I think Portland is a dark hours for getting Davis.
Portland gets Davis and Hayward
gives McCollum, Pick 25, 2020 first, Harkless, Leonard
Lillard
Turner
Hayward
Davis
Nurkic
NOP gets
McCollum, Rozier (S&T starting 15 mill), Mo Harkless, Anfernee Simons, Pick 20, Pick 25, 2020 Portland First
Give: Davis, Jrue, Moore
Pelicans get youth, and allstar level player and multiple picks. Also save capspace.
Rozier
McCollum
Harkless
Zion
Randle - Resigned
Boston gets Jrue and Moore
gives: Hayward, pick 20, Rozier s&t
Boston adds a replacement PG/SG who is a terrific defender and a capable scorer.
you are just adamant that you're going to trade away Hayward as well as S&T Rozier regardless of the low-value of Hayward at the moment and the difficulties of making a S&T work under the current CBA.
having said that, this deal sucks for the C's. Hayward, if he were to ever be traded, should have recovered enough to be worth well more than just Jrue and Moore. As crappy a season as Rozier had last year, he's still worth more than Moore. Suggesting we give up a first rounder as well is just rubbing salt in the wound.
from the perspective of NO, the deal sucks for them too. AD alone would be worth more than that package nevermind also giving up Jrue and Moore. A solid starter, an up-and-down combo guard, 2 journeymen and 3 late first rounders. They're better off taking Tatum, Smart, Yabu/Williams and the 3 C's picks (or exchanging the Mem pick for one of this year's picks).
cause team will be better without them, and that is why they should be traded,
Rozier should have been traded at deadline, but Danny has a mancrush on him for some reason.
C's wouldn't be better with Jrue and Moore in their place. trading Hayward for pennies on the dollar is poor asset management. I get you may not like his lack of productivity last year, most don't like it, but his market value is pretty low right now. better to wait to see if he improves for next year which I suspect he will. at that point, depending on the team's make-up, it may be worth trading him in a package for someone better looking to move from their team or he may be back to the player we originally signed. if he hasn't improved, he's easier to move as an expiring deal and the C's come off looking like a franchise that's supportive of its injured players. if he's still got issues next year, it's past the point where players in the league would see it as a negative move by the C's.
No argument on dumping Rozier but a S&T isn't happening. the money manipulations required to make a S&T work under the current CBA makes it far too difficult to pull off and that's not even taking into account trying to move him for a player that'd be worth having on the team. He's either going to be let go if Kyrie resigns (just like Danny did with Olynyk when trying to make room for Hayward) or he's going to be resigned if Kyrie leaves (vomit).
Maybe Hayward will get better, but I am not sold that Allstar Utah Hayward in a system designed exclusively around him can get to that point on a team oriented basketball team like Boston.
Also I am not convinced that Hayward, at his best, is better than Jrue at his best.
Where do you get this idea that the Utah system when Hayward was there was built around him and not a team basketball system like ours?
Quin Snyder is a great coach with a great system. He didn't pull a Mike D'Antoni and give the ball to Hayward and let him do everything, D'Antoni does with Harden.
That last Utah team had 6 players with usage percentages between 21% to 27%. By comparison, this year's Celtic "team system" had only 5 players with usage %'s between 21% and 29%. Hayward's usage in Utah was less than Kyrie's here and only slightly higher than Hill and Hood's usage percentage when Hayward played with them in Utah.
As a reference, the Rockets, a team clearly built around Harden have Harden's usage % at 40%.
WHo had the highest usage on that team?
And who would have the highest usage on this team?
I cannot see how one cannot claim that Hayward was the absolute centerpiece of that team, hands down.
And on a team with Tatum, Brown, Horford he would/should not be the centerpiece.
Hayward was the#1 offensive option but that team wasn't built around him. There is a massive difference.
He didn't even take 16 shots a game. Only had a 27% usage rate. He only scoredBy comparison 5 points more per game than the next highest scoring player.
By comparison, Kyrie in Stevens' "team" system had a 29% usage, took 18.5 shots a game and scored almost 7 points a game more than the 2nd leading scorer. And as I said earlier, the Jazz had 6 high usage players, this Celtics team just 6.
I don't know why you are trying to paint a completely false narrative about Gordon in Utah, but Utah has and had a great team system. It wasn't some "superstar" system built around one player.
Ok. If we are going to debate about my terminology then fine.
Yes gordon took the nost shots.
Yes gordon had the highest usage.
Yes gordon was the number 1 option.
Yes Gordon had the 6th highest amount of touches per game
Yes Gordon had a time per possession behind only lebron, giannis and butler
But I guess the system wasnt created to let that happen and instead it was purely coincidental.
And it doent change that he will never be number 1 option here.
Topic: Predict the new Rumor dominoes. (Read 9199 times)