Author Topic: Interesting trade idea?  (Read 6188 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Interesting trade idea?
« Reply #15 on: January 19, 2020, 10:04:25 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48120
  • Tommy Points: 8794
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
I don't give a lot of these Hayward trades any credence because I think you guys aren't figuring some important things into your equations.

1. Hayward's problems with the nerves in his previously broken foot are now out and when coupled with his play since coming back from his cortisone shots, means his trade stock has dropped precipitously. I am sure every GM Danny offers up Gordon to is asking their medical teams if Hayward's problems could be long term and if they don't get good answers, this drops Hayward's value more.

2. Teams really don't know if they are going to owe Hayward $15 million on an expiring contract or $49 million over a season and a half. Now some teams might not care, but most will. This tightens up your market and again drops Hayward's value.

3. This reduction in trade value of Hayward more than likely means, if someone is willing to take Hayward on, they now will want more draft capital to make up the value difference.

Maybe Cleveland would take Gordo to dump Love's salary. Clearly, they won't care about these things as to them, they are still saving tremendous amounts of long term money. But, does anyone here want Love's lack of defense and his 3.5 year/$105 million contract, a contract that makes you pay him in his 32-34 year old seasons?

Not sure what other teams won't care about how long Hayward is on their books, for how much and how good he will be during that time, just to get out from under a contract or get something of value because that team may lose one of their players to free agency.

Re: Interesting trade idea?
« Reply #16 on: January 19, 2020, 10:14:16 PM »

Offline NKY fan

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2349
  • Tommy Points: 106
I don't give a lot of these Hayward trades any credence because I think you guys aren't figuring some important things into your equations.

1. Hayward's problems with the nerves in his previously broken foot are now out and when coupled with his play since coming back from his cortisone shots, means his trade stock has dropped precipitously. I am sure every GM Danny offers up Gordon to is asking their medical teams if Hayward's problems could be long term and if they don't get good answers, this drops Hayward's value more.

2. Teams really don't know if they are going to owe Hayward $15 million on an expiring contract or $49 million over a season and a half. Now some teams might not care, but most will. This tightens up your market and again drops Hayward's value.

3. This reduction in trade value of Hayward more than likely means, if someone is willing to take Hayward on, they now will want more draft capital to make up the value difference.

Maybe Cleveland would take Gordo to dump Love's salary. Clearly, they won't care about these things as to them, they are still saving tremendous amounts of long term money. But, does anyone here want Love's lack of defense and his 3.5 year/$105 million contract, a contract that makes you pay him in his 32-34 year old seasons?

Not sure what other teams won't care about how long Hayward is on their books, for how much and how good he will be during that time, just to get out from under a contract or get something of value because that team may lose one of their players to free agency.
I think we should look to teams with cap space next year. Teams like Cleveland and Memphis can use him if he picks his option just because they have to meet minimum salary floor and there is no one better they can spend it on. If he doesn’t pick it they will figure something else ..
there are really a lot of options to make it work and to minimize the draft capital we send out
The question of course is :
Can Hayward be a difference maker this year again if ever?

Re: Interesting trade idea?
« Reply #17 on: January 19, 2020, 10:17:12 PM »

Offline jambr380

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13002
  • Tommy Points: 1756
  • Everybody knows what's best for you
I almost forgot two more points of comparison.

1. Drummond is a terrible free-throw shooter, which makes him hard to leave in at crunch time.

2. Enes this year is much more efficient on offense.

What's the appeal of adding a less-skilled-on-offense Kanter II to the roster?

https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.fcgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1_select=Andre+Drummond&y1=2020&player_id1=drumman01&idx=players&player_id2_hint=Enes+Kanter&player_id2_select=Enes+Kanter&y2=2020&player_id2=kanteen01&idx=players

I agree. There is just absolutely no way in the world Danny would ever trade for Drummond while he has Kanter on the roster (and should be able to sign him at 120% at what he's making now or, at the very worst, the MLE).

I like Drummond, but he makes absolutely no sense as the type of big we need in our system. Heck, Kanter is excellent at what he does (inside scoring, rebounding) and he doesn't even start. I maintain that Hayward and Kanter is better than having Drummond and Kanter.

Re: Interesting trade idea?
« Reply #18 on: January 19, 2020, 10:20:47 PM »

Offline NKY fan

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2349
  • Tommy Points: 106
I almost forgot two more points of comparison.

1. Drummond is a terrible free-throw shooter, which makes him hard to leave in at crunch time.

2. Enes this year is much more efficient on offense.

What's the appeal of adding a less-skilled-on-offense Kanter II to the roster?

https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.fcgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1_select=Andre+Drummond&y1=2020&player_id1=drumman01&idx=players&player_id2_hint=Enes+Kanter&player_id2_select=Enes+Kanter&y2=2020&player_id2=kanteen01&idx=players

I agree. There is just absolutely no way in the world Danny would ever trade for Drummond while he has Kanter on the roster (and should be able to sign him at 120% at what he's making now or, at the very worst, the MLE).

I like Drummond, but he makes absolutely no sense as the type of big we need in our system. Heck, Kanter is excellent at what he does (inside scoring, rebounding) and he doesn't even start. I maintain that Hayward and Kanter is better than having Drummond and Kanter.
How about instead of Drummond we get Tristan and Iggy in exchange of Hayward and second rounders ?

Re: Interesting trade idea?
« Reply #19 on: January 19, 2020, 10:22:17 PM »

Offline Fierce1

  • NGT
  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2630
  • Tommy Points: 121
I almost forgot two more points of comparison.

1. Drummond is a terrible free-throw shooter, which makes him hard to leave in at crunch time.

2. Enes this year is much more efficient on offense.

What's the appeal of adding a less-skilled-on-offense Kanter II to the roster?

https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.fcgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1_select=Andre+Drummond&y1=2020&player_id1=drumman01&idx=players&player_id2_hint=Enes+Kanter&player_id2_select=Enes+Kanter&y2=2020&player_id2=kanteen01&idx=players

I agree. There is just absolutely no way in the world Danny would ever trade for Drummond while he has Kanter on the roster (and should be able to sign him at 120% at what he's making now or, at the very worst, the MLE).

I like Drummond, but he makes absolutely no sense as the type of big we need in our system. Heck, Kanter is excellent at what he does (inside scoring, rebounding) and he doesn't even start. I maintain that Hayward and Kanter is better than having Drummond and Kanter.

Drummond is better than Kanter at blocking shots and is more mobile than Kanter.

Re: Interesting trade idea?
« Reply #20 on: January 19, 2020, 10:24:56 PM »

Offline Fierce1

  • NGT
  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2630
  • Tommy Points: 121
I almost forgot two more points of comparison.

1. Drummond is a terrible free-throw shooter, which makes him hard to leave in at crunch time.

2. Enes this year is much more efficient on offense.

What's the appeal of adding a less-skilled-on-offense Kanter II to the roster?

https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.fcgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1_select=Andre+Drummond&y1=2020&player_id1=drumman01&idx=players&player_id2_hint=Enes+Kanter&player_id2_select=Enes+Kanter&y2=2020&player_id2=kanteen01&idx=players

I agree. There is just absolutely no way in the world Danny would ever trade for Drummond while he has Kanter on the roster (and should be able to sign him at 120% at what he's making now or, at the very worst, the MLE).

I like Drummond, but he makes absolutely no sense as the type of big we need in our system. Heck, Kanter is excellent at what he does (inside scoring, rebounding) and he doesn't even start. I maintain that Hayward and Kanter is better than having Drummond and Kanter.
How about instead of Drummond we get Tristan and Iggy in exchange of Hayward and second rounders ?

If you're moving Hayward for Tristan then why not Hayward, Poirier, and Langford for Kevin Love and Tristan.

That trade works.

Re: Interesting trade idea?
« Reply #21 on: January 19, 2020, 10:32:12 PM »

Offline NKY fan

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2349
  • Tommy Points: 106
I almost forgot two more points of comparison.

1. Drummond is a terrible free-throw shooter, which makes him hard to leave in at crunch time.

2. Enes this year is much more efficient on offense.

What's the appeal of adding a less-skilled-on-offense Kanter II to the roster?

https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.fcgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1_select=Andre+Drummond&y1=2020&player_id1=drumman01&idx=players&player_id2_hint=Enes+Kanter&player_id2_select=Enes+Kanter&y2=2020&player_id2=kanteen01&idx=players

I agree. There is just absolutely no way in the world Danny would ever trade for Drummond while he has Kanter on the roster (and should be able to sign him at 120% at what he's making now or, at the very worst, the MLE).

I like Drummond, but he makes absolutely no sense as the type of big we need in our system. Heck, Kanter is excellent at what he does (inside scoring, rebounding) and he doesn't even start. I maintain that Hayward and Kanter is better than having Drummond and Kanter.
How about instead of Drummond we get Tristan and Iggy in exchange of Hayward and second rounders ?

If you're moving Hayward for Tristan then why not Hayward, Poirier, and Langford for Kevin Love and Tristan.

That trade works.
You’re trying to optimize salaries and have us stuck with Loves contract ... no thanks. He will go down right when you need him and his defense is suspect. I would rather have iggy be the difference maker on the second unit. He can also teach Romeo a thing or two

Re: Interesting trade idea?
« Reply #22 on: January 19, 2020, 10:34:00 PM »

Offline Fierce1

  • NGT
  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2630
  • Tommy Points: 121
I almost forgot two more points of comparison.

1. Drummond is a terrible free-throw shooter, which makes him hard to leave in at crunch time.

2. Enes this year is much more efficient on offense.

What's the appeal of adding a less-skilled-on-offense Kanter II to the roster?

https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.fcgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1_select=Andre+Drummond&y1=2020&player_id1=drumman01&idx=players&player_id2_hint=Enes+Kanter&player_id2_select=Enes+Kanter&y2=2020&player_id2=kanteen01&idx=players

I agree. There is just absolutely no way in the world Danny would ever trade for Drummond while he has Kanter on the roster (and should be able to sign him at 120% at what he's making now or, at the very worst, the MLE).

I like Drummond, but he makes absolutely no sense as the type of big we need in our system. Heck, Kanter is excellent at what he does (inside scoring, rebounding) and he doesn't even start. I maintain that Hayward and Kanter is better than having Drummond and Kanter.
How about instead of Drummond we get Tristan and Iggy in exchange of Hayward and second rounders ?

If you're moving Hayward for Tristan then why not Hayward, Poirier, and Langford for Kevin Love and Tristan.

That trade works.
You’re trying to optimize salaries and have us stuck with Loves contract ... no thanks. He will go down right when you need him and his defense is suspect. I would rather have iggy be the difference maker on the second unit. He can also teach Romeo a thing or two

Well, we'll find out in 2 and a half weeks.

After the trade deadline passes, all the trade talk will stop.

Re: Interesting trade idea?
« Reply #23 on: January 19, 2020, 11:17:54 PM »

Offline gouki88

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31552
  • Tommy Points: 3141
  • 2019 & 2021 CS Historical Draft Champion
God, Hayward for TT & Iggy / Love / Drummond is yuck.
'23 Historical Draft: Orlando Magic.

PG: Terry Porter (90-91) / Steve Francis (00-01)
SG: Joe Dumars (92-93) / Jeff Hornacek (91-92) / Jerry Stackhouse (00-01)
SF: Brandon Roy (08-09) / Walter Davis (78-79)
PF: Terry Cummings (84-85) / Paul Millsap (15-16)
C: Chris Webber (00-01) / Ralph Sampson (83-84) / Andrew Bogut (09-10)

Re: Interesting trade idea?
« Reply #24 on: January 19, 2020, 11:20:36 PM »

Offline NKY fan

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2349
  • Tommy Points: 106
God, Hayward for TT & Iggy / Love / Drummond is yuck.
If Hayward is damaged goods isn’t it better to have 2 guys with championship experience on expiring deals instead of him?

Re: Interesting trade idea?
« Reply #25 on: January 19, 2020, 11:25:19 PM »

Offline gouki88

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31552
  • Tommy Points: 3141
  • 2019 & 2021 CS Historical Draft Champion
God, Hayward for TT & Iggy / Love / Drummond is yuck.
If Hayward is damaged goods isn’t it better to have 2 guys with championship experience on expiring deals instead of him?
Simply, no. Iggy is toast & TT is not very good. Hayward is currently hurt, but he still is much more useful to this team
'23 Historical Draft: Orlando Magic.

PG: Terry Porter (90-91) / Steve Francis (00-01)
SG: Joe Dumars (92-93) / Jeff Hornacek (91-92) / Jerry Stackhouse (00-01)
SF: Brandon Roy (08-09) / Walter Davis (78-79)
PF: Terry Cummings (84-85) / Paul Millsap (15-16)
C: Chris Webber (00-01) / Ralph Sampson (83-84) / Andrew Bogut (09-10)

Re: Interesting trade idea?
« Reply #26 on: January 19, 2020, 11:53:47 PM »

Offline tazzmaniac

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8113
  • Tommy Points: 549
God, Hayward for TT & Iggy / Love / Drummond is yuck.
If Hayward is damaged goods isn’t it better to have 2 guys with championship experience on expiring deals instead of him?
When did Hayward become damaged goods?  He's having a pretty good season.  I'm not against trading him but only for someone who could improve our chances to get out of the East.  TT & Iggy, Love or Drummond most certainly don't. 

Re: Interesting trade idea?
« Reply #27 on: January 20, 2020, 12:07:13 AM »

Offline LilRip

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6857
  • Tommy Points: 391
Some people here wouldn’t trade Hayward unless it was for Embiid or Giannis ;D
- LilRip

Re: Interesting trade idea?
« Reply #28 on: January 20, 2020, 12:18:14 AM »

Offline LilRip

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6857
  • Tommy Points: 391
I don't give a lot of these Hayward trades any credence because I think you guys aren't figuring some important things into your equations.

1. Hayward's problems with the nerves in his previously broken foot are now out and when coupled with his play since coming back from his cortisone shots, means his trade stock has dropped precipitously. I am sure every GM Danny offers up Gordon to is asking their medical teams if Hayward's problems could be long term and if they don't get good answers, this drops Hayward's value more.

2. Teams really don't know if they are going to owe Hayward $15 million on an expiring contract or $49 million over a season and a half. Now some teams might not care, but most will. This tightens up your market and again drops Hayward's value.

3. This reduction in trade value of Hayward more than likely means, if someone is willing to take Hayward on, they now will want more draft capital to make up the value difference.

Maybe Cleveland would take Gordo to dump Love's salary. Clearly, they won't care about these things as to them, they are still saving tremendous amounts of long term money. But, does anyone here want Love's lack of defense and his 3.5 year/$105 million contract, a contract that makes you pay him in his 32-34 year old seasons?

Not sure what other teams won't care about how long Hayward is on their books, for how much and how good he will be during that time, just to get out from under a contract or get something of value because that team may lose one of their players to free agency.

TP

Hayward isn’t some all star prospect anymore. He’s a super solid player who makes the max and (imo) is our 4th best player behind Kemba-Jaylen-Jayson. You don’t trade him for nothing but I think people need to temper what kind of return you’re getting for Hayward.

Hypothetically, if we had cap space for a max player, would people here be on board signing Hayward to a 2 year max deal?

- LilRip

Re: Interesting trade idea?
« Reply #29 on: January 20, 2020, 01:05:29 AM »

Offline tazzmaniac

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8113
  • Tommy Points: 549
I don't give a lot of these Hayward trades any credence because I think you guys aren't figuring some important things into your equations.

1. Hayward's problems with the nerves in his previously broken foot are now out and when coupled with his play since coming back from his cortisone shots, means his trade stock has dropped precipitously. I am sure every GM Danny offers up Gordon to is asking their medical teams if Hayward's problems could be long term and if they don't get good answers, this drops Hayward's value more.

2. Teams really don't know if they are going to owe Hayward $15 million on an expiring contract or $49 million over a season and a half. Now some teams might not care, but most will. This tightens up your market and again drops Hayward's value.

3. This reduction in trade value of Hayward more than likely means, if someone is willing to take Hayward on, they now will want more draft capital to make up the value difference.

Maybe Cleveland would take Gordo to dump Love's salary. Clearly, they won't care about these things as to them, they are still saving tremendous amounts of long term money. But, does anyone here want Love's lack of defense and his 3.5 year/$105 million contract, a contract that makes you pay him in his 32-34 year old seasons?

Not sure what other teams won't care about how long Hayward is on their books, for how much and how good he will be during that time, just to get out from under a contract or get something of value because that team may lose one of their players to free agency.

TP

Hayward isn’t some all star prospect anymore. He’s a super solid player who makes the max and (imo) is our 4th best player behind Kemba-Jaylen-Jayson. You don’t trade him for nothing but I think people need to temper what kind of return you’re getting for Hayward.

Hypothetically, if we had cap space for a max player, would people here be on board signing Hayward to a 2 year max deal?
I'd rather have Hayward as our 4th best player than Drumond.  Drummond is only making 5M less that Hayward which won't make a difference.