Gordon Hayward 2020: I'm standing here in pieces and you're having delusions of grandeur!

Status
Not open for further replies.

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
9,571
You do want $0 because that leaves you with a $34.2 million traded player exception to use to acquire talent.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
18,957
I think Atlanta makes almost no sense. Teams don't give away assets for no reason. The Hawks aren't trading anything of value to sign Hayward to a long term deal that they could just sign in a week. And I don't think either the Hawks or Hayward want a 1 year deal. I know Nighthob has the dream scenario where Hayward opts in, the Hawks trade a premium asset for one year of him for some reason, but that seems unlikely when the Hawks could use that money to get 2 vets that would overall improve their team more long term, and Hayward seems focused on a long-term deal.

Atlanta only makes sense if the Celtics are taking back some salary, that's the only way it makes sense for them.

I think more likely destinations are:
Indy
Knicks (If they want to keep Portis)
Dallas (sneaky possibility now that the Giannis chase is likely over)
Magic
 

Swedgin

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2013
370
I'm liking the ATL angle here. They can take him into cap space so the question is who/what is fair compensation.

Mileage may vary, but desireables from ATL include the #6 pick, Huerter, Collins, future picks. Maybe Capela? Maybe Dedmon?
Why would they trade for him, if he was interested in playing there? Why not just have him opt out and sign him into that space without giving the Celtics anything?
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
18,957
Why would they trade for him, if he was interested in playing there? Why not just save him opt out and sign him into that space without giving the Celtics anything?
This is indeed the flaw in the ATL logic. If both sides are interested long term there is no reason to S&T. If Hayward isn't interested, not much reason to trade for him, and more importantly, not much reason for him to opt in vs. holding out for somewhere he wants to go.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
42,832
I think Atlanta makes almost no sense. Teams don't give away assets for no reason. The Hawks aren't trading anything of value to sign Hayward to a long term deal that they could just sign in a week.
They don't need to trade anything of value because the value is Hayward off of the books and using that $34.2M exception. A team *might* do a S&T because down the road Atlanta may be on other side of things.

I don't think that's where this is headed, but Atlanta gets goodwill. Wasn't the Rozier/Walker deal something like that? It didn't need to be a S&T did it?
 

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,834
Santa Monica
Extending to Thursday, helps the Celtics

Feels like GH/Bartlestein did this because they are extending, and wanted to give Danny more time to find the best deal for Kemba.

Draft stock will be added by the C's and throughout the league by Thursday, so plenty of cheap movable pieces. If Danny can add a solid bench piece for Kemba and payroll flex that's a win
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
19,252
Extending to Thursday, helps the Celtics

Feels like GH/Bartlestein did this because they are extending, and wanted to give Danny more time to find the best deal for Kemba.

Draft stock will be added by the C's and throughout the league by Thursday, so plenty of cheap movable pieces. If Danny can add a solid bench piece for Kemba and payroll flex that's a win
We're going to be down K & H? What are we getting back?
 

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,834
Santa Monica
We're going to be down K & H? What are we getting back?
C's keep and extend Hayward. Hayward is the 3rd offensive option, Smart starts at PG.

Kemba-Ya brings his offense and good vibes to another team. Danny gets the flexibility to add all the vets the Rockets throw away after they deal Harden/Russ

the 2 days extra gives Danny a chance to pick through Fertitta's yard sale
 
Last edited:

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,834
Santa Monica
Wait, why would we be trading Kemba?
1. Kemba's defense is bad, its even worse with an injured knee
2. the JayCrews emergence on offense
3. His timeline doesn't match up with the Jays
4. Smart can start at PG. Team was more efficient with MS on the court than KW
5. Kemba less explosive offensively with those knee issue
6. Payroll flexibility

I presume the next question is If we know all of this, why would a team trade for him?
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
18,957
1. Kemba's defense is bad, its even worse with an injured knee
2. the JayCrews emergence on offense
3. His timeline doesn't match up with the Jays
4. Smart can start at PG. Team was more efficient with MS on the court than KW
5. Kemba less explosive offensively with those knee issue
6. Payroll flexibility

I presume the next question is If we know all of this, why would a team trade for him?
He's really good at Basketball.

I also disagree with 3, no player in the NBA has a timeline more than 3 years at a time. If the Celtics aren't contenders in the next 3 years we'll start hearing about Tatum trades to somewhere he can win, same as Giannis and AD, and PG and so on and so on.
 

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,834
Santa Monica
Do they last one calendar year or one NBA year? That is, given the compressed schedule, is a TPE worth more right now than it would be normally, because it lasts a few months into the next season?
It's supposed to be 1 calendar year. Last year TPE's were extended due to COVID. So they will probably be shortened this season to match the NBA year.

Here is a quick primer


I still think TPE's will be worth more this year, since teams will be losing 40% of revenue. Some around here disagree, think TPEs are worthless, and the C's need their playoff roster set Day 1 of the pre-season. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,834
Santa Monica
He's really good at Basketball.

I also disagree with 3, no player in the NBA has a timeline more than 3 years at a time. If the Celtics aren't contenders in the next 3 years we'll start hearing about Tatum trades to somewhere he can win, same as Giannis and AD, and PG and so on and so on.
If he's healthy, he's really good at basketball. If we get post-All-Star game Kemba, he isn't worth the freight.

I'd say its a coin toss he is healthy this season

as far as #3: Kemba is in decline, the Jays are ascending. Hence their timelines don't match.

With or without Kemba, if the Jays are healthy the C's will be contenders
 
Last edited:

InstaFace

MDLzera
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
15,012
Pittsburgh, PA
1. Kemba's defense is bad, its even worse with an injured knee
2. the JayCrews emergence on offense
3. His timeline doesn't match up with the Jays
4. Smart can start at PG. Team was more efficient with MS on the court than KW
5. Kemba less explosive offensively with those knee issue
6. Payroll flexibility

I presume the next question is If we know all of this, why would a team trade for him?
Hang on a sec. I'm starting from the proposition that the team has a window to win right now, enough talent on the roster to do so. They have a great coach, great team chemistry, an owner willing to spend into the tax, and not a ton of obvious holes other than "Hayward keeps getting holes in him".

We're not trying to win the roster-efficiency title, the payroll-efficiency title, or the "NPV of future assets" title. Don't get me wrong, I'm not 100% sarcastic here, those are actually great things to be trying to win when you don't have a contention window to win the actual title. But we DO have such a window. I have a hard time seeing how trading Hayward is going to improve the 2021-22-23 talent level on the roster, relative to him staying (either on 1/34 or on 3/75 or something).

Why are we preferring any outcome to "he stays, either for 1 year or more than that"? We're not trading him for an all-NBA player. We're not getting a Billy King haul for him, or even a Half-King like what Presti just got for future HOFer Chris Paul. If he's unwilling to stay, then sure, let's talk about what a return might look like. But if he's willing to stay, isn't that our preferred result?
 

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,834
Santa Monica
I have a hard time seeing how trading Hayward is going to improve the 2021-22-23 talent level on the roster, relative to him staying (either on 1/34 or on 3/75 or something).

Why are we preferring any outcome to "he stays, either for 1 year or more than that"? We're not trading him for an all-NBA player. We're not getting a Billy King haul for him, or even a Half-King like what Presti just got for future HOFer Chris Paul. If he's unwilling to stay, then sure, let's talk about what a return might look like. But if he's willing to stay, isn't that our preferred result?
Agreed, that's why I said sign/extend Hayward and trade Kemba.

You quoted me talking about Kemba, Kemba's defense, Kemba's bad knee, Marcus Smart playing PG and my very last point was payroll flexibility in the future...all those bread crumbs should have led you to my point




C's keep and extend Hayward. Hayward is the 3rd offensive option, Smart starts at PG.

Kemba-Ya brings his offense and good vibes to another team. Danny gets the flexibility to add all the vets the Rockets throw away after they deal Harden/Russ

the 2 days extra gives Danny a chance to pick through Fertitta's yard sale
and if you feel excited about keeping Kemba to blow up any kind of future flexibility, read below

I'm very cognizant of trying to win now while taking advantage of the market conditions that COVID has presented

 
Last edited:

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
9,571
Hang on a sec. I'm starting from the proposition that the team has a window to win right now, enough talent on the roster to do so. They have a great coach, great team chemistry, an owner willing to spend into the tax, and not a ton of obvious holes other than "Hayward keeps getting holes in him".

We're not trying to win the roster-efficiency title, the payroll-efficiency title, or the "NPV of future assets" title. Don't get me wrong, I'm not 100% sarcastic here, those are actually great things to be trying to win when you don't have a contention window to win the actual title. But we DO have such a window. I have a hard time seeing how trading Hayward is going to improve the 2021-22-23 talent level on the roster, relative to him staying (either on 1/34 or on 3/75 or something).

Why are we preferring any outcome to "he stays, either for 1 year or more than that"? We're not trading him for an all-NBA player. We're not getting a Billy King haul for him, or even a Half-King like what Presti just got for future HOFer Chris Paul. If he's unwilling to stay, then sure, let's talk about what a return might look like. But if he's willing to stay, isn't that our preferred result?
He was talking about Kemba, not Gordo. And they’re going to have to replace Kemba sooner rather than later if the loss of quickness is real.
 

Pilgrim

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 24, 2006
2,237
Jamaica Plain
Not surprising... as he points out in the piece there is little reason for a trade since they have cap space. My guess is Hayward doesn't have them near the top of his list, hence why he pushed back the deadline in the hope of getting something done somewhere he'd prefer
They will be able to skim a pick from Boston if they do it as a sign and trade, and get a nice bonus for signing a guy they were going to sign anyway. Makes sense for both teams if thats where he wants to go.
 

Swedgin

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2013
370
Hang on a sec. I'm starting from the proposition that the team has a window to win right now, enough talent on the roster to do so. They have a great coach, great team chemistry, an owner willing to spend into the tax, and not a ton of obvious holes other than "Hayward keeps getting holes in him".

We're not trying to win the roster-efficiency title, the payroll-efficiency title, or the "NPV of future assets" title. Don't get me wrong, I'm not 100% sarcastic here, those are actually great things to be trying to win when you don't have a contention window to win the actual title. But we DO have such a window. I have a hard time seeing how trading Hayward is going to improve the 2021-22-23 talent level on the roster, relative to him staying (either on 1/34 or on 3/75 or something).

Why are we preferring any outcome to "he stays, either for 1 year or more than that"? We're not trading him for an all-NBA player. We're not getting a Billy King haul for him, or even a Half-King like what Presti just got for future HOFer Chris Paul. If he's unwilling to stay, then sure, let's talk about what a return might look like. But if he's willing to stay, isn't that our preferred result?
I think you have absolutely the right frame on the question. But one on your inputs is bad. There is no 3/75 extension to be had. The luxury tax implications make retaining GH at anything approaching market rate unrealistic (unless they commit some major roster surgery, namely moving Kemba.)

The calculus is really one of year of GH and nothing in return thereafter vs. what he fetches in a sign and trade. For some folks here I think the answer is always the latter. I agree with you that that view is wrong headed. However, there is a point where the return could make it worth it me (and that point got a little easier to get to after the Bucks deals). Where you draw that line is a place where I think reasonable minds can differ.
 

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,834
Santa Monica
I think you have absolutely the right frame on the question. But one on your inputs is bad. There is no 3/75 extension to be had. The luxury tax implications make retaining GH at anything approaching market rate unrealistic (unless they commit some major roster surgery, namely moving Kemba.)

The calculus is really one of year of GH and nothing in return thereafter vs. what he fetches in a sign and trade. For some folks here I think the answer is always the latter. I agree with you that that view is wrong headed. However, there is a point where the return could make it worth it me (and that point got a little easier to get to after the Bucks deals). Where you draw that line is a place where I think reasonable minds can differ.
My wrong-headed answer is to keep the best player (Hayward) and try to move the lesser player (Kemba) now (if it can be done). Not only do you gain flexibility in future seasons (when the Jays will be at their peak) but Danny can add players later this season that could add more value to a championship run in 2021.

Clearly, Tilman Fertitta is the first seller, which many of us signaled weeks ago. More to come as the season wears on.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
15,012
Pittsburgh, PA
Agreed, that's why I said sign/extend Hayward and trade Kemba.

You quoted me talking about Kemba, Kemba's defense, Kemba's bad knee, Marcus Smart playing PG and my very last point was payroll flexibility in the future...all those bread crumbs should have led you to my point
That's fine, but then I'm no less confused because our contention window depends on Kemba being healthy and productive. Trading him leaves us with a gaping quality-PG shaped hole, with no real prospect to fill it now that Brown's extension kicks in.

I don't see how our bet can't be "let's see if we can win with Hayward and Kemba", because not only is there no meaningful way to add high-end talent right now, I'm not sure there's a way to go down one rung on the talent ladder with either of them in exchange for someone with better health projections, either.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
9,571
That's fine, but then I'm no less confused because our contention window depends on Kemba being healthy and productive. Trading him leaves us with a gaping quality-PG shaped hole, with no real prospect to fill it now that Brown's extension kicks in.

I don't see how our bet can't be "let's see if we can win with Hayward and Kemba", because not only is there no meaningful way to add high-end talent right now, I'm not sure there's a way to go down one rung on the talent ladder with either of them in exchange for someone with better health projections, either.
Long term Boston needs to pick one or the other, because Hayward is clearly unhappy in the other guy on the floor role and the owners aren't likely to want those luxury tax bills in the reduced revenue landscape likely to dominate the next 18-24 months. And Tatum's going sunshine supernova has lessened the need for Kemba's closing ability (which might be damaged by the damaged knee). The best reason for wishing that the knee were healthy is that it would facilitate a deal.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
7,292
Kiev, Ukraine
I’m old enough to remember when people thought the Kyrie trade was bad value because IT was better.

If you have a small guard past his peak showing injury issues, you hit the “sell” button as fast as you can.
 

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,834
Santa Monica
That's fine, but then I'm no less confused because our contention window depends on Kemba being healthy and productive. Trading him leaves us with a gaping quality-PG shaped hole, with no real prospect to fill it now that Brown's extension kicks in.

I don't see how our bet can't be "let's see if we can win with Hayward and Kemba", because not only is there no meaningful way to add high-end talent right now, I'm not sure there's a way to go down one rung on the talent ladder with either of them in exchange for someone with better health projections, either.
I guess that's where we differ, I believe the Celtics "contention window" is dependent on Brown/Tatum. Whatever you saw last year from the Jays, will be even better this season IMO. That's a better bet than Kemba being healthy and productive this year (or the next 3 seasons). What exactly is Kemba's ultimate upside going forward? 3rd option on offense and a defensive liability. I don't believe Danny should sit on his hands and wish cast Kemba's past mileage and chronic knee problems away. The downside (an IT backslide) could be devastating.

Marcus Smart is more than capable of starting and shutting down opposing PGs.

Neither of us knows what rung of talent could be had with a TPE, but I suspect it's more than you envision.
 

128

Member
SoSH Member
May 4, 2019
2,183
This is hardly clear.
Agreed. I've never gotten the sense that the post-injury Hayward has had enough self-confidence to want to be the alpha dog. On the court, at least, he seems comfortable deferring to the Jays.
 

128

Member
SoSH Member
May 4, 2019
2,183
From Jared Weiss' latest article in The Athletic:

According to a person familiar with Hayward’s thinking, the 30-year-old former All-Star wants to continue to be a core part of a winning team and would not want to go to Atlanta. Hayward delaying his $34 million player option deadline to Thursday at 5 p.m. ET indicates that he wants more options. This rumor that the Hawks are in play seems like posturing to create a perception of leverage, that Hayward would be happy to join Atlanta either on his current contract or in a new multi-year deal.
 
Last edited:

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
4,566
Agreed. I've never gotten the sense that the post-injury Hayward has had enough self-confidence to want to be the alpha dog. On the court, at least, he seems comfortable deferring to the Jays.
It's a minority narrative, but there are some folks out there complaining that Hayward was mistreated by the Celtics. It's a perspective I find quite mind-boggling. He was a starter (or received starter minutes) in the beginning of his second year here when, based on ability to contribute, he clearly didn't deserve them. But, the Celtics wanted to allow him to rehabilitate in games - which had a negative impact on team chemistry.

There are those that felt like Hayward wasn't used appropriately in games by the Celtics, but it's really hard for me to see that take. Hayward touched the ball a lot, and he was the one making those decisions about whether to take the shot or dish it off.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
11,420
It's a minority narrative, but there are some folks out there complaining that Hayward was mistreated by the Celtics. It's a perspective I find quite mind-boggling. He was a starter (or received starter minutes) in the beginning of his second year here when, based on ability to contribute, he clearly didn't deserve them. But, the Celtics wanted to allow him to rehabilitate in games - which had a negative impact on team chemistry.

There are those that felt like Hayward wasn't used appropriately in games by the Celtics, but it's really hard for me to see that take. Hayward touched the ball a lot, and he was the one making those decisions about whether to take the shot or dish it off.
Whoever promotes that narrative has zero credibility. Had he not had a freak wrist injury early this season, or landed freakishly on someone's foot in Orlando, we would not be having this conversation.

For someone who is supposedly discontented, he returned to the bubble for the Celtics playoff matchup against the Heat while still obviously in pain, and missed the birth of his child to boot.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
42,832
Agreed. I've never gotten the sense that the post-injury Hayward has had enough self-confidence to want to be the alpha dog. On the court, at least, he seems comfortable deferring to the Jays.
Same. And if Atlanta is a place he might want to go he's not going to be alpha with Trae Young there.

EDIT: Just read the very next post where it says he doesn't want the A.T.L.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
That CelticsBlog article, and more particularly, the stats therein about performances of various 3-man combos from last year, makes me really hope that the next 48 hours brings a Kemba trade and a Hayward extension. Ideally, the Kemba trade would still leave two of the 3 1st round picks this year to take a swing at a PG.

The only downside to trading Kemba that I have read here is the perception that trading a big FA signing after one year will effect negative future outcomes. If the improvements bring a title, that title's allure will vastly outweigh any negative vibes from a Kemba trade.
 

Jeff Van GULLY

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2005
3,573
Can Gordon stay healthy? I feel like most of these have been freak injuries but he is starting to get older...

I agree with those who prefer Gordon to Kemba. While I love what he brought in terms of a team first attitude and washed the stink of Kyrie from the team, defensively you could see how Kemba’s size inhibits the Celtics team defense. Some flashbacks to IT when I watched him this year.

He did the best he could—and came up with some solid strips/steals in the playoffs—but coupled with the knee, he doesn’t have as much offensive/defensive balance that Hayward offers.

The idea of rolling with an oversized guard/wing grouping with Hayward running point just sounds like a lot of fun.
 

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,834
Santa Monica
That CelticsBlog article, and more particularly, the stats therein about performances of various 3-man combos from last year, makes me really hope that the next 48 hours brings a Kemba trade and a Hayward extension. Ideally, the Kemba trade would still leave two of the 3 1st round picks this year to take a swing at a PG.

The only downside to trading Kemba that I have read here is the perception that trading a big FA signing after one year will effect negative future outcomes. If the improvements bring a title, that title's allure will vastly outweigh any negative vibes from a Kemba trade.
Agreed, title allure trumps all. Anyone that is saying the Celtics can't compete for a Championship next season without both Kemba and Hayward isn't paying attention (or looking at the basic stats).

Danny/Celtics got a huge break with the CAP not getting reset lower, they should take advantage of other teams' desire for a past All-Star and try their best to deal Kemba and keep Hayward

I also feel the whole concept of a "Free-Agency perception hit" for trading Kemba is silly. If the Celtics survived trading a heroic IT4, before he even got a decent contract, then they can survive trading Kemba after guaranteeing him $140MM.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
37,238
Agreed, title allure trumps all. Anyone that is saying the Celtics can't compete for a Championship next season without both Kemba and Hayward isn't paying attention (or looking at the basic stats).

Danny/Celtics got a huge break with the CAP not getting reset lower, they should take advantage of other teams' desire for a past All-Star and try their best to deal Kemba and keep Hayward

I also feel the whole concept of a "Free-Agency perception hit" for trading Kemba is silly. If the Celtics survived trading a heroic IT4, before he even got a decent contract, then they can survive trading Kemba after guaranteeing him $140MM.
And the simple reality is that the Celtics won't have cap space for a while nor will they be at the top of the pecking order for ring chasing MLE talent anytime soon either. I'm not concerned about the impact of trading Kemba if there is a good deal to be made. I remain skeptical that there is so I fully expect that he returns and we get to play the fun load management game with him.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
11,554
Santa Monica, CA
If the Gordo era is over, and this is all we got out of him, I'm sad I ignored the July 4th parade in 2017 checking for updates on him.

Personally I'd keep him and hope he stays healthy. He's been banged up but not with anything that should be with him in 2021. And he's another year removed from the real injury.

Move Kemba, keep Gordo.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
And the simple reality is that the Celtics won't have cap space for a while nor will they be at the top of the pecking order for ring chasing MLE talent anytime soon either. I'm not concerned about the impact of trading Kemba if there is a good deal to be made. I remain skeptical that there is so I fully expect that he returns and we get to play the fun load management game with him.
I'm not sure I agree with the bolded. As long as the East remains the easier path to the Finals, the top teams in the East may see players want to escape the log jam in the West (cf. Kawhi to TOR 2019; Harden's reported desire to head to BK).
MIL seems to have improved, but they still haven't made it to the Finals once.
MIA has a lot of question marks in terms of the upcoming season.
Who knows what BK will look like, with or without Harden, what with Durant coming back from injury and the mercurial nature of Kyrie.

In many ways, Boston, with a pretty solid core of Tatum/Brown/Smart, plus stable coaching and management, plus there trips to the final four in the last 4 years, seems to be a pretty desirable place.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
37,238
I'm not sure I agree with the bolded. As long as the East remains the easier path to the Finals, the top teams in the East may see players want to escape the log jam in the West (cf. Kawhi to TOR 2019; Harden's reported desire to head to BK).
MIL seems to have improved, but they still haven't made it to the Finals once.
MIA has a lot of question marks in terms of the upcoming season.
Who knows what BK will look like, with or without Harden, what with Durant coming back from injury and the mercurial nature of Kyrie.

In many ways, Boston, with a pretty solid core of Tatum/Brown/Smart, plus stable coaching and management, plus there trips to the final four in the last 4 years, seems to be a pretty desirable place.
It is and Boston will certainly be in the mix but there is always LA, Miami is now equally desirable, Brooklyn may add a 3rd star, Philly could be emerging, etc. I don't think a Kemba trade would impact an MLE FA's decision one bit. But reasonable minds can disagree.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.