Unloading Hayward By Including Brown & 2019 Picks

[BitterJim]

If Ainge brings this trade proposal to Wyc, he should be fired on the spot.

Why? Are NBA front offices not allowed to play pranks?

[Sketch5]

I get Hayward had a rough year, but most of the guys did, he's just pointed out more because of his contract.

Problem was he was rehabbing the whole year, so his time off from working was less than others. And he couldn't really work on his game to see what he could do, and couldn't.

Look at Jordan when he took the year+ off. When he came back, it was rough on most nights, year he was still better than Hayward most nights, but one, he's Michel #$##ing Jordan and two, he didn't have his foot facing the wrong way a year before.

Jordan took the summer to relearn how to play the game his body would let him. When he came back for his first full season he wasn't the same player he was when he retired. He was still the best, but different than before. More post up fades than driving to the hoop.

I think Hayward needs to do that. He showed too many times that his could still play when he was aggressive and had more touches. Looking at a lot of box scores it wasn't that he was missing a tone of shots, he just wasn't putting them up. Thats a lot to do with Stevens and Irving. Hayward is too unselfish to demand the ball, and Irving is too demanding of the ball.

Trading Brown for cap relief is dumb, a guy who can score and dig down and play D doesn't come around every draft. It's only a couple more years, and last one is player option, and like Horford, if Hayward is playing below top level, he may opt our and take a lesser longer term contract.

[byennie]

Hayward is a victim of expectations, but he's not this much of an albatross. He essentially put up 16/5/5 adjusted to full starter minutes, while constantly deferring to the younger guys. It's not the guy we thought we were getting for a max contract, but with even marginal improvements he's still a good player and not one you tack Jaylen Brown on to just to get rid of him.

[Roy H.]

I think there are a few problems with the trade.  One is the concept of selling Hayward at his lowest point, which others have rightfully focused on.  Some others:

1.  This trade makes us significantly worse.  Hayward is very overpaid at this point, but even if he doesn't recover any further, he's still a useful player.  Losing him without an adequate replacement makes us worse.  That's compounded by trading Brown, who at times was our second best player last year.

2.  The trade doesn't make us free agency players.  We'd still have to lose Kyrie or Horford to open up significant cap space.  Then the question becomes, does a free agent want to join us if we've lost Kyrie/Horford, Hayward, Brown, and a lot of our trade assets. 

3.  I don't think you'd get the return you're expecting.  Teams like Atlanta and Cleveland aren't going to give up 2 or 3 unprotected lottery picks for Hayward and Brown.  The Brooklyn trade was disastrous for NJ, and the entire league took notice.  Now, you see teams like Cleveland insisting on adding protections to picks, even when Paul George was potentially on the table. 

[IDreamCeltics]

What are your thoughts on getting rid of Hayward and our abundance of 2019 picks by including Brown? What if we turned those assets into potential future lottery picks (e.g., trade with the Hawks or Cavs for 2-3 future unprotected picks)? What are some of the pros and cons? Obviously Brown will be expensive after this year and Hayward is expensive now and next year. Plus, do we really want to risk ending up with four picks this year (remember 2015)?

It's a fair question.

I think the time to move Hayward has passed.  Truth be told, I was in favor of trading him at any point during the last two seasons, but now his value is lower to every team in the league than it's ever been. 

Additionally, he's a very solid vet who never complained in the media about a pretty tough situation this year.  He may not be the all-star that people were expecting when he became the 5th highest paid player in the NBA, but two years ago people were clamoring to trade Al Horford and now he's widely recognized as the most important player on the team. 

And don't forget, Hayward had a horrific ankle injury, but even if it's never 100% of what it was there's a good chance  he will find ways to adjust his game and improve from what he showed his season.     

Whatever happens, I don't think it's a good move to give up any of the legitimate assets the team has to unload Hayward.  If the rebuild went so badly that we have to trade lottery picks away to offload our star free-agent acquisitions then that's Truly the end of the run and we start all over from ground zero.

[SCeltic34]

I think there are a few problems with the trade.  One is the concept of selling Hayward at his lowest point, which others have rightfully focused on.  Some others:

1.  This trade makes us significantly worse.  Hayward is very overpaid at this point, but even if he doesn't recover any further, he's still a useful player.  Losing him without an adequate replacement makes us worse.  That's compounded by trading Brown, who at times was our second best player last year.

2.  The trade doesn't make us free agency players.  We'd still have to lose Kyrie or Horford to open up significant cap space.  Then the question becomes, does a free agent want to join us if we've lost Kyrie/Horford, Hayward, Brown, and a lot of our trade assets. 

3.  I don't think you'd get the return you're expecting.  Teams like Atlanta and Cleveland aren't going to give up 2 or 3 unprotected lottery picks for Hayward and Brown.  The Brooklyn trade was disastrous for NJ, and the entire league took notice.  Now, you see teams like Cleveland insisting on adding protections to picks, even when Paul George was potentially on the table.

To add to that, trading away a star player who chose your team as a free agent doesn't help your future prospects of landing another star in free agency.  Recall this interview:

Although the further developments of Isaiah Thomas’ injury illuminated some of the rationale for why Ainge gave up such a grand package for Irving, it remains a bold move that takes a big bet on Irving.

But in an interview with CSNNE’s Abby Chin and Brian Scalabrine – who once played for Ainge – the Celtics’ President of Basketball Operations revealed another motivation for the deal.

“I think signing Gordon Hayward and Al Horford, I felt I had a responsibility to give them a chance,” Ainge said. “I think that that Brooklyn pick, I think can be really, really exciting there. I think Cleveland could have a really good pick there, but it’s probably going to be a big man that’s 19-years-old that probably needs a couple of years to develop that can probably develop in to a franchise player.”

https://celticswire.usatoday.com/2017/09/27/558-danny-ainge-kyrie-irving-brooklyn-pick-gordon-hayward-al-horford-brad-stevens/

He wants to treat our stars who signed as free agents well, and he should.  For this reason I don't think Hayward or Horford end up in a trade, unless they personally request a trade or if he can pull off Brooklyn Nets heist 2.0. 

[Csfan1984]

Everyone wants to dump Hayward. Can people have a little patience? He is going to be an asset this year and then a big trade chip as an expiring contract next year. Brown is a need especially if we lose Irving and Smart has to start at PG.

No...not unless patience is applied to everyone. When I read that Tatum is soft and doesn't have the right personality to be a great player, that tells me what I need to know about the standard used for Hayward versus all the other players on the team.

I didn't write such a claim. I don't know why people wouldn't have patience in either case/situation.

[GreenCoffeeBean]

I don’t know why everyone is in such a hurry to win around here. It’s not like we have a group of perennial all stars entering their mid 30s. Relax.

[slamtheking]

What are your thoughts on getting rid of Hayward and our abundance of 2019 picks by including Brown? What if we turned those assets into potential future lottery picks (e.g., trade with the Hawks or Cavs for 2-3 future unprotected picks)? What are some of the pros and cons? Obviously Brown will be expensive after this year and Hayward is expensive now and next year. Plus, do we really want to risk ending up with four picks this year (remember 2015)?

easily a candidate for worst thread of the season.

[blink]

I am sorry, but this is a horrible trade idea.  Yeah lets get rid of an all-star player who had a down year (and whose trade value is as low as it possibly could get) by trading one of our best young players so the other team will take him.  This has got to be one of the worst trade ideas I have heard on this blog, and believe me there have been some terrible ones over the last 10 + years.  This isn't a personal attack on you, but this makes no sense.  I am sure others in this thread will go into more detail.

[RazzelnoDazzel]

I don’t know why everyone is in such a hurry to win around here. It’s not like we have a group of perennial all stars entering their mid 30s. Relax.

Right people making it seem like we got 3 max players and been to the ECF 2 seasons in a row or something...

[GreenlyGreeny]

On the surface it may sound like a terrible idea, but what if it was necessary to clear cap space to sign Durant? Does that change the equation?

[gouki88]

On the surface it may sound like a terrible idea, but what if it was necessary to clear cap space to sign Durant? Does that change the equation?

We still wouldn't have cap space unless we let Kyrie walk and completely change Al's contract, if I'm not mistaken

[GreenlyGreeny]

On the surface it may sound like a terrible idea, but what if it was necessary to clear cap space to sign Durant? Does that change the equation?

We still wouldn't have cap space unless we let Kyrie walk and completely change Al's contract, if I'm not mistaken

It just might work if we: Change Al’s contract; rescind the rights to Theis, Wannamaker, and Morris; trade Yabusele, Williams and Ojeleye for pick(s).

[Pvictor11]

Let it go man. It won't happen, sorry. NBA is a business and a basic investment principle is that you buy an asset in the low, not sell. Plus, trading him would harm the celtics perception around the league. Trading IT hurt the perception of the organization, but it was a very smart decision considering Free agency. Trading Hayward will not be a good business decision and will make the front office look bad.