The Hayward S&T: Missed Opportunity? (Merged)

[Roy H.]

I hope that interview with Pritchard isn't indicative of who he is as as a professional - it wasn't very becoming.

Why?  For being candid?  Was Danny equally unbecoming for discussing the failed trade with Justice Winslow?

[Moranis]

If Indy wanted Hayward so bad they could easily have matched the Charlotte offer and continued negotiating with Boston. I find it incredibly difficult to believe that Hayward's agent, a very good player agent, wouldn't have offered Indy a chance to match Charlotte's offer.

All the stuff coming out of Indy seems like a PR smokescreen to me. It takes three parties to do a sign and trade and Gordo wanted money that Indy looks like they didn't want to pay him. That's the story right there. Everything else is white noise.

It is getting pretty annoying in this thread that people just assume with 100% certainty that Ainge/Pritchard could have gotten this deal done before Hayward's agent actually explored possibilities beyond IND. Sure, I buy that Hayward was interested in going to the Pacers, but the only other team (besides BOS) that he ever actually signed with in the past was CHA; it's just that UTA matched that contract.

Hayward signed for the most money with a franchise/city that he apparently likes. Would I rather have Turner/McDermott/a 1st? Of course, but that seemingly was never in the cards.

Since Danny rejected that offer, I guess we will never know with absolute certainty.  I tend to trust the word of a long term, respected GM when he goes on record though.

I hope that interview with Pritchard isn't indicative of who he is as as a professional - it wasn't very becoming. You are right that we may never know, but I find it hard to believe that Hayward's agent was just ready to accept a deal w/ IND w/o searching for potentially better offers. As nick noted above, if IND was willing to pay $30M/yr, then he would probably be there right now.

But even then there are no guarantees. It was seemingly important for Hayward to spread his wings and show he could be an All-Star/best player on a team again. That wasn't going to happen in BOS or IND. He may have been willing to give up that up to go back home to IND (and getting out of Boston asap), but apparently not for less money. It seems Pritchard and Ainge probably made assumptions about what Hayward really wanted w/o taking into account that it really was up to him in the end.

Charlotte was looking at other players, it was only when those fell through and Hayward was still out there that they moved back in.  Had Boston and Indiana made a trade on the first day, Charlotte never would have been in play and they were really the only other team that had any real interest in Hayward.  So if the trade would have been done, Hayward would be a Pacer.  It was because Boston and Indiana couldn't reach a deal that allowed Charlotte to move back in when their other targets went off the board and Charlotte knew they had to pay more than Indiana to get Hayward.  They had to pay the premium because Hayward wanted to go home.  I do wonder what would have happened had Charlotte not moved back in. 

[nickagneta]

If Indy wanted Hayward so bad they could easily have matched the Charlotte offer and continued negotiating with Boston. I find it incredibly difficult to believe that Hayward's agent, a very good player agent, wouldn't have offered Indy a chance to match Charlotte's offer.

All the stuff coming out of Indy seems like a PR smokescreen to me. It takes three parties to do a sign and trade and Gordo wanted money that Indy looks like they didn't want to pay him. That's the story right there. Everything else is white noise.

Talks between Indiana and Boston had been broken. What was there to talk about for Hayward's agent?
As long as Boston wouldn't agree to the Indiana offer it was impossible for Hayward to sign a contract there.

All the reports say the same: Indiana offered Turner + McDermott + 1st rounder (probably protected). From the beginning it was reported that Turner was on the table and we even had reports that Boston was looking for suitors for Turner to involve a 3rd team. Then we even had a detailed report that Boston wanted Warren + Turner or Oladipo, and wasn't satisfied with the Indiana offer.

Then we had reports that talks between Boston and Indiana had stalled and that there wasn't any progress in these negotiations. And then Hayward signed with the Hornets. We even had an interview by the Indiana GM that they were unwilling to offer anything more than Turner + McDermott + 1st.

There really is no mystery here. I haven't seen any report that would suggest otherwise. Oladipo and Warren were off the table and Ainge wasn't high on Turner, or at least not enough to agree to a sign-and-trade of Hayward to the Pacers.

The only question is whether Hayward would have reconsidered signing with the Pacers if the Hornets would have been in time to come up with their bigger offer. I think Hayward would have preferred to play in Indiana, but that's something we don't really know.

All the other information is out there, in fact more than usual, probably because the Pacers got frustrated that Ainge wasn't willing to accept the offer they deemed very reasonable and it was hurting both franchises (Pacers not getting Hayward, Celtics seeing Hayward leave for nothing).

Again. White noise.

There are two negotiations occurring at the same time during sign and trades, between the free agent and various teams and between the free agent's team and any team that might want to sign and trade the player. The more important negotiations are those between the player and teams he is negotiating with.

Hayward's agent was negotiating with multiple teams and got offers from multiple teams. Indy had committed to 4 years $100 million. New York had made aggressive similar offers, as did Charlotte. Eventually Charlotte upped their offer.

As I said, Hayward's agent is a good agent. If you believe Hayward's agent didn't let Indy know the offer to match was 4 years $120 million, then you really don't get how player agents work.

Indy knew the price went up and backed off. They decided that money, plus what they would have to give up in a trade, was too much. So they went into PR damage control mode and pointed the finger at Danny.

But it was their decision not to match the Charlotte offer that ended things. They were every bit as unyielding in their negotiations with Boston as Ainge was in return. If they said they would match the Charlotte order, they could have continued negotiating the terms of the trade with Boston. There was no giant rush to get the deal done. Just look at how long after Hayward decided to sign in Charlotte before the Boston sign and trade with Charlotte was consummated. There was still time for Indy and Boston to work out a deal if Indy matched the money. But they didn't. The money was too much.

The Pacers didn't match the Charlotte money and were just as stringent and hard headed in their trade negotiations with Ainge, as Ainge was in return, but somehow Celtics fans believe it's all Danny's fault, because the team that went cheap and played hardball just as much as Ainge leaked some of the offers being bandied back and forth.

Sorry, I don't buy that. Hayward chose Charlotte because of the money, the money Indy didn't want to offer. Indy offers the money and eventually, Ainge and Pritchard would have come to terms on a deal. The contract talks between Hayward's representatives and the teams were the more important of the talks happening and Indy balked. End of story.

[Roy H.]

If Indy wanted Hayward so bad they could easily have matched the Charlotte offer and continued negotiating with Boston. I find it incredibly difficult to believe that Hayward's agent, a very good player agent, wouldn't have offered Indy a chance to match Charlotte's offer.

All the stuff coming out of Indy seems like a PR smokescreen to me. It takes three parties to do a sign and trade and Gordo wanted money that Indy looks like they didn't want to pay him. That's the story right there. Everything else is white noise.

Talks between Indiana and Boston had been broken. What was there to talk about for Hayward's agent?
As long as Boston wouldn't agree to the Indiana offer it was impossible for Hayward to sign a contract there.

All the reports say the same: Indiana offered Turner + McDermott + 1st rounder (probably protected). From the beginning it was reported that Turner was on the table and we even had reports that Boston was looking for suitors for Turner to involve a 3rd team. Then we even had a detailed report that Boston wanted Warren + Turner or Oladipo, and wasn't satisfied with the Indiana offer.

Then we had reports that talks between Boston and Indiana had stalled and that there wasn't any progress in these negotiations. And then Hayward signed with the Hornets. We even had an interview by the Indiana GM that they were unwilling to offer anything more than Turner + McDermott + 1st.

There really is no mystery here. I haven't seen any report that would suggest otherwise. Oladipo and Warren were off the table and Ainge wasn't high on Turner, or at least not enough to agree to a sign-and-trade of Hayward to the Pacers.

The only question is whether Hayward would have reconsidered signing with the Pacers if the Hornets would have been in time to come up with their bigger offer. I think Hayward would have preferred to play in Indiana, but that's something we don't really know.

All the other information is out there, in fact more than usual, probably because the Pacers got frustrated that Ainge wasn't willing to accept the offer they deemed very reasonable and it was hurting both franchises (Pacers not getting Hayward, Celtics seeing Hayward leave for nothing).

Again. White noise.

There are two negotiations occurring at the same time during sign and trades, between the free agent and various teams and between the free agent's team and any team that might want to sign and trade the player. The more important negotiations are those between the player and teams he is negotiating with.

Hayward's agent was negotiating with multiple teams and got offers from multiple teams. Indy had committed to 4 years $100 million. New York had made aggressive similar offers, as did Charlotte. Eventually Charlotte upped their offer.

As I said, Hayward's agent is a good agent. If you believe Hayward's agent didn't let Indy know the offer to match was 4 years $120 million, then you really don't get how player agents work.

Indy knew the price went up and backed off. They decided that money, plus what they would have to give up in a trade, was too much. So they went into PR damage control mode and pointed the finger at Danny.

But it was their decision not to match the Charlotte offer that ended things. They were every bit as unyielding in their negotiations with Boston as Ainge was in return. If they said they would match the Charlotte order, they could have continued negotiating the terms of the trade with Boston. There was no giant rush to get the deal done. Just look at how long after Hayward decided to sign in Charlotte before the Boston sign and trade with Charlotte was consummated. There was still time for Indy and Boston to work out a deal if Indy matched the money. But they didn't. The money was too much.

The Pacers didn't match the Charlotte money and were just as stringent and hard headed in their trade negotiations with Ainge, as Ainge was in return, but somehow Celtics fans believe it's all Danny's fault, because the team that went cheap and played hardball just as much as Ainge leaked some of the offers being bandied back and forth.

Sorry, I don't buy that. Hayward chose Charlotte because of the money, the money Indy didn't want to offer. Indy offers the money and eventually, Ainge and Pritchard would have come to terms on a deal. The contract talks between Hayward's representatives and the teams were the more important of the talks happening and Indy balked. End of story.

That’s a narrative created by you though. There’s no indication but Danny would have ever agreed to a deal acceptable to Indiana. And the fact of the matter is, Turner plus McDermott plus a number one was on the table, and Danny rejected it.

[footey]

If Indy wanted Hayward so bad they could easily have matched the Charlotte offer and continued negotiating with Boston. I find it incredibly difficult to believe that Hayward's agent, a very good player agent, wouldn't have offered Indy a chance to match Charlotte's offer.

All the stuff coming out of Indy seems like a PR smokescreen to me. It takes three parties to do a sign and trade and Gordo wanted money that Indy looks like they didn't want to pay him. That's the story right there. Everything else is white noise.

It is getting pretty annoying in this thread that people just assume with 100% certainty that Ainge/Pritchard could have gotten this deal done before Hayward's agent actually explored possibilities beyond IND. Sure, I buy that Hayward was interested in going to the Pacers, but the only other team (besides BOS) that he ever actually signed with in the past was CHA; it's just that UTA matched that contract.

Hayward signed for the most money with a franchise/city that he apparently likes. Would I rather have Turner/McDermott/a 1st? Of course, but that seemingly was never in the cards.

Since Danny rejected that offer, I guess we will never know with absolute certainty.  I tend to trust the word of a long term, respected GM when he goes on record though.

I hope that interview with Pritchard isn't indicative of who he is as as a professional - it wasn't very becoming. You are right that we may never know, but I find it hard to believe that Hayward's agent was just ready to accept a deal w/ IND w/o searching for potentially better offers. As nick noted above, if IND was willing to pay $30M/yr, then he would probably be there right now.

But even then there are no guarantees. It was seemingly important for Hayward to spread his wings and show he could be an All-Star/best player on a team again. That wasn't going to happen in BOS or IND. He may have been willing to give up that up to go back home to IND (and getting out of Boston asap), but apparently not for less money. It seems Pritchard and Ainge probably made assumptions about what Hayward really wanted w/o taking into account that it really was up to him in the end.

Charlotte was looking at other players, it was only when those fell through and Hayward was still out there that they moved back in.  Had Boston and Indiana made a trade on the first day, Charlotte never would have been in play and they were really the only other team that had any real interest in Hayward.  So if the trade would have been done, Hayward would be a Pacer.  It was because Boston and Indiana couldn't reach a deal that allowed Charlotte to move back in when their other targets went off the board and Charlotte knew they had to pay more than Indiana to get Hayward.  They had to pay the premium because Hayward wanted to go home.  I do wonder what would have happened had Charlotte not moved back in.

It stuns me how casual fans like Roy and Moranis get access to the Celtics trade room and are privy to what deals were acceptable to Gordon Hayward, his agent and the Pacers, all signed up in a neat package but rejected by Ainge.

[Roy H.]

If Indy wanted Hayward so bad they could easily have matched the Charlotte offer and continued negotiating with Boston. I find it incredibly difficult to believe that Hayward's agent, a very good player agent, wouldn't have offered Indy a chance to match Charlotte's offer.

All the stuff coming out of Indy seems like a PR smokescreen to me. It takes three parties to do a sign and trade and Gordo wanted money that Indy looks like they didn't want to pay him. That's the story right there. Everything else is white noise.

It is getting pretty annoying in this thread that people just assume with 100% certainty that Ainge/Pritchard could have gotten this deal done before Hayward's agent actually explored possibilities beyond IND. Sure, I buy that Hayward was interested in going to the Pacers, but the only other team (besides BOS) that he ever actually signed with in the past was CHA; it's just that UTA matched that contract.

Hayward signed for the most money with a franchise/city that he apparently likes. Would I rather have Turner/McDermott/a 1st? Of course, but that seemingly was never in the cards.

Since Danny rejected that offer, I guess we will never know with absolute certainty.  I tend to trust the word of a long term, respected GM when he goes on record though.

I hope that interview with Pritchard isn't indicative of who he is as as a professional - it wasn't very becoming. You are right that we may never know, but I find it hard to believe that Hayward's agent was just ready to accept a deal w/ IND w/o searching for potentially better offers. As nick noted above, if IND was willing to pay $30M/yr, then he would probably be there right now.

But even then there are no guarantees. It was seemingly important for Hayward to spread his wings and show he could be an All-Star/best player on a team again. That wasn't going to happen in BOS or IND. He may have been willing to give up that up to go back home to IND (and getting out of Boston asap), but apparently not for less money. It seems Pritchard and Ainge probably made assumptions about what Hayward really wanted w/o taking into account that it really was up to him in the end.

Charlotte was looking at other players, it was only when those fell through and Hayward was still out there that they moved back in.  Had Boston and Indiana made a trade on the first day, Charlotte never would have been in play and they were really the only other team that had any real interest in Hayward.  So if the trade would have been done, Hayward would be a Pacer.  It was because Boston and Indiana couldn't reach a deal that allowed Charlotte to move back in when their other targets went off the board and Charlotte knew they had to pay more than Indiana to get Hayward.  They had to pay the premium because Hayward wanted to go home.  I do wonder what would have happened had Charlotte not moved back in.

It stuns me how casual fans like Roy and Moranis get access to the Celtics trade room and are privy to what deals were acceptable to Gordon Hayward, his agent and the Pacers, all signed up in a neat package but rejected by Ainge.

I mean, it’s certainly your right to reject pretty much 100% of the reporting out there, and to dismiss the direct, on record words of one of the participants in talks.

[NKY fan]

If Indy wanted Hayward so bad they could easily have matched the Charlotte offer and continued negotiating with Boston. I find it incredibly difficult to believe that Hayward's agent, a very good player agent, wouldn't have offered Indy a chance to match Charlotte's offer.

All the stuff coming out of Indy seems like a PR smokescreen to me. It takes three parties to do a sign and trade and Gordo wanted money that Indy looks like they didn't want to pay him. That's the story right there. Everything else is white noise.

Talks between Indiana and Boston had been broken. What was there to talk about for Hayward's agent?
As long as Boston wouldn't agree to the Indiana offer it was impossible for Hayward to sign a contract there.

All the reports say the same: Indiana offered Turner + McDermott + 1st rounder (probably protected). From the beginning it was reported that Turner was on the table and we even had reports that Boston was looking for suitors for Turner to involve a 3rd team. Then we even had a detailed report that Boston wanted Warren + Turner or Oladipo, and wasn't satisfied with the Indiana offer.

Then we had reports that talks between Boston and Indiana had stalled and that there wasn't any progress in these negotiations. And then Hayward signed with the Hornets. We even had an interview by the Indiana GM that they were unwilling to offer anything more than Turner + McDermott + 1st.

There really is no mystery here. I haven't seen any report that would suggest otherwise. Oladipo and Warren were off the table and Ainge wasn't high on Turner, or at least not enough to agree to a sign-and-trade of Hayward to the Pacers.

The only question is whether Hayward would have reconsidered signing with the Pacers if the Hornets would have been in time to come up with their bigger offer. I think Hayward would have preferred to play in Indiana, but that's something we don't really know.

All the other information is out there, in fact more than usual, probably because the Pacers got frustrated that Ainge wasn't willing to accept the offer they deemed very reasonable and it was hurting both franchises (Pacers not getting Hayward, Celtics seeing Hayward leave for nothing).

Again. White noise.

There are two negotiations occurring at the same time during sign and trades, between the free agent and various teams and between the free agent's team and any team that might want to sign and trade the player. The more important negotiations are those between the player and teams he is negotiating with.

Hayward's agent was negotiating with multiple teams and got offers from multiple teams. Indy had committed to 4 years $100 million. New York had made aggressive similar offers, as did Charlotte. Eventually Charlotte upped their offer.

As I said, Hayward's agent is a good agent. If you believe Hayward's agent didn't let Indy know the offer to match was 4 years $120 million, then you really don't get how player agents work.

Indy knew the price went up and backed off. They decided that money, plus what they would have to give up in a trade, was too much. So they went into PR damage control mode and pointed the finger at Danny.

But it was their decision not to match the Charlotte offer that ended things. They were every bit as unyielding in their negotiations with Boston as Ainge was in return. If they said they would match the Charlotte order, they could have continued negotiating the terms of the trade with Boston. There was no giant rush to get the deal done. Just look at how long after Hayward decided to sign in Charlotte before the Boston sign and trade with Charlotte was consummated. There was still time for Indy and Boston to work out a deal if Indy matched the money. But they didn't. The money was too much.

The Pacers didn't match the Charlotte money and were just as stringent and hard headed in their trade negotiations with Ainge, as Ainge was in return, but somehow Celtics fans believe it's all Danny's fault, because the team that went cheap and played hardball just as much as Ainge leaked some of the offers being bandied back and forth.

Sorry, I don't buy that. Hayward chose Charlotte because of the money, the money Indy didn't want to offer. Indy offers the money and eventually, Ainge and Pritchard would have come to terms on a deal. The contract talks between Hayward's representatives and the teams were the more important of the talks happening and Indy balked. End of story.

You making a whole bunch of assumptions here.
PR damage control is not needed in place like Indy. Pacers are not the knicks or the Celtics where you have teams of sports pundits dissecting everything. Fans in Indy are pretty chill.
They (fans) wanted Hayward but moved on very quickly from that debacle.
The takeaway is - you reach agreement on first day of free agency and it’s a done deal. At that point Indy had the best offer for Hayward (home team part of the allure ) .. this is the reason they overplayed their hand because they thought they are giving Danny an offer he can’t reject . Danny didn’t expect someone would offer 20mil more to Hayward (that tells you how much he values him) .
 20 million more is a lot for Indy . Their owner have his Simon malls network of shopping locations basically shattered from the pandemic .. at that point in time 20 mill plus luxury tax was a lot to him. This is the reason they wanted to move quickly not exactly indicative of how much they value Hayward.
But it was ok to trash Turner at the time and proclaim that Thompson is much better. Turner is currently top 6 in defensive PPP rating . Where is Tristan?  Not to mention the draft pick the thought of which has Danny salivating each time. It was a mistake at the time from Danny and it’s still a mistake and depending on what happens with the tpe it could turn bad for the Celtics if we rush into a bad deal.

[Vermont Green]

The Boston Globe's Gary Washburn reported last week that the Celtics wanted Myles Turner and either T.J. Warren or Victor Oladipo in return for Hayward, but that Indiana was only offering Turner and Doug McDermott.

This is the reporting.  Pritchard did not provide any specifics other than saying:

"If you can add a player that materially improves you, you have to take a shot," Pritchard said, via J. Michael. " ... It hurt a little more this time (because) the feedback was he wanted to be here. We were probably overplaying in the trade but we were trying to get a special player."

I don't feel that Turner and McDermott is a big opportunity lost and certainly not overpaying by Indy.  Turner costs twice what we got Thompson for and is signed for 3 years.  McDermott doesn't really add anything in my mind but clears salary for Indy.  Plus we have room now to add a couple of additional depth pieces to Thompson and Teague ($11M) which would not be the case if we took back $25M in salary.

So Indy offered Turner and McDermott, Ainge wanted I guess Turner and and either T.J. Warren or Victor Oladipo.  That would have been a lot of salary coming back but OK.  I don't see the big scandal or missed opportunity here.  Turner and McDermott do not excite me that much.  And I can see why Indy did not want to give up TJ Warren.  They ended up getting LeVert for Oladipo so not sure why they would not offer him for Hayward but the "reporting" says they didn't.

To me, the potentially realistic deal was Turner and Oladipo but with something more from Boston than just Hayward.  Maybe a young player (they ended up trading Oladipo for a young player) or a pick.  But it is still only one year of Oladipo so you can't give up too much.  Likely Pritchard and Ainge haggled over this and couldn't agree.  So Pritchard comes out and says Danny was being unreasonable.  Yeah, I guess I just don't see the problem here from the Celtics perspective.

[Roy H.]

The Boston Globe's Gary Washburn reported last week that the Celtics wanted Myles Turner and either T.J. Warren or Victor Oladipo in return for Hayward, but that Indiana was only offering Turner and Doug McDermott.

This is the reporting.  Pritchard did not provide any specifics other than saying:

"If you can add a player that materially improves you, you have to take a shot," Pritchard said, via J. Michael. " ... It hurt a little more this time (because) the feedback was he wanted to be here. We were probably overplaying in the trade but we were trying to get a special player."

I don't feel that Turner and McDermott is a big opportunity lost and certainly not overpaying by Indy.  Turner costs twice what we got Thompson for and is signed for 3 years.  McDermott doesn't really add anything in my mind but clears salary for Indy.  Plus we have room now to add a couple of additional depth pieces to Thompson and Teague ($11M) which would not be the case if we took back $25M in salary.

So Indy offered Turner and McDermott, Ainge wanted I guess Turner and and either T.J. Warren or Victor Oladipo.  That would have been a lot of salary coming back but OK.  I don't see the big scandal or missed opportunity here.  Turner and McDermott do not excite me that much.  And I can see why Indy did not want to give up TJ Warren.  They ended up getting LeVert for Oladipo so not sure why they would not offer him for Hayward but the "reporting" says they didn't.

To me, the potentially realistic deal was Turner and Oladipo but with something more from Boston than just Hayward.  Maybe a young player (they ended up trading Oladipo for a young player) or a pick.  But it is still only one year of Oladipo so you can't give up too much.  Likely Pritchard and Ainge haggled over this and couldn't agree.  So Pritchard comes out and says Danny was being unreasonable.  Yeah, I guess I just don't see the problem here from the Celtics perspective.

Turner is light years better than Thompson, and McDermott ads double digits scoring and shooting.

And, there has been a lot more reporting than just Gary Washburn.

[NKY fan]

The Boston Globe's Gary Washburn reported last week that the Celtics wanted Myles Turner and either T.J. Warren or Victor Oladipo in return for Hayward, but that Indiana was only offering Turner and Doug McDermott.

This is the reporting.  Pritchard did not provide any specifics other than saying:

"If you can add a player that materially improves you, you have to take a shot," Pritchard said, via J. Michael. " ... It hurt a little more this time (because) the feedback was he wanted to be here. We were probably overplaying in the trade but we were trying to get a special player."

I don't feel that Turner and McDermott is a big opportunity lost and certainly not overpaying by Indy.  Turner costs twice what we got Thompson for and is signed for 3 years.  McDermott doesn't really add anything in my mind but clears salary for Indy.  Plus we have room now to add a couple of additional depth pieces to Thompson and Teague ($11M) which would not be the case if we took back $25M in salary.

So Indy offered Turner and McDermott, Ainge wanted I guess Turner and and either T.J. Warren or Victor Oladipo.  That would have been a lot of salary coming back but OK.  I don't see the big scandal or missed opportunity here.  Turner and McDermott do not excite me that much.  And I can see why Indy did not want to give up TJ Warren.  They ended up getting LeVert for Oladipo so not sure why they would not offer him for Hayward but the "reporting" says they didn't.

To me, the potentially realistic deal was Turner and Oladipo but with something more from Boston than just Hayward.  Maybe a young player (they ended up trading Oladipo for a young player) or a pick.  But it is still only one year of Oladipo so you can't give up too much.  Likely Pritchard and Ainge haggled over this and couldn't agree.  So Pritchard comes out and says Danny was being unreasonable.  Yeah, I guess I just don't see the problem here from the Celtics perspective.

Boston reporters worded the pick offered from Indy as “plus a potentially first round pick” meaning a protected first rounder but it’s possible it’s protections were relaxed in following years.
So probably the pick was what they countered Danny to leave Oladipo off the deal. If Danny send them TL and a second rounder plus Hayward maybe we have Oladipo and Turner now. We can guess lol

[tonydelk]

The Boston Globe's Gary Washburn reported last week that the Celtics wanted Myles Turner and either T.J. Warren or Victor Oladipo in return for Hayward, but that Indiana was only offering Turner and Doug McDermott.

This is the reporting.  Pritchard did not provide any specifics other than saying:

"If you can add a player that materially improves you, you have to take a shot," Pritchard said, via J. Michael. " ... It hurt a little more this time (because) the feedback was he wanted to be here. We were probably overplaying in the trade but we were trying to get a special player."

I don't feel that Turner and McDermott is a big opportunity lost and certainly not overpaying by Indy.  Turner costs twice what we got Thompson for and is signed for 3 years.  McDermott doesn't really add anything in my mind but clears salary for Indy.  Plus we have room now to add a couple of additional depth pieces to Thompson and Teague ($11M) which would not be the case if we took back $25M in salary.

So Indy offered Turner and McDermott, Ainge wanted I guess Turner and and either T.J. Warren or Victor Oladipo.  That would have been a lot of salary coming back but OK.  I don't see the big scandal or missed opportunity here.  Turner and McDermott do not excite me that much.  And I can see why Indy did not want to give up TJ Warren.  They ended up getting LeVert for Oladipo so not sure why they would not offer him for Hayward but the "reporting" says they didn't.

To me, the potentially realistic deal was Turner and Oladipo but with something more from Boston than just Hayward.  Maybe a young player (they ended up trading Oladipo for a young player) or a pick.  But it is still only one year of Oladipo so you can't give up too much.  Likely Pritchard and Ainge haggled over this and couldn't agree.  So Pritchard comes out and says Danny was being unreasonable.  Yeah, I guess I just don't see the problem here from the Celtics perspective.

Turner is light years better than Thompson, and McDermott ads double digits scoring and shooting.

And, there has been a lot more reporting than just Gary Washburn.

People are 2nd guessing this deal because Turner's play has been a lot more solid.  No Dipo and Lavert is out.  Turner is going to get a ton of touches.  based off of prior years he was not a special player.  Solid player that I think would have been a good fit.  McDermot is a borderline rotation player.  Just being honest.  I will say since both players were mentioned in trades their effort has seemed to pick up when watching Indy games.  Sometimes these situations light a fire under a players arse.  I'm still glad they didn't settle for this deal.  Hayward on Indy would have made them a very tough team.  I can't stand Indy after the way they dealt with Boston for Paul George and kind of got arrogant about it.  I want Indy to fall into mediocracy because Pritchard the GM is an asshat.

[jambr380]

Again, I don't know why people assume that because Pritchard wanted to get a deal done early and get Hayward on a bargain contract that Hayward's agent wasn't going to put feelers out to other teams to see if they could beat the contract offer. We have to remember - IT WAS ALWAYS HAYWARD'S DECISION - not Ainge's, not Pritchard's. Hayward talked to Jordan on the first night of FA; it's not like this went on for days or weeks and Hayward just moved on. As nick pointed out, Pritchard had the opportunity to match CHA's offer and chose not to. End of story.

Ainge had this to say about the failed trade with IND:

"This gets missed but because it's a sign-and-trade, the player has control. If he doesn't want to go somewhere, or gets a better offer somewhere else, there isn't much you can do."

As for people believing Pritchard and not Ainge. Here are a couple of quotes from recent anonymous front office interviews about Ainge. It doesn't sound like Ainge is the type to beat around the bush:

An Eastern Conference GM: “There’s no (expletive) with Boston. Get in, get out. It might take a bunch of conversations, but they aren’t wasting your time. And you get brutal honesty."

An Eastern Conference Executive: "I find with the Celtics that they know what they want and don’t move off of it. It’s both infuriating and refreshing. At least you don’t waste time.”

Why everybody is so ready to believe Pritchard and not Ainge beats me, but I guess we'll never know. Again, this is coming from somebody who absolutely would rather have Turner, McD, and a 1st over Thompson and a TPE, so it's not like I am trying to defend not doing the deal if it was actually on the table.

[slamtheking]

Again, I don't know why people assume that because Pritchard wanted to get a deal done early and get Hayward on a bargain contract that Hayward's agent wasn't going to put feelers out to other teams to see if they could beat the contract offer. We have to remember - IT WAS ALWAYS HAYWARD'S DECISION - not Ainge's, not Pritchard's. Hayward talked to Jordan on the first night of FA; it's not like this went on for days or weeks and Hayward just moved on. As nick pointed out, Pritchard had the opportunity to match CHA's offer and chose not to. End of story.

Ainge had this to say about the failed trade with IND:

"This gets missed but because it's a sign-and-trade, the player has control. If he doesn't want to go somewhere, or gets a better offer somewhere else, there isn't much you can do."

As for people believing Pritchard and not Ainge. Here are a couple of quotes from recent anonymous front office interviews about Ainge. It doesn't sound like Ainge is the type to beat around the bush:

An Eastern Conference GM: “There’s no (expletive) with Boston. Get in, get out. It might take a bunch of conversations, but they aren’t wasting your time. And you get brutal honesty."

An Eastern Conference Executive: "I find with the Celtics that they know what they want and don’t move off of it. It’s both infuriating and refreshing. At least you don’t waste time.”

Why everybody is so ready to believe Pritchard and not Ainge beats me, but I guess we'll never know. Again, this is coming from somebody who absolutely would rather have Turner, McD, and a 1st over Thompson and a TPE, so it's not like I am trying to defend not doing the deal if it was actually on the table.

I think the end evaluation can't come until something happens with the TPE.  If Danny uses it on one big star, great, this was the way to go.  if he uses it to bring in a couple of really good role players or solid starter, this is still probably the way to go.  if he does nothing and it expires, he possibly screwed the pooch depending on the contracts for Turner/Mcdermott next season and the impact to the cap.

[Moranis]

Again, I don't know why people assume that because Pritchard wanted to get a deal done early and get Hayward on a bargain contract that Hayward's agent wasn't going to put feelers out to other teams to see if they could beat the contract offer. We have to remember - IT WAS ALWAYS HAYWARD'S DECISION - not Ainge's, not Pritchard's. Hayward talked to Jordan on the first night of FA; it's not like this went on for days or weeks and Hayward just moved on. As nick pointed out, Pritchard had the opportunity to match CHA's offer and chose not to. End of story.

Ainge had this to say about the failed trade with IND:

"This gets missed but because it's a sign-and-trade, the player has control. If he doesn't want to go somewhere, or gets a better offer somewhere else, there isn't much you can do."

As for people believing Pritchard and not Ainge. Here are a couple of quotes from recent anonymous front office interviews about Ainge. It doesn't sound like Ainge is the type to beat around the bush:

An Eastern Conference GM: “There’s no (expletive) with Boston. Get in, get out. It might take a bunch of conversations, but they aren’t wasting your time. And you get brutal honesty."

An Eastern Conference Executive: "I find with the Celtics that they know what they want and don’t move off of it. It’s both infuriating and refreshing. At least you don’t waste time.”

Why everybody is so ready to believe Pritchard and not Ainge beats me, but I guess we'll never know. Again, this is coming from somebody who absolutely would rather have Turner, McD, and a 1st over Thompson and a TPE, so it's not like I am trying to defend not doing the deal if it was actually on the table.

I don't get how you can read those quotes and come to the conclusion you are reaching.  Ainge didn't want Turner and McDermott (plus a 1st) - see the direct quote from Ainge below.  He told the Pacers that from day 1 (if your quotes above are accurate).  That is why Hayward moved on and a trade never materialized because Ainge didn't want what the Pacers were offering and a trade was the only way Hayward was going to Indiana for more than the MLE. 

“I understand that perspective because if you don’t know what I know then you really don’t know, at all, what happened. We knew all four of those options and what they were so any trade that came on, it had to be a trade that we wanted, not a trade just to let Gordon go somewhere where he wanted to play.

It had to be something that was good for the Celtics and good for our business, for our luxury tax, for our personnel and the cost of their contracts.”

And here is Pritchard

"If you can add a player that materially improves you, you have to take a shot," " ... It hurt a little more this time (because) the feedback was he wanted to be here. We were probably overplaying in the trade but we were trying to get a special player."

"It can't come at a cost so debilitating that it doesn't make sense,"

Putting the actual quotes from the actual GM's together it seems apparent that the teams couldn't reach a deal on the terms of the trade.  There really is no other way you can read those and not reach that conclusion. 

[Vermont Green]

Turner is light years better than Thompson, and McDermott ads double digits scoring and shooting.

And, there has been a lot more reporting than just Gary Washburn.

OK, you are higher on both than me.  That is fine.  I can tell you that for me, I don't see Turner and McDermott as a great lost opportunity.

And as to other reporting, it is all just reporting, Washburn included.  Pritchard didn't say anything specific.  You and others have implied that we know Ainge passed on some great deal because of what Pritchard said publicly.  It appears Ainge passed on Turner and McDermott.  You think that was a good deal and he should have taken it.  I don't think it was such a great deal and am fine that he didn't.

Boston has lost a number of players to FA.  Irving, Horford, and now Hayward.  This broader issue or concern has more implications than whether you like Turner or not.  We signed Walker as a way to fill the cap gap from Horford and now you look at that and say maybe it would be nice if we had that money to spend on something else.  There is an opportunity cost with every trade or signing, that is difficult to define.  That is why you can't just say "I like Turner more than Thompson so Ainge should have made the deal".  Well, actually you can say that if that is how you feel about Turner but to me that is omitting some of the context.