Hayward opt in and trade up on draft night. (Trade ideas)

[patman66]

#1 for a Gordon rental? Minny says No.

what if hayward agrees to extend?

Is that an extention to his current $34 million dollar contract. I wouldn't if I was Minny considering his injury history.
Or is it a decline option and resign for a smaller deal with more years? Say 3/$60. So there is still a risk he can bail like Al did from Celtics chasing a bigger payday in Philly.

What is his injury history, he missed significant time once during his career and has shown to be over it He certainly would not resign anywhere near that value, even with the celts, a playoff team, teammates he likes and a coach he loves.

Any trade regarding the first and haywood, just does not fly. Hayward value is to either a contender looking to get better or a young team learning how to play together. Minn is neither.

[enzino]

Any trade regarding the first and haywood, just does not fl.

it's
hayward and #11
for
#1

[Resistance]

what if hayward agrees to extend?

Minnesota

Ignore James Johnson since you have him going out in the trade.

Is Hayward in synch (agewise) with the rest of the Minnesota roster?

he is younger (30) then any player of min outgoing package (James Johnson (33), Evan Turner (31)).

I asked if Hayward is in synch with the Minnesota roster after the trade and you pointed back at the outgoing players even when I said to ignore them. You didn't even bother answering my question.


Since you think that you are smarter than the average bear...


101. When can't a player be traded? Can players be given "no-trade" clauses in their contracts?

In addition, teams cannot trade players under the following circumstances:

* For two months after receiving the player in trade, if the trade aggregates the player's salary with the salaries of other players. However, the team is free to trade the player immediately, either by himself or without aggregating his salary with other salaries. This restriction applies only to players who were acquired using an exception (and not cap room). (Also see question number 90.)

* When the trade deadline has passed. Teams are free to make trades again once their season has ended4, but cannot trade players whose contracts are ending or could end due to an option or ETO.

* For three months or until December 15 of that season (whichever is later) after signing a contract as a free agent or matching an offer sheet to a restricted free agent. This obviously does not apply to the trade completing a sign-and-trade transaction (see question number 92).

* For three months or until December 15 of that season (whichever is later) after converting a Two-Way contract to a standard contract (see question number 83), with the three months beginning on the date the contract is converted.

* For three months or until January 15 of that season (whichever is later) after re-signing a free agent with Larry Bird or Early Bird rights, if the team is over the cap, the player's new salary is above the minimum, and he receives a raise greater than 20%.

* For 30 days after signing as a draft pick. This applies even for later-signed first round picks, who are signed using cap room at least three seasons after they are drafted (see question number 49).

* For 30 days after signing a Two-Way contract (see question number 82).

* For one year after signing a player to a Designated Veteran contract or extension (see question number 24).

* For six months after signing a player to an extension that is over the limit (in terms of years, salary or raises) for an extend-and-trade transaction5 (see question number 95).

* After claiming a player on waivers, for 30 days if the player was claimed during the season. If the player was claimed during the offseason, he cannot be traded until the 30th day of the following season.

* A team cannot reacquire a player it traded away during the same season (a season for this purpose being defined as starting on the first day of the regular season and ending on the last day of the Finals). If the player was traded between seasons (i.e., from the first day after the Finals to the last day prior to the start of the next regular season), it cannot reacquire the player prior to the end of the next season. If he is waived by his new team, then he cannot re-sign with his original team until the one-year anniversary of the trade, or until the July 1 following the end of his contract, whichever comes first6. However, if a team trades a player's draft rights, it can reacquire the player during the same season.

* A team cannot acquire players during a season when they do not have room on their 15-man roster, even if they intend to waive an incoming player immediately. For example, a team with 14 players cannot trade one player for three, while simultaneously waiving an incoming player to remain at 15 players7.

Explain how you were able to have Evan Turner in the trade even when the CBA FAQ says that isn't possible.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

I can see Atlanta working, but it will be all three of the picks and hayward. They may want Kanter instead of Dedmon so they can save 20 mil there. What I would find more likely is Kanter and Hayward for Dedmon and Huerter. They may want a later 1st And the celts get a nice TPE

Is it conventional wisdom that Kanter will opt in, though? I thought I'd read that he's a likely opt-out given the assumption that he can do better than $5m... ?

Having a productive veteran like Hayward on a young team where there are some wing minutes available, as well as some PF minutes in small-ball is an attractive notion, even if only for a year. It's just too bad he's not a year or two younger, which would make his Bird rights plausibly worth having.

From where I sit, It seems likely that Schlenk can find a better use for $35m on his spreadsheet, in reality, and that he's probably inclined to value 3 years of Huerter over 1 year of Hayward. But I'm persuaded there could be some framework here for a deal of some kind.

[SmartWentCrazy]

Do not see Hayward as a trade chip to move up in the draft for except maybe Golden State. And even then, I think #2 is probably too high. But Wiggins is such a terrible contract and Hayward is such a perfect fit and Golden State is such a title contending team when healthy that I think there could be a match. Taking back Wiggins is tough for Boston though so it might take an intermediary team with cap space (Detroit, ATL) to take on Wiggins into cap room to move up to #2, and then Boston uses Hayward to move up to that new spot from #14. And that depends on how much those cap teams want #2 and how much Boston loves the guy they can get mid lottery because we’re win now too.

Beyond that scenario, I think he holds solid value around the league in a REASONABLE deal. There are teams who want to contend but leave flexibility open. Teams like Miami, Memphis or Dallas who would love to keep building momentum but not hurt future cap space for runs at Giannis. A team like Portland who needs a SF desperately. A team like Sacramento who keeps trying to push into the playoffs. Orlando might be tough with the Isaac injury hurting their momentum but they were another one.

Not saying we’re going to get super high picks or stud prospects for Hayward but I think lots of teams would be willing to move some salary weight plus a really well-fitting role player or two for Boston. If we decide we want to get a little more rounded depth over a 4th “star” and/or the financials need to be trimmed a bit, I think we can find that deal. But I think that return would be disappointing to most Celtics fans. And as a win now team there’s also real value in just keeping him even if we view at as a rental because of money.

One thing to note on Hayward’s contract is that he can easily be extended. His next deal will be for less than his salary so any team, Boston or someone else, can just tack on years. You can let him play out the bloated option year and then try and lock him in early for a few more years.

In theory I'm fine with the idea of Wiggins/2 for Hayward/14, assuming GH is on board with a reasonable extension. I'm not sure our FO would buy in though, they seem like they believe in the Wiggins renaissance.

The devil is in the details finding someone willing to take on Wiggins for an expiring and a lower pick.

If GS would do that, I wonder if Philly would consider Wiggins for Horford. Boston would do Horford and 2 for Hayward and 14.

[gswhoops]

Do not see Hayward as a trade chip to move up in the draft for except maybe Golden State. And even then, I think #2 is probably too high. But Wiggins is such a terrible contract and Hayward is such a perfect fit and Golden State is such a title contending team when healthy that I think there could be a match. Taking back Wiggins is tough for Boston though so it might take an intermediary team with cap space (Detroit, ATL) to take on Wiggins into cap room to move up to #2, and then Boston uses Hayward to move up to that new spot from #14. And that depends on how much those cap teams want #2 and how much Boston loves the guy they can get mid lottery because we’re win now too.

Beyond that scenario, I think he holds solid value around the league in a REASONABLE deal. There are teams who want to contend but leave flexibility open. Teams like Miami, Memphis or Dallas who would love to keep building momentum but not hurt future cap space for runs at Giannis. A team like Portland who needs a SF desperately. A team like Sacramento who keeps trying to push into the playoffs. Orlando might be tough with the Isaac injury hurting their momentum but they were another one.

Not saying we’re going to get super high picks or stud prospects for Hayward but I think lots of teams would be willing to move some salary weight plus a really well-fitting role player or two for Boston. If we decide we want to get a little more rounded depth over a 4th “star” and/or the financials need to be trimmed a bit, I think we can find that deal. But I think that return would be disappointing to most Celtics fans. And as a win now team there’s also real value in just keeping him even if we view at as a rental because of money.

One thing to note on Hayward’s contract is that he can easily be extended. His next deal will be for less than his salary so any team, Boston or someone else, can just tack on years. You can let him play out the bloated option year and then try and lock him in early for a few more years.

In theory I'm fine with the idea of Wiggins/2 for Hayward/14, assuming GH is on board with a reasonable extension. I'm not sure our FO would buy in though, they seem like they believe in the Wiggins renaissance.

The devil is in the details finding someone willing to take on Wiggins for an expiring and a lower pick.

If GS would do that, I wonder if Philly would consider Wiggins for Horford. Boston would do Horford and 2 for Hayward and 14.

Philly fans have been pretty universally opposed to this (we’ve definitely tried it before lol)

[patman66]

I can see Atlanta working, but it will be all three of the picks and hayward. They may want Kanter instead of Dedmon so they can save 20 mil there. What I would find more likely is Kanter and Hayward for Dedmon and Huerter. They may want a later 1st And the celts get a nice TPE

Is it conventional wisdom that Kanter will opt in, though? I thought I'd read that he's a likely opt-out given the assumption that he can do better than $5m... ?

Having a productive veteran like Hayward on a young team where there are some wing minutes available, as well as some PF minutes in small-ball is an attractive notion, even if only for a year. It's just too bad he's not a year or two younger, which would make his Bird rights plausibly worth having.

From where I sit, It seems likely that Schlenk can find a better use for $35m on his spreadsheet, in reality, and that he's probably inclined to value 3 years of Huerter over 1 year of Hayward. But I'm persuaded there could be some framework here for a deal of some kind.

In NE most of the talk among fans is that he opts in. This is in the context of if hayward opts in an does not sign an extension, we have to cut 10 mill to get under the tax line for the future. if he doesn't that then gets us 1/2 the way there, and then Semi, Edwards and Porier have to go. Hell if Kanter opts out, Porier goes back home for playing time, don't pick up semis option we just have to find a taker for Edwards 1.8 mill and we are there. maybe Ainge can get hayward to sign a one + deal year deal for a couple of mill less than his opt in to get us the rest of there, sort of like a 5 mill gurantante that is payable even if he moves on.

[patman66]

I can see Atlanta working, but it will be all three of the picks and hayward. They may want Kanter instead of Dedmon so they can save 20 mil there. What I would find more likely is Kanter and Hayward for Dedmon and Huerter. They may want a later 1st And the celts get a nice TPE

Is it conventional wisdom that Kanter will opt in, though? I thought I'd read that he's a likely opt-out given the assumption that he can do better than $5m... ?

Having a productive veteran like Hayward on a young team where there are some wing minutes available, as well as some PF minutes in small-ball is an attractive notion, even if only for a year. It's just too bad he's not a year or two younger, which would make his Bird rights plausibly worth having.

From where I sit, It seems likely that Schlenk can find a better use for $35m on his spreadsheet, in reality, and that he's probably inclined to value 3 years of Huerter over 1 year of Hayward. But I'm persuaded there could be some framework here for a deal of some kind.

it only works if ATL wants to improve this year while keeping the 2021 flexibility and then having haywood resign as the bu plan if they can't bring a better piece in in FA . If he is fine with running the kids out and wants to use the cap to take in a expiring for a late first he certainly has that option.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

it only works if ATL wants to improve this year while keeping the 2021 flexibility and then having haywood resign as the bu plan if they can't bring a better piece in in FA . If he is fine with running the kids out and wants to use the cap to take in a expiring for a late first he certainly has that option.

I'm by no means representative of all Hawks fans, but I've become content with the proposition that Schlenk will first look to target Brandon Ingram--though he's at the disadvantage that NYK appears to have the capacity to compete with him on contract, and more than compete with him on market/franchise/tradition/prestige. (I realize the popular notion among fans is that BI is automatically headed back to NOP. But an ESPN story published about the same time as the ASG break and framed on a roundtable discussion with some number of current and previous NBA decision-makers--anonymous, of course--provided reason to believe they could ultimately decide to go another direction.)

Failing that, I see him looking at the trade block for some unexpected opportunities. Oladipo would make a lot of sense, except that he's very possibly going to only be dealt in exchange for a price imagining something closer to the healthy 2017-18 Oladipo than the still-recovering 2019-20 edition. Hayward makes similar sense, except he'd be a whole $14m more on Schlenk's ledger--an amount that otherwise could be used on another half-decent player.

Failing that... and I think this is the most likely scenario by a considerable margin... Schlenk targets the FA with the greatest perceived upside who isn't 6-3 or less... Christian Wood. Again, NYK and the player's current team could upset that attempt.

Not getting Ingram, not getting an unexpected opportunity in the trade market, and not getting Wood... would leave Schlenk to mainly add the best FAs who will sign for 1 year, and fully turn his eyes to add a top-tier talent in Summer 2021.

[patman66]

it only works if ATL wants to improve this year while keeping the 2021 flexibility and then having haywood resign as the bu plan if they can't bring a better piece in in FA . If he is fine with running the kids out and wants to use the cap to take in a expiring for a late first he certainly has that option.

I'm by no means representative of all Hawks fans, but I've become content with the proposition that Schlenk will first look to target Brandon Ingram--though he's at the disadvantage that NYK appears to have the capacity to compete with him on contract, and more than compete with him on market/franchise/tradition/prestige. (I realize the popular notion among fans is that BI is automatically headed back to NOP. But an ESPN story published about the same time as the ASG break and framed on a roundtable discussion with some number of current and previous NBA decision-makers--anonymous, of course--provided reason to believe they could ultimately decide to go another direction.)

Failing that, I see him looking at the trade block for some unexpected opportunities. Oladipo would make a lot of sense, except that he's very possibly going to only be dealt in exchange for a price imagining something closer to the healthy 2017-18 Oladipo than the still-recovering 2019-20 edition. Hayward makes similar sense, except he'd be a whole $14m more on Schlenk's ledger--an amount that otherwise could be used on another half-decent player.

Failing that... and I think this is the most likely scenario by a considerable margin... Schlenk targets the FA with the greatest perceived upside who isn't 6-3 or less... Christian Wood. Again, NYK and the player's current team could upset that attempt.

Not getting Ingram, not getting an unexpected opportunity in the trade market, and not getting Wood... would leave Schlenk to mainly add the best FAs who will sign for 1 year, and fully turn his eyes to add a top-tier talent in Summer 2021.

Ingram is one guy I would not even think was on the dart board. When are the kids going to play SF, you can play him in the backcourt with Tre can you? I would think that would be pretty bad def. Why would you be looking at wood when you have Cappella and Collins, at min you will be looking at 65 mill with those three.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

Ingram is one guy I would not even think was on the dart board. When are the kids going to play SF, you can play him in the backcourt with Tre can you? I would think that would be pretty bad def. Why would you be looking at wood when you have Cappella and Collins, at min you will be looking at 65 mill with those three.

The answers to both questions sound essentially the same.

(1a) On any given team, there are typically going to be 8 guys logging the major minutes (25+).

(1b) The Hawks can easily accommodate, and more than that need to add, a viable contender to be that 3rd weapon beyond Ice and JC.

(1c) You can't assume that Reddish or Hunter is/are going to be that. Time is of the essence. Decisions have to be made now because cap space is fleeting.

(1d) You also can't assume that Capela's health is going to be 100%, at least not until he's played 10-20 games, which is too late.

(1e) You also, unfortunately, have to be mindful that Collins screw-up puts him in a very vulnerable position suspension-wise, not to mention that there's always a chance that Schlenk receives the proverbial offer-too-good-to-refuse.

So, if BI, then you write him in at SF, and let Reddish and Hunter rotate with him--ie, Reddish/Ingram, Hunter/Ingram, or Reddish/Hunter)... which probably leads to a Huerter trade, unfortunately for some fans.

And for CW, much the same idea... Collins and Capela, if healthy and available, probably start, but Wood is the primary sub for both, and thus collects effectively the same number of minutes.

Btw, everything I'm reading posits anything from $12m to $20m for Wood. I'm guessing it will end up much closer to $20m, if not that exactly.

[patman66]

Ingram is one guy I would not even think was on the dart board. When are the kids going to play SF, you can play him in the backcourt with Tre can you? I would think that would be pretty bad def. Why would you be looking at wood when you have Cappella and Collins, at min you will be looking at 65 mill with those three.

The answers to both questions sound essentially the same.

(1a) On any given team, there are typically going to be 8 guys logging the major minutes (25+).

(1b) The Hawks can easily accommodate, and more than that need to add, a viable contender to be that 3rd weapon beyond Ice and JC.

(1c) You can't assume that Reddish or Hunter is/are going to be that. Time is of the essence. Decisions have to be made now because cap space is fleeting.

(1d) You also can't assume that Capela's health is going to be 100%, at least not until he's played 10-20 games, which is too late.

(1e) You also, unfortunately, have to be mindful that Collins screw-up puts him in a very vulnerable position suspension-wise, not to mention that there's always a chance that Schlenk receives the proverbial offer-too-good-to-refuse.

So, if BI, then you write him in at SF, and let Reddish and Hunter rotate with him--ie, Reddish/Ingram, Hunter/Ingram, or Reddish/Hunter)... which probably leads to a Huerter trade, unfortunately for some fans.

And for CW, much the same idea... Collins and Capela, if healthy and available, probably start, but Wood is the primary sub for both, and thus collects effectively the same number of minutes.

Btw, everything I'm reading posits anything from $12m to $20m for Wood. I'm guessing it will end up much closer to $20m, if not that exactly.

yeah that is about what I figured 20 mill, With Collins getting 4 and 110, about the same as Jaylen Brown. There are 8 guys but there are only three postions, your a ballhandler, a Wing or a Big. Having 4 of your best players at the wing or Dedmon, Collins, Cappela and wood as bigs is a strange way of getting your best usage on the court. if your going to pay Ingram 32 mill he is going to get 32 min. That is 18 to divide up.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

yeah that is about what I figured 20 mill, With Collins getting 4 and 110, about the same as Jaylen Brown. There are 8 guys but there are only three postions, your a ballhandler, a Wing or a Big. Having 4 of your best players at the wing or Dedmon, Collins, Cappela and wood as bigs is a strange way of getting your best usage on the court. if your going to pay Ingram 32 mill he is going to get 32 min. That is 18 to divide up.

Slight correction, assuming the current numbers I believe a max for BI given his time clock is $28.5m. If Schlenk pursued and signed him, that action would speak for itself that he is among those who consider Ingram to be a future perennial All-Star talent, and b/t him, Ice and JC, the team has settled on its key 3.

As for the total b/t a proposed Collins (~25m beginning 2021-22) Capela (~17m) and Wood (~20m), what perhaps matters more than the simple sum is what share of the overall payroll that will represent (... probably when all is said and done, in the 45% neighborhood).

If it turns out that Reddish and/or Hunter develop into something more than currently is certain, then you make those decisions to adjust payroll later--you let that evolve, though, you don't make any preemptive decisions. I mean, the FA, trade and draft channels are what they are.

In a Hawks Utopia, Schlenk would have more options than he does this off-season. And I do think he'll work hard to make commitments this off-season if he possibly can, knowing next off-season that the competition only gets steeper w/ more teams having more space. Still, that might yet prove to be his only good alternative. I mean, it isn't nuts to think that, in actuality, neither Ingram nor Wood are on his radar because he either doesn't project them to continue to ascend, and/or he perceives some off-court reasons to pass. I'm only going on conventional wisdom among us fans, of course.

Crunch time w/ Ingram on the roster would have Ice/Reddish or Hunter/Ingram/Collins/Capela... w/ Wood on the roster: Ice/Reddish/Hunter/Collins/Wood on offense, Capela on defense.

[BowlRips]

Lol people think that an injury prone Hayward on a 1/35mil has positive value, let alone enough value to get the 1st pick in the draft

[patman66]

yeah that is about what I figured 20 mill, With Collins getting 4 and 110, about the same as Jaylen Brown. There are 8 guys but there are only three postions, your a ballhandler, a Wing or a Big. Having 4 of your best players at the wing or Dedmon, Collins, Cappela and wood as bigs is a strange way of getting your best usage on the court. if your going to pay Ingram 32 mill he is going to get 32 min. That is 18 to divide up.

Slight correction, assuming the current numbers I believe a max for BI given his time clock is $28.5m. If Schlenk pursued and signed him, that action would speak for itself that he is among those who consider Ingram to be a future perennial All-Star talent, and b/t him, Ice and JC, the team has settled on its key 3.

As for the total b/t a proposed Collins (~25m beginning 2021-22) Capela (~17m) and Wood (~20m), what perhaps matters more than the simple sum is what share of the overall payroll that will represent (... probably when all is said and done, in the 45% neighborhood).

If it turns out that Reddish and/or Hunter develop into something more than currently is certain, then you make those decisions to adjust payroll later--you let that evolve, though, you don't make any preemptive decisions. I mean, the FA, trade and draft channels are what they are.

In a Hawks Utopia, Schlenk would have more options than he does this off-season. And I do think he'll work hard to make commitments this off-season if he possibly can, knowing next off-season that the competition only gets steeper w/ more teams having more space. Still, that might yet prove to be his only good alternative. I mean, it isn't nuts to think that, in actuality, neither Ingram nor Wood are on his radar because he either doesn't project them to continue to ascend, and/or he perceives some off-court reasons to pass. I'm only going on conventional wisdom among us fans, of course.

Crunch time w/ Ingram on the roster would have Ice/Reddish or Hunter/Ingram/Collins/Capela... w/ Wood on the roster: Ice/Reddish/Hunter/Collins/Wood on offense, Capela on defense.

you know your team a lot better than I, I am just giving my thoughts that if I was an Atlanta fan, how I would proceed. I would concentrate on the back court, and let the wings develop playing 25 min a nite.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

you know your team a lot better than I, I am just giving my thoughts that if I was an Atlanta fan, how I would proceed. I would concentrate on the back court, and let the wings develop playing 25 min a nite.

Don't misunderstand--I genuinely appreciate your input and perspective.

And forgive me repeating myself, but again, there are 96 minutes per game to be distributed on the wing--and thus, altogether likely that 3 guys to each get 28-30 min/gm.

[patman66]

you know your team a lot better than I, I am just giving my thoughts that if I was an Atlanta fan, how I would proceed. I would concentrate on the back court, and let the wings develop playing 25 min a nite.

Don't misunderstand--I genuinely appreciate your input and perspective.

And forgive me repeating myself, but again, there are 96 minutes per game to be distributed on the wing--and thus, altogether likely that 3 guys to each get 28-30 min/gm.

ok 28-30 and not 25.

[patman66]

you know your team a lot better than I, I am just giving my thoughts that if I was an Atlanta fan, how I would proceed. I would concentrate on the back court, and let the wings develop playing 25 min a nite.

Don't misunderstand--I genuinely appreciate your input and perspective.

And forgive me repeating myself, but again, there are 96 minutes per game to be distributed on the wing--and thus, altogether likely that 3 guys to each get 28-30 min/gm.

ok 28-30 and not 25.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

you know your team a lot better than I, I am just giving my thoughts that if I was an Atlanta fan, how I would proceed. I would concentrate on the back court, and let the wings develop playing 25 min a nite.

Don't misunderstand--I genuinely appreciate your input and perspective.

And forgive me repeating myself, but again, there are 96 minutes per game to be distributed on the wing--and thus, altogether likely that 3 guys to each get 28-30 min/gm.

ok 28-30 and not 25.

By the way... just a fun thought, at least for me... it is true that during his cup of coffee in Milwaukee, apparently Bud played Christian Wood at the 3 on occasion.

[Karmaloop]

Why would any team ahead of Boston have any interest in landing Hayward? Hayward is a win-now piece, and the large majority of teams ahead of Boston aren't win-now teams.