off on that, then Hayward has to go. And if the end game is getting under the tax, it probably won't be for two players. It will be for just one who's not as good but cheaper. Might mean using our own draft capital to salary dump the second contract another team would have to send out.

The type of deal I'm envisioning if we can't do something with Hayward is a team like ORL sending us Aaron Gordon + Aminu for Hayward. We then use one of our picks to dump Aminu's deal (and maybe Kanter's with it to open up the full MLEto use on a better big).
Floody100
Rookie
Posts: 1,001
And1: 892
Joined: Oct 21, 2018
 

Re: Trade Ideas Thread 

Post#125 » by Floody100 » Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:34 am

I was reluctant to wanting to do the trade between Hayward & Gordon but I think I’m starting to warm up to the idea. The problem with Gordon’s role in Orlando is not only has he been asked to play as the #2 option but also to play alongside a guy who’s been asked to be the #1 option but really isn’t one which in turn is probably the reason he hasn’t been able to make that next step. By coming here he relieves some of that pressure by being the #4 option on this team. His 3point & free throw shooting aren’t crash hot but i look at the improvements Marcus (3pt shooting) & Jaylen (FT shooting) have made & have reason to believe our coaching staff can help work on those issues.
Although not as good as Hayward he’s definitely an underrated passer which could make up for some of what you lose from Hayward although I’d also hope Tatum & Brown can work on those aspects of their game to help as well.
Besides being cheaper, what makes me want to do this trade is his superior athleticism & defence to Hayward. Not saying Hayward’s a bad defender at all but Gordon’s brings that more advanced versatility. You also get a player who could be our guy who defends Giannis too.
If we trade for Gordon & bring back Baynes I would call that a successful offseason.
hugepatsfan
Junior
Posts: 320
And1: 264
Joined: May 28, 2020
       

Re: Trade Ideas Thread 

Post#126 » by hugepatsfan » Tue Jun 30, 2020 4:14 am

One problem with trading Hayward is his trade kicker... He gets a 15% trade bonus if dealt. We have to pay that and it hits our cap. His trade bonus would be $5,128,062.

Also, even though we're paying the bonus, the other team acquiring him needs to account for him as incoming money for the amount of his salary + the trade exception. His salary is $34,187,085 so add in the trade kicker and the team we're trading to has to account for him as $39,315,148 of incoming money.

Based on trade matching rules, that means any team trading for him would have to send back $31,372,118 of money. So if we have to take back that much money and pay the trade kicker then we'd actually be spending a higher luxury tax bill in trading Hayward.

So let's imagine how an Aaron Gordon trade would work. ORL can't just send him back. They'd have two realistic choices to make the numbers work - either send back Terrence Ross or Al-Faroq Aminu/Khem Birch along with Gordon. Either way, if we want to get below the tax, we need to involve a third team to dump those ancillary pieces to. It's either a 3 year deal for Ross at ~$13M per or $13M of salary in '20-21 + $10M in '21-22. To get a team to just take on that money would probably cost our own 1st rounder, projected #26. And that might be lowballing it, but it's comparable to last year's Tony Snell salary dump between MIL/DET so I'll run with it.

So now we've got the deal to where we're just taking back Gordon's $18.1M salary. But remember, we also need to add in the Hayward trade kicker from earlier. So all together, between A. Gordon's salary and the trade bonus we'd have $23,264,46.75 on the books.

The hardship doesn't stop there. If we want to get enough wiggle room to use the full MLE and stay below the tax we're going to have to salary dump/release Enes Kanter and Vincent Poirier. And to salary dump with nothing coming back might even take future draft picks. And then that still won't be enough. After that my calculations have us stll needing to clear out a little bit more money through some combination of Grant Williams/Langford/Robert Williams or Daniel Theis. Then we can use the full MLE. I don't think it'd be worth clearing all that out to get the full MLE. We could always decide it's fine to be in the tax and just use the partial which might be enough for Aron Baynes.

Looking back on all this, would it be worth it? Is downgrading from Gordon Hayward to Aaron Gordon while upgrading from Enes Kanter to an Aron Baynes type worth the draft picks/young players we had to give up and still being in the luxury tax and setting ourselves up for repeater penalties down the road. I'd argue hell to the no it isn't. I'd say we're making ourselves worse, which would be fine if we were getting financial flexibility but we're not.

I love the idea of trading Hayward to set ourselves up long term, but I'm just struggling to see any sort of scenario where it makes sense once you try to put an actual deal together.
hugepatsfan
Junior
Posts: 320
And1: 264
Joined: May 28, 2020
       

Re: Trade Ideas Thread 

Post#127 » by hugepatsfan » Tue Jun 30, 2020 4:23 am

^ All that being said, if Hayward decides to opt out and some team out there is willing to pay him what he wants on a long term deal, then a S&T becomes feasible since we'd likely be at a lower salary and there's no trade kicker.
User avatar
Parliament10
Forum Mod - Celtics
Forum Mod - Celtics
Posts: 27,182
And1: 27,136
Joined: Jul 24, 2009
       

Re: Trade Ideas Thread 

Post#128 » by Parliament10 » Tue Jun 30, 2020 6:41 am

hugepatsfan wrote:One problem with trading Hayward is his trade kicker... He gets a 15% trade bonus if dealt. We have to pay that and it hits our cap. His trade bonus would be $5,128,062.

I think that Hayward would waive his Trade Kicker, especially in this situation.
"It's not about me, it's about the Team."
~ Marcus Smart
Triple7
Analyst
Posts: 3,003
And1: 1,892
Joined: Aug 23, 2018
 

Re: Trade Ideas Thread 

Post#129 » by Triple7 » Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:45 am

Parliament10 wrote:
bucknersrevenge wrote:
hugepatsfan wrote:
This is silly, Gordon is not bad. He's a complimentary player. He excels at defending multiple spots and providing playmaking from the 4. ORL isn't built for him to play a complimentary role because he's miscast as a focal point.

Hayward is definitely a better player but that's not why anyone is suggesting a trade. A lot of Celtics fans want to bury their heads in the sands when it comes to finances. Keeping Hayward long term as the 4th option might just not be financially feasible. People are suggesting trades for guys like Aaron Gordon knowing it makes us worse but because it helps make the current configuration of the team more financially feasible long term.

Maybe Wyc is fine paying the tax this year, next year and then repeater tax the following year. That's what it would take to keep Hayward the next 3 years. You add up all the tax and it's going to end up to a LOT of money. If you also try and keep guys like Theis and use the MLE to add other depth then you're talking about over $100M of taxes over the next 3 years. Moving Hayward for a guy like Gordon can help get under the tax for one more year and avoid paying any repeater tax because of the relief from Kemba's deal coming off the books before we get to that.


Image

I'm in Agreement with Trading Hayward, and bringing in 2 lesser players.
We all know that Hayward is good. He just doesn't belong in a 4th-Option Role. On any team.

But, that's all he is here. And to the tune of $34M next season. The money is not good.
Time to move on.


Edit:
I also think that Aaron Gordon will do much better in our system.
We need a 4 and a 5. Not another Starting 3.


I agree with this. Plus this moves Jayson to his natural position. The kemba, brown, hayward and Tatum lineup would have been fine, if we have a rim protector at the 5, which we don’t have. I think he fits well with our young guys.
hugepatsfan
Junior
Posts: 320
And1: 264
Joined: May 28, 2020
       

Re: Trade Ideas Thread 

Post#130 » by hugepatsfan » Tue Jun 30, 2020 4:39 pm

Triple7 wrote:
Parliament10 wrote:
bucknersrevenge wrote:
Image

I'm in Agreement with Trading Hayward, and bringing in 2 lesser players.
We all know that Hayward is good. He just doesn't belong in a 4th-Option Role. On any team.

But, that's all he is here. And to the tune of $34M next season. The money is not good.
Time to move on.


Edit:
I also think that Aaron Gordon will do much better in our system.
We need a 4 and a 5. Not another Starting 3.


I agree with this. Plus this moves Jayson to his natural position. The kemba, brown, hayward and Tatum lineup would have been fine, if we have a rim protector at the 5, which we don’t have. I think he fits well with our young guys.


To be fair, it's worked in every way imaginable this year. Both offensively and defensively that lineup has excelled alongside Theis at center (who has been an extremely overlooked and underappreciated player himself).

Honestly, I think moving Hayward for Gordon or another PF that can't shoot would actually require a change at center. Theis isn't a total negative shooting from the outside, but if we make the massive downgrade from Hayward to a Gordon type then I think upgrading from Theis to a MLE free agent like Aron Baynes or Marc Gasol will be needed to help offset things.

It also creates a need for better offensive bench help. Right now we use Smart as an interchangeable backup to all of Kemba/Brown/Hayward/Tatum. You are not going to want to play Smart and Gordon together for heavy minutes. You're not going to want to play Semi or Grant Williams alongside Gordon like we do with Hayward. We need to upgrade backup PG from Wanamaker anyway but swapping Hayward for Gordon makes the shooting a bigger part of our upgrade.
SmartWentCrazy
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 15,484
And1: 24,439
Joined: Dec 29, 2014

Re: Trade Ideas Thread 

Post#131 » by SmartWentCrazy » Wed Jul 1, 2020 12:04 pm

hugepatsfan wrote:One problem with trading Hayward is his trade kicker... He gets a 15% trade bonus if dealt. We have to pay that and it hits our cap. His trade bonus would be $5,128,062.

Also, even though we're paying the bonus, the other team acquiring him needs to account for him as incoming money for the amount of his salary + the trade exception. His salary is $34,187,085 so add in the trade kicker and the team we're trading to has to account for him as $39,315,148 of incoming money.

Based on trade matching rules, that means any team trading for him would have to send back $31,372,118 of money. So if we have to take back that much money and pay the trade kicker then we'd actually be spending a higher luxury tax bill in trading Hayward.

So let's imagine how an Aaron Gordon trade would work. ORL can't just send him back. They'd have two realistic choices to make the numbers work - either send back Terrence Ross or Al-Faroq Aminu/Khem Birch along with Gordon. Either way, if we want to get below the tax, we need to involve a third team to dump those ancillary pieces to. It's either a 3 year deal for Ross at ~$13M per or $13M of salary in '20-21 + $10M in '21-22. To get a team to just take on that money would probably cost our own 1st rounder, projected #26. And that might be lowballing it, but it's comparable to last year's Tony Snell salary dump between MIL/DET so I'll run with it.

So now we've got the deal to where we're just taking back Gordon's $18.1M salary. But remember, we also need to add in the Hayward trade kicker from earlier. So all together, between A. Gordon's salary and the trade bonus we'd have $23,264,46.75 on the books.

The hardship doesn't stop there. If we want to get enough wiggle room to use the full MLE and stay below the tax we're going to have to salary dump/release Enes Kanter and Vincent Poirier. And to salary dump with nothing coming back might even take future draft picks. And then that still won't be enough. After that my calculations have us stll needing to clear out a little bit more money through some combination of Grant Williams/Langford/Robert Williams or Daniel Theis. Then we can use the full MLE. I don't think it'd be worth clearing all that out to get the full MLE. We could always decide it's fine to be in the tax and just use the partial which might be enough for Aron Baynes.

Looking back on all this, would it be worth it? Is downgrading from Gordon Hayward to Aaron Gordon while upgrading from Enes Kanter to an Aron Baynes type worth the draft picks/young players we had to give up and still being in the luxury tax and setting ourselves up for repeater penalties down the road. I'd argue hell to the no it isn't. I'd say we're making ourselves worse, which would be fine if we were getting financial flexibility but we're not.

I love the idea of trading Hayward to set ourselves up long term, but I'm just struggling to see any sort of scenario where it makes sense once you try to put an actual deal together.


Couple of notes on trade kickers:

-We pay it, but it hits the receiving teams cap, not ours.
-Its capped as a true up to the max salary he’d receive as a FA, or 35% of the cap. If the cap stands at 109, itll only be about an 11% raise. If the cap drops to 100, itll be functionally nothing.
hugepatsfan
Junior
Posts: 320
And1: 264
Joined: May 28, 2020
       

Re: Trade Ideas Thread 

Post#132 » by hugepatsfan » Wed Jul 1, 2020 1:16 pm

SmartWentCrazy wrote:
hugepatsfan wrote:One problem with trading Hayward is his trade kicker... He gets a 15% trade bonus if dealt. We have to pay that and it hits our cap. His trade bonus would be $5,128,062.

Also, even though we're paying the bonus, the other team acquiring him needs to account for him as incoming money for the amount of his salary + the trade exception. His salary is $34,187,085 so add in the trade kicker and the team we're trading to has to account for him as $39,315,148 of incoming money.

Based on trade matching rules, that means any team trading for him would have to send back $31,372,118 of money. So if we have to take back that much money and pay the trade kicker then we'd actually be spending a higher luxury tax bill in trading Hayward.

So let's imagine how an Aaron Gordon trade would work. ORL can't just send him back. They'd have two realistic choices to make the numbers work - either send back Terrence Ross or Al-Faroq Aminu/Khem Birch along with Gordon. Either way, if we want to get below the tax, we need to involve a third team to dump those ancillary pieces to. It's either a 3 year deal for Ross at ~$13M per or $13M of salary in '20-21 + $10M in '21-22. To get a team to just take on that money would probably cost our own 1st rounder, projected #26. And that might be lowballing it, but it's comparable to last year's Tony Snell salary dump between MIL/DET so I'll run with it.

So now we've got the deal to where we're just taking back Gordon's $18.1M salary. But remember, we also need to add in the Hayward trade kicker from earlier. So all together, between A. Gordon's salary and the trade bonus we'd have $23,264,46.75 on the books.

The hardship doesn't stop there. If we want to get enough wiggle room to use the full MLE and stay below the tax we're going to have to salary dump/release Enes Kanter and Vincent Poirier. And to salary dump with nothing coming back might even take future draft picks. And then that still won't be enough. After that my calculations have us stll needing to clear out a little bit more money through some combination of Grant Williams/Langford/Robert Williams or Daniel Theis. Then we can use the full MLE. I don't think it'd be worth clearing all that out to get the full MLE. We could always decide it's fine to be in the tax and just use the partial which might be enough for Aron Baynes.

Looking back on all this, would it be worth it? Is downgrading from Gordon Hayward to Aaron Gordon while upgrading from Enes Kanter to an Aron Baynes type worth the draft picks/young players we had to give up and still being in the luxury tax and setting ourselves up for repeater penalties down the road. I'd argue hell to the no it isn't. I'd say we're making ourselves worse, which would be fine if we were getting financial flexibility but we're not.

I love the idea of trading Hayward to set ourselves up long term, but I'm just struggling to see any sort of scenario where it makes sense once you try to put an actual deal together.


Couple of notes on trade kickers:

-We pay it, but it hits the receiving teams cap, not ours.
-Its capped as a true up to the max salary he’d receive as a FA, or 35% of the cap. If the cap stands at 109, itll only be about an 11% raise. If the cap drops to 100, itll be functionally nothing.


Doing research I thought I read it would count on ours, but that would definitely help if it doesn't.

The 15% vs. 11% thing I figured wasn't too material to call out but good point.

If the cap drops to $100M then this is all a moot point because there's no way we ever get under the tax. So I wouldn't be as sensitive to what Hayward makes in '20-21.
Curmudgeon
RealGM
Posts: 29,126
And1: 10,312
Joined: Jan 20, 2004
Location: Boston, MA

Re: Trade Ideas Thread 

Post#133 » by Curmudgeon » Wed Jul 1, 2020 3:19 pm

There will have to be some sort of compromise on the cap and the luxury tax. Smoothing in reverse. If there is no compromise, we will not be seeing any trades at all.
"Numbers lie alot. Wins and losses don't lie." - Jerry West
"You are what your record says you are."- Bill Parcells
"Offense sells tickets. Defense wins games. Rebounding wins championships." Pat Summit
User avatar
theman
RealGM
Posts: 12,709
And1: 1,149
Joined: May 23, 2001

Re: Trade Ideas Thread 

Post#134 » by theman » Wed Jul 1, 2020 6:38 pm

Parliament10 wrote:
hugepatsfan wrote:One problem with trading Hayward is his trade kicker... He gets a 15% trade bonus if dealt. We have to pay that and it hits our cap. His trade bonus would be $5,128,062.

I think that Hayward would waive his Trade Kicker, especially in this situation.


Why? Has Hayward expressed interest in playing in Orlando or indicated he wants out of Boston? $5 million is a lot of money even when you are making $30 million.
'The easiest way to know you are in a cult is if you are forbidden from learning'. - Tim Pool

“If you can control the words people use, you can frame the issue… That’s how propaganda works". - Cindy Rodriguez
User avatar
Parliament10
Forum Mod - Celtics
Forum Mod - Celtics
Posts: 27,182
And1: 27,136
Joined: Jul 24, 2009
       

Re: Trade Ideas Thread 

Post#135 » by Parliament10 » Wed Jul 1, 2020 7:13 pm

theman wrote:
Parliament10 wrote:
hugepatsfan wrote:One problem with trading Hayward is his trade kicker... He gets a 15% trade bonus if dealt. We have to pay that and it hits our cap. His trade bonus would be $5,128,062.

I think that Hayward would waive his Trade Kicker, especially in this situation.


Why? Has Hayward expressed interest in playing in Orlando or indicated he wants out of Boston? $5 million is a lot of money even when you are making $30 million.

$34M + $5M?
That's Ridiculous.
"It's not about me, it's about the Team."
~ Marcus Smart
yahboi617
Ballboy
Posts: 16
And1: 2
Joined: Apr 10, 2020
         

Jarret Allen 

Post#136 » by yahboi617 » Thu Jul 2, 2020 8:48 pm

I've seen a couple of trade ideas for the celtics getting Jarret Allen from Brooklyn, an idea I can get behind. We'd send one of theis or williams with a top pick swap and another late first from us to get him. I like it and think it would make us the best defense in the east and possibly the league with a legit rim protector, and I don't think our offense would drop off significantly or at all. What do y'all think?
PtruthP34
Senior
Posts: 576
And1: 64
Joined: Dec 16, 2003

Re: Jarret Allen 

Post#137 » by PtruthP34 » Thu Jul 2, 2020 9:07 pm

I’d rather hold on to Rob Williams and develop him. Similar talents, IMO. Rob has a chance to be special with his absurd block and steal rates and good passing, combined with his finishing ability. Allen is more proven right now by far but Timelord is healthy and Kanter is hyping him up. I want to see him raise some eyebrows this summer.

Interesting that Allen is a year younger. Would not have guessed that.

Theis also plays a different but critical role for us, and I’d view a front court with both Allen and Williams as limited and too redundant.
bucknersrevenge
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,136
And1: 4,411
Joined: Jul 05, 2012
Location: Philly
Contact:
         

Re: Trade Ideas Thread 

Post#138 » by bucknersrevenge » Fri Jul 3, 2020 4:18 am

Oh no. I guess we can put to bed any BS ideas of trading for either one of these two that never had a chance in Hades of happening for even a minute.

Read on Twitter
?s=20
There is no statute of limitation on Twitter. Remember that...
SmartWentCrazy
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 15,484
And1: 24,439
Joined: Dec 29, 2014

Re: Trade Ideas Thread 

Post#139 » by SmartWentCrazy » Fri Jul 3, 2020 1:07 pm

bucknersrevenge wrote:Oh no. I guess we can put to bed any BS ideas of trading for either one of these two that never had a chance in Hades of happening for even a minute.

Read on Twitter
?s=20


Im less of a fan of trading for Donovan than I originally was, but:

Read on Twitter


Dude is now saying that, in addition to the previous off-court tension, there also was on-court tension. Think this situation could get real interesting this fall. Would not be shocked at all if one of the gets dealt this summer after they flame out of the playoffs in round 1 again.
hugepatsfan
Junior
Posts: 320
And1: 264
Joined: May 28, 2020
       

Re: Trade Ideas Thread 

Post#140 » by hugepatsfan » Fri Jul 3, 2020 1:44 pm

If the Jazz trade Gobert, I always imagined it would be more related to his impending free agency after next year. They might just not want to pay him what he wants into his 30s.

Can't see them moving Mitchell. He'll take the extension just for security even if he has issues. And then if it doesn't work you can trade him later.

Return to Boston Celtics