Author Topic: The Hayward S&T: Missed Opportunity? (Merged)  (Read 29813 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: The Hayward S&T: Missed Opportunity?
« Reply #90 on: January 25, 2021, 01:19:11 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58549
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Quote
  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.

That’s the thread in a nutshell.  It got sidetracked by this random idea that that trade could have never been made.  But, the essence of the thread is, was getting Turner + McDermott + 1st a missed opportunity, or is it no big deal in the grand scheme, especially with the TPE?


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: The Hayward S&T: Missed Opportunity?
« Reply #91 on: January 25, 2021, 02:05:32 PM »

Offline keevsnick

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5515
  • Tommy Points: 549
So basically the question is would you rather have:

-Turner, McDermitt, 1st

-28.5 TPE, Thompson, and be out 2 2nds (the price we paid for the TPE)

I think after seeing what we've seen form Thompson and Turner so far I'd rather have the IND deal, even WITHOUT the first but especially with it. Turner+McDermitt puts you into the tax I think but by a small enough amount you could probably get out of it. And you can say you don't want to pay Turner 18 million but I'd rather pay that for a DPOY candidate than 8 million for a guy in Thompson who has been actively bad on defense. And even if you don't like Turner he's been good enough he has positive value on his contract.

But we can't say for sure until we see how they use the TPE.

Re: The Hayward S&T: Missed Opportunity?
« Reply #92 on: January 25, 2021, 02:38:01 PM »

Offline NKY fan

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2349
  • Tommy Points: 106
So basically the question is would you rather have:

-Turner, McDermitt, 1st

-28.5 TPE, Thompson, and be out 2 2nds (the price we paid for the TPE)

I think after seeing what we've seen form Thompson and Turner so far I'd rather have the IND deal, even WITHOUT the first but especially with it. Turner+McDermitt puts you into the tax I think but by a small enough amount you could probably get out of it. And you can say you don't want to pay Turner 18 million but I'd rather pay that for a DPOY candidate than 8 million for a guy in Thompson who has been actively bad on defense. And even if you don't like Turner he's been good enough he has positive value on his contract.

But we can't say for sure until we see how they use the TPE.
We as fans have the privilege to comment in hindsight so yes the Indy deal should have been done.
We can cut Danny some slack if he was given something like 24 hrs to decide because Hayward was in touch with Knicks and Charlotte and Danny didn’t feel like making a quick decision. But I’m more leaning towards him not hesitating but being greedy lol

Re: The Hayward S&T: Missed Opportunity?
« Reply #93 on: January 25, 2021, 03:17:09 PM »

Offline jambr380

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13002
  • Tommy Points: 1756
  • Everybody knows what's best for you
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.

Okay, I get it, the GM quotes are just fluff; but, I provided a quote from Ainge that said in a sign and trade, the player has control. I don't know why you are ignoring that part of it.

I think it's entirely possible that both things are true - Ainge and Pritchard couldn't come to an agreement and Hayward was always going to take the best deal. I believe Ainge and Pritchard thought they had more time to figure out a deal when, in reality, Hayward's agent was always going to use IND's offer to try and get an even better offer out there on the market.

According to recent comments by Hayward, he seemed pretty interested in going just about anywhere. And, while IND may have won the 'tiebreaker' if multiple teams had offered the same amount, I would say he determined which team wanted him the most by which team was offering the most money:
Quote
"Yeah, Atlanta was a team that I was really interested in," Hayward told The Athletic. "I think they’re another group of guys who are obviously young but extremely talented and you saw the additions that they added in the offseason. ... New York was in the mix — the Knicks. Indiana was another team that was really interested, and we had mutual interest for a while. Boston was — like, let’s not forget about Boston. I really wanted to go back to Boston too. There were just a lot of options and a lot of potential teams that I could go to, but I’d say those were the main ones. Atlanta, New York, Boston, Indiana, and then Charlotte obviously."

Re: The Hayward S&T: Missed Opportunity?
« Reply #94 on: January 25, 2021, 03:38:58 PM »

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182
Quote
  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.

That’s the thread in a nutshell.  It got sidetracked by this random idea that that trade could have never been made.  But, the essence of the thread is, was getting Turner + McDermott + 1st a missed opportunity, or is it no big deal in the grand scheme, especially with the TPE?


Personally I don't think Turner & McDermott really changes the team's position in the league hierarchy this season, and I'd rather have the cap flexibility moving forward.

That's setting aside what Ainge might do with the TPE, which could skew things even further.
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain

Re: The Hayward S&T: Missed Opportunity?
« Reply #95 on: January 25, 2021, 03:49:07 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48120
  • Tommy Points: 8794
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
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.
It's not a narrative.

What I don't get is how some think that just because the C's and Pacers couldn't agree to terms early on that that means Hayward would have taken Indy's deal. To me THAT is a narrative.

There were other teams negotiating with Hayward's agent. The deal in question had already been shopped. Charlotte upped their offer.

Do people, especially those that negotiate deals for a living really of the belief that Hayward's agent got Charlotte's offer and didn't shop it trying to get even more money? Do you really think Indy wasn't given a chance to match or beat the Charlotte offer?

Really, some of you lawyers/business people out there really think that?

Also, Danny may have been stubborn about his demands, but so was Indy. All Indy did in leaking info on the negotiations was to put blame elsewhere for not completing the deal. For not looking cheap.

The idea that Ainge was solely the problem in not completing the sign and trade and Hayward's agent and Indy had nothing to do with Hayward ending up in Charlotte boggles my mind.


Re: The Hayward S&T: Missed Opportunity?
« Reply #96 on: January 25, 2021, 03:54:19 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58549
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
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.
It's not a narrative.

What I don't get is how some think that just because the C's and Pacers couldn't agree to terms early on that that means Hayward would have taken Indy's deal. To me THAT is a narrative.

There were other teams negotiating with Hayward's agent. The deal in question had already been shopped. Charlotte upped their offer.

Do people, especially those that negotiate deals for a living really of the belief that Hayward's agent got Charlotte's offer and didn't shop it trying to get even more money? Do you really think Indy wasn't given a chance to match or beat the Charlotte offer?

Really, some of you lawyers/business people out there really think that?

Also, Danny may have been stubborn about his demands, but so was Indy. All Indy did in leaking info on the negotiations was to put blame elsewhere for not completing the deal. For not looking cheap.

The idea that Ainge was solely the problem in not completing the sign and trade and Hayward's agent and Indy had nothing to do with Hayward ending up in Charlotte boggles my mind.

Charlotte didn’t up their offer. They hadn’t made an offer. They only jumped in once negotiations with Indiana stalled, and their initial targets had signed elsewhere. We can’t just ignore all of those facts.

And, regarding whether Indiana would have theoretically give him more money, Indiana was not going to back off it’s compensation. As Prichard explained, they gave all they were willing to give, which is two starting caliber players and a first rounder.  What’s the sense of further negotiations at that point? Danny had declined their best price.

And, I do negotiate for a living. I know that Moran S is an attorney as well. Negotiations work a lot of different ways, and anybody who follows the same pattern every time is doing it wrong. One thing that is universally true, however: once the other side has reached its bottom line, it makes no sense to keep pushing.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: The Hayward S&T: Missed Opportunity?
« Reply #97 on: January 25, 2021, 04:04:52 PM »

Online Vermont Green

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11226
  • Tommy Points: 860
Quote
  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.

That’s the thread in a nutshell.  It got sidetracked by this random idea that that trade could have never been made.  But, the essence of the thread is, was getting Turner + McDermott + 1st a missed opportunity, or is it no big deal in the grand scheme, especially with the TPE?

How do we know there was a first offered?  Was this "rumored" or "reported".  Adding a first to Turner and McDermott does sweeten the pot if that was really the case, I just don't understand where that conclusion came from.  Feels a bit like the goal posts have been moved.

Re: The Hayward S&T: Missed Opportunity?
« Reply #98 on: January 25, 2021, 04:11:24 PM »

Offline NKY fan

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2349
  • Tommy Points: 106
Quote
  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.

That’s the thread in a nutshell.  It got sidetracked by this random idea that that trade could have never been made.  But, the essence of the thread is, was getting Turner + McDermott + 1st a missed opportunity, or is it no big deal in the grand scheme, especially with the TPE?

How do we know there was a first offered?  Was this "rumored" or "reported".  Adding a first to Turner and McDermott does sweeten the pot if that was really the case, I just don't understand where that conclusion came from.  Feels a bit like the goal posts have been moved.
I saw the wording from Boston writers - “plus potentially a first round pick” which means a first round pick with protections. Most likely top 10 to top 14 protection

Re: The Hayward S&T: Missed Opportunity?
« Reply #99 on: January 25, 2021, 04:16:55 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58549
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Quote
  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.

That’s the thread in a nutshell.  It got sidetracked by this random idea that that trade could have never been made.  But, the essence of the thread is, was getting Turner + McDermott + 1st a missed opportunity, or is it no big deal in the grand scheme, especially with the TPE?

How do we know there was a first offered?  Was this "rumored" or "reported".  Adding a first to Turner and McDermott does sweeten the pot if that was really the case, I just don't understand where that conclusion came from.  Feels a bit like the goal posts have been moved.
I saw the wording from Boston writers - “plus potentially a first round pick” which means a first round pick with protections. Most likely top 10 to top 14 protection

Indy reporters indicated the same about the first rounder:

Quote
The Indiana Pacers offered the Boston Celtics Myles Turner, a first-round pick and a rotation player for Gordon Hayward last week, a source with knowledge of the negotiations told IndyStar.


And, for those doubting Hayward’s interest, Shams (the second most connected guy in the business) reported:

Quote
"Gordon Hayward is fully focused and wants to sign a deal with the Pacers."
« Last Edit: January 25, 2021, 04:28:46 PM by Roy H. »


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: The Hayward S&T: Missed Opportunity?
« Reply #100 on: January 25, 2021, 06:04:37 PM »

Offline footey

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15965
  • Tommy Points: 1833
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.
It's not a narrative.

What I don't get is how some think that just because the C's and Pacers couldn't agree to terms early on that that means Hayward would have taken Indy's deal. To me THAT is a narrative.

There were other teams negotiating with Hayward's agent. The deal in question had already been shopped. Charlotte upped their offer.

Do people, especially those that negotiate deals for a living really of the belief that Hayward's agent got Charlotte's offer and didn't shop it trying to get even more money? Do you really think Indy wasn't given a chance to match or beat the Charlotte offer?

Really, some of you lawyers/business people out there really think that?

Also, Danny may have been stubborn about his demands, but so was Indy. All Indy did in leaking info on the negotiations was to put blame elsewhere for not completing the deal. For not looking cheap.

The idea that Ainge was solely the problem in not completing the sign and trade and Hayward's agent and Indy had nothing to do with Hayward ending up in Charlotte boggles my mind.

Charlotte didn’t up their offer. They hadn’t made an offer. They only jumped in once negotiations with Indiana stalled, and their initial targets had signed elsewhere. We can’t just ignore all of those facts.

And, regarding whether Indiana would have theoretically give him more money, Indiana was not going to back off it’s compensation. As Prichard explained, they gave all they were willing to give, which is two starting caliber players and a first rounder.  What’s the sense of further negotiations at that point? Danny had declined their best price.

And, I do negotiate for a living. I know that Moran S is an attorney as well. Negotiations work a lot of different ways, and anybody who follows the same pattern every time is doing it wrong. One thing that is universally true, however: once the other side has reached its bottom line, it makes no sense to keep pushing.

I'm a corporate transactional attorney as well, and, no offense, have probably negotiated more deals than either you or Moranis (I've been practicing since 1983). Not sure that gives either of you (or me)  authority to say what Gordon Hayward was ready to do, unless you are privy to him or his agent.  You seem to be jumping to conclusions based upon the reported offer and counter offer between Indy and Boston.   You guys are assuming that since Boston and Indy were haggling, Gordon was ready to sign with Indy.  That may be the case, but according to Hayward in the recent Athletic article, he was considering 5 different deals.  Has anyone bothered to read that?

If it is true that the trade would have happened (i.e. Hayward would have signed off) if Boston accepted Myles Turner and Dougie McBuckets, was that a bad decision to turn it down? At the moment, in retrospect, it probably was.  Because, since the start of the season (15 games in), Turner is outperforming expectations, at least defensively, and Thompson is underperforming.  And we could probably have used a good shooting wing off the bench right now.  Let's see how it plays out the rest of the year.  Things can change pretty fast.

Re: The Hayward S&T: Missed Opportunity?
« Reply #101 on: January 25, 2021, 06:08:24 PM »

Offline mmmmm

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5308
  • Tommy Points: 862
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.

I'm dubious about your representation of how this went down.

The FA period opened up at 6 pm on Friday.  That was the earliest that any team could talk with Hayward without permission from the Celtics.   You can almost bet that Hayward's agent was on the phone with other teams at that point, whether they called him or he called them.

It's almost certain that Hayward's agent quite rightfully would never have agreed to any deal with IND or BOS before at least testing interest from other potential suitors.   He would be the worst agent on the planet if he did not do so.

Hayward said the next day that Michael Jordan called him later that same Friday evening to 'close the deal'.  That means that there were some sort of conversation between Hayward's camp and the Hornets earlier that evening, but after 6pm, enough to establish mutual interest before bringing in MJ to 'close the deal'.  And the whole thing took only a few hours between when Free Agency officially opened and to when the deal was 'closed'.

The above are basically facts of record.

What I suspect went down is that his agent got the offer from CHA fairly quickly after 6 pm.  He then probably went back to IND and BOS to look for a counter offer and those two teams probably said it was out of their price ranges.   And then the deal was closed shortly after with MJ's call.


NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.

Re: The Hayward S&T: Missed Opportunity?
« Reply #102 on: January 25, 2021, 06:29:07 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58549
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Quote
That may be the case, but according to Hayward in the recent Athletic article, he was considering 5 different deals.  Has anyone bothered to read that?

I have.  We already knew those five teams expressed some level of interest.  There are literally no details in that article about his true preferences, which is natural.  It’s not like he’s going to say “Indy was my first choice, but I settled for Charlotte”.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: The Hayward S&T: Missed Opportunity?
« Reply #103 on: January 25, 2021, 06:54:43 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58549
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
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.

I'm dubious about your representation of how this went down.

The FA period opened up at 6 pm on Friday.  That was the earliest that any team could talk with Hayward without permission from the Celtics.   You can almost bet that Hayward's agent was on the phone with other teams at that point, whether they called him or he called them.

It's almost certain that Hayward's agent quite rightfully would never have agreed to any deal with IND or BOS before at least testing interest from other potential suitors.   He would be the worst agent on the planet if he did not do so.

Hayward said the next day that Michael Jordan called him later that same Friday evening to 'close the deal'.  That means that there were some sort of conversation between Hayward's camp and the Hornets earlier that evening, but after 6pm, enough to establish mutual interest before bringing in MJ to 'close the deal'.  And the whole thing took only a few hours between when Free Agency officially opened and to when the deal was 'closed'.

The above are basically facts of record.

What I suspect went down is that his agent got the offer from CHA fairly quickly after 6 pm.  He then probably went back to IND and BOS to look for a counter offer and those two teams probably said it was out of their price ranges.   And then the deal was closed shortly after with MJ's call.

Are you suggesting that all of this occurred during six hours? 

More “facts” that you left out:

* Hayward extended his opt out date to allow Boston more time to work out a trade;

* Shams reported that Hayward’s singular focus was Indy;

* Indy’s GM expressed that Hayward wanted to be there;

* Indy and Ainge both on record said that a trade didn’t happen because the teams couldn’t agree on compensation.

Quote from: Danny Ainge
it had to be a trade that we wanted, not a trade just to let Gordon go somewhere where he wanted to play.

Isn’t it fair to ask if Danny just misjudged what would be best for the Celts?



I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: The Hayward S&T: Missed Opportunity?
« Reply #104 on: January 25, 2021, 07:22:54 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48120
  • Tommy Points: 8794
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club

Quote from: Danny Ainge
it had to be a trade that we wanted, not a trade just to let Gordon go somewhere where he wanted to play.

Interesting quote. Let's add some context and look at the entirety of it:

Quote
Ainge joined 98.5 The Sports Hub’s Toucher & Rich morning show Tuesday when he talked about the Celtics’ initial offseason plan was to bring Hayward back. Instead, Gordon inked a massive four-year, $120 million deal with the Charlotte Hornets.

The two sides fell to come to an agreement (clearly), however, through no intentions of his own, Ainge says the Celtics anticipated Hayward’s exit plan months ago. But Danny hoped that both sides could come to an agreed destination via a sign-and-trade best for all parties considered.

Ultimately, leaving Ainge and the Celtics with a parting gift in the form of a $28.5 million traded player exception – the largest TPE in NBA history. It wasn’t Plan A, certainly wasn’t Plan B but it was the best Ainge could squeeze out of losing his second max-paid signee in back-to-back years.

“We set out to try to get Gordon (Hayward) to come back,” Ainge said. “That was our number one goal in the offseason was to get Gordon back with the Celtics. He’s a terrific player and I just think that he preferred to go somewhere else, and made his choice to go to Charlotte.

“I think he preferred to be a more featured player and Charlotte was paying him a lot of money and he chose to go there.”

Ainge went on to confirm that the Indiana Pacers was a potential destination for a Gordon Hayward, sign-and-trade deal but said that those talks fell through.

“Indiana was one of a handful of teams, maybe three or four teams would probably be a more accurate description, that we talked about the potential of sign and trades,” Ainge added. “And, as you know, with sign and trades the player controls that because if we work out a deal with another team but if Gordon doesn’t want to go there, then he doesn’t have to go there. It takes all three parties to be pleased.”

As for the specifics surrounding a trade proposal for the Pacers, Ainge pleaded the fifth. He wouldn’t get into which Indiana players were discussed but had plenty to say to those speculating that he asked the Pacers for the farm and wouldn’t settle for less.

“That’s not even close to fair,” Ainge said. “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.”

Ainge, who said it donned on him weeks before Hayward’s decision, believes, either way, Gordon was ready to move on from Boston.

“I think he just wants to be involved in the offense more,” Ainge explained. “Having the ball in his hands to dribble and pass and participate in the offense a little more. I think it’s very common and I think we’ve had some good players. Kemba (Walker), Jaylen (Brown), Jayson (Tatum), and Marcus (Smart); those guys demand the ball some, and I think if you ask each one of them, they’d probably like to have a little bit more of a featured role.

“But that’s the nature of the business that we’re in, that’s not any knock on Gordon in any way, shape, or form.”