sully00 wrote:31to6 wrote:Curmudgeon wrote:Some of you guys just need to take a cold shower when it comes to Fultz. He's a terrible fit for the Celtics roster and very questionable as a defender. If the hype is real, Ainge should trade the pick. If it isn't real, he should draft someone else.
Why not at least put such smoking takes in the appropriate thread? Or is the Fultz thread the one where you're urging us to max Otto Porter?
This thread should be reserved for Sully throttling the group think on giving $30M to Hayward when we've got Brown and Fultz.
I am not even against signing Hayward. I just need to see the plan on that one. It can't be sign Hayward move Crowder to the bench, not play Brown, but plan on Yabu, Zizic, and Horford as the only bigs.
It would seem to me the plan should be to try and bring Hayward and Favors to Boston in exchange for KO, Crowder and some draft assets or young players. Even if it is a situation where we sign Hayward outright and trade for Favors at least that makes sense. SF's and SG's are weird assets in the NBA everyone is willing to pay them silly money but it is tough to get a decent return on them in a trade.
That reads as if you're saying "Don't sign Hayward unless Utah also agrees to trade us Favors." Of course, that can't really be what you mean.
Anyhow, the simplest mechanism for signing Hayward is:
-- Renounce all our FAs (mainly bigs).
-- Trade a guard. (Bradley or Smart).
-- Sign Hayward to cap room.
-- Sign the rookies, including stashes.
In that model:
-- You're right that we only start with Horford and the rookies as bigs ...
-- ... plus Crowder, who would surely be the putative starter.
-- But we also have a full MLE to work with.
-- Whatever happens in the guard trade, we have the ability to bring back a big with some salary, into a trade exception if nothing else. And of course we have lots of picks to trade.
Banned temporarily for, among other sins, being "Extremely Deviant".
