Hayward Undecided

[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.

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.

If the Celtics land Hayward I personally would be fine dealing IT4. The problem I see right now is what are teams going to give up for a 5'9, no defense, playing in a perfect system, injured player. If Ainge just trades him for a bucket of balls that could be a national PR disaster. As much as I'd like to see what this team could be without IT4 I don't think the time is right.


Sent from my iPad using RealGM Forums

[ZeroTolerance]

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.

I would hope that Danny can find cap room to resign KO....He's a late bloomer perhaps as far as his being consistent?

But what a weapon he can be when he is on.....He still needs to find that fire in his belly a might...That feeling of urgency hasn't been his strong suit to date....Hope he can work over the summer on that!

[Slartibartfast]

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.

If the Celtics land Hayward I personally would be fine dealing IT4. The problem I see right now is what are teams going to give up for a 5'9, no defense, playing in a perfect system, injured player. If Ainge just trades him for a bucket of balls that could be a national PR disaster. As much as I'd like to see what this team could be without IT4 I don't think the time is right.

Sent from my iPad using RealGM Forums

Ainge traded Rondo and Perk in very similar situations and got acceptable hauls for them (the Perk haul I think is really underrated. I mean Jeff Green wasn't much but he was still a player with significant pedigree and demonstrable talent entering RFA AND they got a decent stopgap in Krstic AND a pick for a post-ACL impending UFA non-skilled slow as molasses oaf - love him but all true).

I mean those guys were coming off ACLs - IT's got a little hip issue that wasn't serious enough to keep him out until we started losing games by 50 to the Cavs.

[Andrew McCeltic]

I've wondered if IT for Porzingis could be feasible.

But IT is going into the last year of his deal, and I don't think Hayward is signing here to play with Fultz.

[Green_teamer]

I've wondered if IT for Porzingis could be feasible.

But IT is going into the last year of his deal, and I don't think Hayward is signing here to play with Fultz.

I'd do that deal in a new York minute but no way new York does. Porzingis is one of the only things Jackson's done right there

[rickrolled]

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.

Maybe we can send James Young, Green on inflated deals to Utah/LA, are they BYC implicated? That would make things easier..

[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.

Maybe we can send James Young, Green on inflated deals to Utah/LA, are they BYC implicated? That would make things easier..

Young we can't offer more than like 2 mil to since we declined his option, BYC would apply to Green, but I think I worked out how we can get both Hayward/Griffin in my post on the previous page of this thread(last post).

[rickrolled]

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.

Maybe we can send James Young, Green on inflated deals to Utah/LA, are they BYC implicated? That would make things easier..

Young we can't offer more than like 2 mil to since we declined his option, BYC would apply to Green, but I think I worked out how we can get both Hayward/Griffin in my post on the previous page of this thread(last post).

Yeah just read that, seems like a lot of work though, 4 team trade and all those moving pieces..I'll settle with Hayward.

[CelticsSpurs]

I've wondered if IT for Porzingis could be feasible.

But IT is going into the last year of his deal, and I don't think Hayward is signing here to play with Fultz.

It would probably take both Brooklyn picks and IT

[OFWGKTA]

Maybe we can send James Young, Green on inflated deals to Utah/LA, are they BYC implicated? That would make things easier..

Young we can't offer more than like 2 mil to since we declined his option, BYC would apply to Green, but I think I worked out how we can get both Hayward/Griffin in my post on the previous page of this thread(last post).

Yeah just read that, seems like a lot of work though, 4 team trade and all those moving pieces..I'll settle with Hayward.

I think it looks a lot more complicated than it actually is, Utah/LA/Brooklyn are trading just with Boston from their POV. For Brooklyn(or whoever with cap space) they would already have interest in signing Kelly as an RFA, and doing this would prevent Boston from matching. For Utah/LAC if they know they're losing Hayward/Griffin anyways one way or another (say Hayward's signing with Boston no matter what, and Griffin is thinking Miami if no Boston) getting Bradley/Crowder is better than nothing. I was also thinking that getting an expiring Amir would make it more possible for LAC to trade for Melo when Amir is eligible as he would be expiring.

[Green_teamer]

I've wondered if IT for Porzingis could be feasible.

But IT is going into the last year of his deal, and I don't think Hayward is signing here to play with Fultz.

It would probably take both Brooklyn picks and IT

Now that's going overboard. He's slightly less valuable than the # 1 pick. Probably fair value at # 2

[CelticsSpurs]

I've wondered if IT for Porzingis could be feasible.

But IT is going into the last year of his deal, and I don't think Hayward is signing here to play with Fultz.

It would probably take both Brooklyn picks and IT

Now that's going overboard. He's slightly less valuable than the # 1 pick. Probably fair value at # 2

I think porzingis is an elite level asset just because he's a matchup nightmare and is a blueprint for big men in the modern NBA. Out of all the young players only AD/KAT/Giannis have more trade value imo

[Captain_Caveman]

I've wondered if IT for Porzingis could be feasible.

But IT is going into the last year of his deal, and I don't think Hayward is signing here to play with Fultz.

It would probably take both Brooklyn picks and IT

Now that's going overboard. He's slightly less valuable than the # 1 pick. Probably fair value at # 2

I'm with you. The #1 pick is an overpay all by itself.

[Fencer reregistered]

He still needs to find that fire in his belly a might...That feeling of urgency hasn't been his strong suit to date....Hope he can work over the summer on that!

Giving somebody a large multi-year guaranteed contract is not necessarily the best way to INCREASE their motivation.

[rickrolled]

Young we can't offer more than like 2 mil to since we declined his option, BYC would apply to Green, but I think I worked out how we can get both Hayward/Griffin in my post on the previous page of this thread(last post).

Yeah just read that, seems like a lot of work though, 4 team trade and all those moving pieces..I'll settle with Hayward.

I think it looks a lot more complicated than it actually is, Utah/LA/Brooklyn are trading just with Boston from their POV. For Brooklyn(or whoever with cap space) they would already have interest in signing Kelly as an RFA, and doing this would prevent Boston from matching. For Utah/LAC if they know they're losing Hayward/Griffin anyways one way or another (say Hayward's signing with Boston no matter what, and Griffin is thinking Miami if no Boston) getting Bradley/Crowder is better than nothing. I was also thinking that getting an expiring Amir would make it more possible for LAC to trade for Melo when Amir is eligible as he would be expiring.

Yup it looks like they're only trading with us at a second look. Still the obstacle of convincing Amir to take a one year deal even if he's making way more than he should. Reportedly he likes to go back to TOR. But could be convinced to change I think. About Melo, you're saying the Clips could ditch us and go for him instead or in addition to Amir?

[fallguy]

He still needs to find that fire in his belly a might...That feeling of urgency hasn't been his strong suit to date....Hope he can work over the summer on that!

Giving somebody a large multi-year guaranteed contract is not necessarily the best way to INCREASE their motivation.

I believe I am the exception to that rule.

Send me the paperwork and I will sign it.

[Andrew McCeltic]

It would probably take both Brooklyn picks and IT

Now that's going overboard. He's slightly less valuable than the # 1 pick. Probably fair value at # 2

I think porzingis is an elite level asset just because he's a matchup nightmare and is a blueprint for big men in the modern NBA. Out of all the young players only AD/KAT/Giannis have more trade value imo

Maybe. I think Jackson is a deep believer in the triangle, and could make decisions with that on his mind. Porzingis is also unhappy, he's been injured, and New York's management isn't incredibly patient. I could see us getting him for the BKN 18 sometime during the season, depending on how things are going in New York. Less likely now. Porzingis also didn't have the kind of sophomore season you would expect from an elite player. Right now, his health and upside are concerns, so are his rebounding and scoring ability. He might be more Horford-tier when it's said and done, but with freakish size/length. Things can change quickly - a year ago, Drummond was untouchable, and we could probably find posts of people here saying it'd take a Brooklyn pick to get him. A year from now, Porzingis could be untouchable again.

[jfs1000d]

Not interested in porzingis unless
It is for cheap.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[OFWGKTA]

Yeah just read that, seems like a lot of work though, 4 team trade and all those moving pieces..I'll settle with Hayward.

I think it looks a lot more complicated than it actually is, Utah/LA/Brooklyn are trading just with Boston from their POV. For Brooklyn(or whoever with cap space) they would already have interest in signing Kelly as an RFA, and doing this would prevent Boston from matching. For Utah/LAC if they know they're losing Hayward/Griffin anyways one way or another (say Hayward's signing with Boston no matter what, and Griffin is thinking Miami if no Boston) getting Bradley/Crowder is better than nothing. I was also thinking that getting an expiring Amir would make it more possible for LAC to trade for Melo when Amir is eligible as he would be expiring.

Yup it looks like they're only trading with us at a second look. Still the obstacle of convincing Amir to take a one year deal even if he's making way more than he should. Reportedly he likes to go back to TOR. But could be convinced to change I think. About Melo, you're saying the Clips could ditch us and go for him instead or in addition to Amir?

Assuming Toronto re-signs Lowry and Ibaka, they'll be above the luxury tax apron, meaning they could only offer Amir ~3.5 mil. If that huge difference in money isn't enough on it's own, Amir is from LA and I don't think he'd be opposed to getting paid 10 mil more to play for a similarly talented team in his hometown. Not sure why I added the Melo thing as it's not really relevant to the Celtics, but I was remembering the Clippers/Knicks rumors around the deadline where the Knicks were ok with Rivers, didn't want Crawford (2 years left as of now at ~14.5 per) and the Clippers didn't want to send Redick (expiring this past season). So with an expiring Amir in hand, they could later trade Amir+Rivers and whatever other value to make the Knicks agree for Melo. So in the second half of the season next year they'd have a lineup like:

Paul
Redick
Crowder
Melo
Jordan

[Fencer reregistered]

Now that's going overboard. He's slightly less valuable than the # 1 pick. Probably fair value at # 2

I think porzingis is an elite level asset just because he's a matchup nightmare and is a blueprint for big men in the modern NBA. Out of all the young players only AD/KAT/Giannis have more trade value imo

Maybe. I think Jackson is a deep believer in the triangle, and could make decisions with that on his mind. Porzingis is also unhappy, he's been injured, and New York's management isn't incredibly patient. I could see us getting him for the BKN 18 sometime during the season, depending on how things are going in New York. Less likely now. Porzingis also didn't have the kind of sophomore season you would expect from an elite player. Right now, his health and upside are concerns, so are his rebounding and scoring ability. He might be more Horford-tier when it's said and done, but with freakish size/length. Things can change quickly - a year ago, Drummond was untouchable, and we could probably find posts of people here saying it'd take a Brooklyn pick to get him. A year from now, Porzingis could be untouchable again.

I have little hope of a Porzingis deal.

The only reason I have ANY hope is that next season is the Knicks' best chance to tank; they don't have their 2019 pick.