Author Topic: Who says no GSW or Celtics?  (Read 2310 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Who says no GSW or Celtics?
« on: September 01, 2020, 12:07:01 AM »

Offline shut_the_gate

  • Brad Stevens
  • Posts: 232
  • Tommy Points: 26
GSW get: Gordon Hayward, 2020 14th pick, 2020 26th pick, (perhaps extra player)
Celtics get: Andrew Wiggins, 2020 2nd pick, Minnesota 2021 pick

Celtics can trade down from 2nd pick to get more assets and get their favourite of Haliburton, Devin Vassell or Patrick Williams.

Warriors get off Wiggins terrible contract and get another All-Star on the same timeline as the rest of their stars and some solid rookies with are on cheaper deals and can contribute.

Re: Who says no GSW or Celtics?
« Reply #1 on: September 01, 2020, 12:10:10 AM »

Offline footey

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16039
  • Tommy Points: 1837
GSW get: Gordon Hayward, 2020 14th pick, 2020 26th pick, (perhaps extra player)
Celtics get: Andrew Wiggins, 2020 2nd pick, Minnesota 2021 pick

Celtics can trade down from 2nd pick to get more assets and get their favourite of Haliburton, Devin Vassell or Patrick Williams.

Both teams say no.

Re: Who says no GSW or Celtics?
« Reply #2 on: September 01, 2020, 12:26:23 AM »

Offline shut_the_gate

  • Brad Stevens
  • Posts: 232
  • Tommy Points: 26
GSW get: Gordon Hayward, 2020 14th pick, 2020 26th pick, (perhaps extra player)
Celtics get: Andrew Wiggins, 2020 2nd pick, Minnesota 2021 pick

Celtics can trade down from 2nd pick to get more assets and get their favourite of Haliburton, Devin Vassell or Patrick Williams.

Both teams say no.

GSW won't be able to get a superstar for that 2nd pick in this years draft as it's too weak plus the players they want, Beal, Simmons ect. aren't available anyway. If they keep the second pick the wages will be huge for the players ability/contribution. Hayward is perfect for them, he gives them another shooter and facilitator who can run the offence when Curry and Green is off the floor and with the 14th pick they can get a much cheaper rookie who they can take perhaps a 2-3 year college kid who can contribute now.

Celtics can get someone like Haliburton who can contribute off the bench right away and long term can replace Walker as our starting point guard and Wiggins can come off the bench and with a restricted role can be useful.

GSW: Baynes, Green, Hayward, Thompson, Curry    (Free agent), 14th pick, 26th pick, Looney

Celtics: Theis, Tatum, Brown, Smart, Walker            Wiggins, Williams, Haliburton, Williams, Langford,
« Last Edit: September 01, 2020, 12:56:01 AM by shut_the_gate »

Re: Who says no GSW or Celtics?
« Reply #3 on: September 01, 2020, 01:29:46 AM »

Offline staticcc

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 518
  • Tommy Points: 38
Both say no. GSW isn’t looking for a Hayward-type player. Celtics are not looking for a Wiggins-type player.
"The bigger the lie, the more they believe." - Bunk

Re: Who says no GSW or Celtics?
« Reply #4 on: September 01, 2020, 01:59:41 AM »

Offline liam

  • NCE
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 45920
  • Tommy Points: 3340
Both say no. GSW isn’t looking for a Hayward-type player. Celtics are not looking for a Wiggins-type player.

Wiggins is on a huge contract for four more years, I think and he plays the same postion as Brown who just got a huge contract..

Re: Who says no GSW or Celtics?
« Reply #5 on: September 01, 2020, 02:12:57 AM »

Offline gouki88

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31552
  • Tommy Points: 3142
  • 2019 & 2021 CS Historical Draft Champion
Boston says no. Wiggins' contract is puke-worthy, especially when we're going to be maxing Tatum imminently. Not worth it for the #2 pick in a weak draft in terms of star talent.

Guys like Kevin Love or LaMarcus Aldridge seem like much more realistic trade targets, as they're on teams that aren't genuine contenders
'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: Who says no GSW or Celtics?
« Reply #6 on: September 01, 2020, 03:14:29 AM »

Offline Csfan1984

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8875
  • Tommy Points: 290
Think both are a No

Warriors should want to trade for a star or draft Wiseman.

Wiggins is a bad fit. C's have to find a someone who takes him on.

Re: Who says no GSW or Celtics?
« Reply #7 on: September 01, 2020, 05:44:48 AM »

Offline makaveli

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3154
  • Tommy Points: 321
  • The Truth
No wiggins, it doesn’t fill our needs.
what doesn't kill you makes you stronger

Re: Who says no GSW or Celtics?
« Reply #8 on: September 01, 2020, 05:57:12 AM »

Offline Androslav

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2983
  • Tommy Points: 528
Both say not. There is just nothing of the interest for these 2 teams.
"The joy of the balling under the rims."

Re: Who says no GSW or Celtics?
« Reply #9 on: September 01, 2020, 06:26:49 AM »

Offline pearljammer10

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13129
  • Tommy Points: 885
Both say no in very hard fashion.

Re: Who says no GSW or Celtics?
« Reply #10 on: September 01, 2020, 08:15:14 AM »

Offline Jvalin

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3742
  • Tommy Points: 737
Don't get the fascination on this board for trading Hayward. Sure, he's overpaid, but he's on the books for just 1 more season. Hopefully, we'll re-sign him on a reasonable contract next year.

Just because we are currently winning without Hayward, it doesn't mean that we should trade him. Imo, we can do without him cause we are lucky enough to have Smart who provides cover for pretty much anybody. That being said, our backup SF right now is Semi. Not exactly an amazing rotation player. :P

If (for whatever reason) we have to trade one of our big 5, I'd rather trade Kemba. We already got a perfect replacement for him in Smart.
« Last Edit: September 01, 2020, 09:20:45 AM by Jvalin »

Re: Who says no GSW or Celtics?
« Reply #11 on: September 01, 2020, 10:29:55 AM »

Online DefenseWinsChamps

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6755
  • Tommy Points: 810
Oof. That would hurt. I could see GSW being at least somewhat interested in Hayward. He'd be a great fit in their scheme. If there was one place the Cs could trade Hayward and not be the bad guys, it would have to be the Warriors, right? Great area to live in. Great franchise. Great scheme. Great teammates. Playing for a championship.

However, the Cs can't take back the years of Wiggins salary without diverting him to a third team. in the 21-22 season, Tatum's new contract will kick in. With Wiggins too, we'd be against the hard cap pretty quick. We just can't.

Hornets
One possibility that could be interesting would be to divert Wiggins to a team like the Hornets with Zeller coming back. The Hornets have a lot of cap space, which means they could absorb the extra salary. They could could use some extra scoring on the wing and Wiggins is probably a better fit and better player for them than Zeller. For the Cs, Zeller is an expiring contract, which means he doesn't complicate our cap figure when Tatum's new salary fits in. I've also thought for a long time that Zeller would be a perfect big for CBS system. He screens well. He's unselfish. He's tough inside. He's a good team defender. He'd be similar to Theis and probably slightly better in different ways.

Hawks
Another possibility could be the Hawks. Same as Hornets, they could absorb the salary without needing to send much back out. Wiggins would give them another playmaker and scorer to go with Young, which is something they desperately need. The Hawks could send back one of Capella, Dedmon, or Collins. Rumor was that Collins was on the trading block at the deadline and the Cs were making calls about him. I don't think I'd do the trade if I were the Hawks, but the Hawks might do it.

Knicks
Another possibility could be the Knicks. Same as the other two, they could absorb the salary without needing to send much back out. They'd have a 20ppg scorer in Wiggins to go with Barrett, Robinson, and their pick this year. The Knicks would send out Randle, Portis, or Gibson. I'm not a fan of any of them, but maybe Randle or Gibson would fit well on this team.

Kings
The only other one that could work would be the Kings for Bjelica. Not sure that's fair value though.

In each case of the examples above, I wonder if Ainge could convince the third team to send a pick back. Nothing big, but like a highly protected first that converts to a second.

These are the ones I've come up with, assuming the pieces with the Cs and Warriors could be worked out so that Hayward goes to the Warriors with 14 and Wiggins and 2 go back to the Cs.

In any of these trades, the key piece is the 2nd pick. If you think that player can be part of the core high level talent with Tatum and Brown for the next 6-8 years or more, then you have to consider it. If you, like many draft scouts, aren't thrilled with the top level talent, then it might not be a great decision.