The Case for Trading Gordon Hayward (Hear Me Out)

[Sophomore]

Hayward is frustrating. I’d say peak Gordon - the guy we saw before he broke his hand - was at least an A-, maybe even an A. But we don’t have that guy now and I don’t know if/when he’s coming back. If he did come back he’d be well worth having.

Bottom line though, I can’t see a trade that makes sense for both teams.

[#1P4P]

The case for trading Hayward is clear and there are great potential trade proposals that can be made with his inclusion, but... the IT trade had a negative impact on the team around the league and I read about their sensitivity to the issue and their not wanting to feed into that image.

I agree with their approach and think they should stay as constructed until the off-season unless there's a coup on the table.

[NKY fan]

I chose the first option but not because it can happen but am hopeful that an all-NBA player becomes available.
If OKC offer Paul straight up for GH to get below the luxury line I would think long and hard whether to pull the trigger or not.

I wouldn't.

Paying Chris Paul over $40 million for the next two years doesn't sit too well with me.

is the goal to win championships or to be competitive while at the same time keeping the owners pockets full?
I am not saying that CP = Lary O'brien trophy but it looks like a lot of people on here are content with young and competitive team but that is it..

The goal is for the young competitive team to grow into a mature title-contender. Similar to the Warriors (obviously not expecting a dynasty).

CP3 is not the answer.

The warriors traded monta Elis for Bogut at the time. Warriors fans were upheaving because a fan favorite was sent for an injured center...
Joe Lacob had to state publicly that most fans can’t understand the trade at the time. He was right and the rest is history..
With that said I see a number of parallels between the two situations.

The difference is Monta Ellis wasn't a great fit next to Curry; his USG % and need to have the ball in his hands conflicted with Curry, who Lacob, correctly guessed had the far higher ceiling than Ellis. And while Bogut was oft hit with injury issues, and question marks, there was no doubt he was considered by many the 1st round pick based on his ability to change the game defensively.

The trade also included Stephen Jackson, who was brought in for his clutch scoring + veteran presence.

And as you can see the rest is history.

Hayward being traded for CP3, is the complete opposite of what the Warriors did.

So you do not see the parallels?

[Fierce1]

So first of all credit to Ryan Bernardoni (@dangercart on Twitter) who just had a long twitter thread basically outlining this idea, but I've been wondering about this to msyelf for months so here it goes.

I think the Celtics should strongly consider trading Gordon Hayward.

I think most C's fans can agree that Tatum, Brown, Hayward have payed at a roughly even level this year. Lets call them B+ guys. They're each good in differnet ways, but roughly equivalent. There's only one basketball right? So what is it that 3 B+ level guys will give you that 2+ level guys and a decent 3+D can't? What really would you be losing if you trade Gordon Hayward? Now you might rightly say "We don't lose much, but thats not a reaosn to do it you fool." To which I would respond with four points.

1) You likely can't keep all four of Kemba/Hayward/ and the Jays long term for money/luxury tax reasons. And yes, I know Wyc said the C's would pay the tax but 4 (near) max contracts is very, very, very diffcult to fit on a team long term.

2) Given their age and how they've played this year, you're kepeing the Jays. So it makes sense to give them a larger role and allow them to grow in it. Neither of them is as good a playamaker/passer as Hayward, but it might help to let them do more of it. Trading Hayward allows them to do that.

3) With or without Hayward probably doesnt change the ceiling of the team that much. I dont think you're winning a tittle with or without him. I think its also possible that having him, another guy who needs to eat on the floor can in fact in some cases lead to stagnant "you turn, my turn" offense. The net translation basically being the repetiitve skill set/talent level doesnt raise your ceiling enough to matter, and in the regular season may not even be worth say more than 3 wins.

4) Even if you think the C's can afford to keep Hayward long term, trading Hayward could give you the sallary fodder to upgrade in other areas. If he's not adding a whole lot to the team ceiling wise then doesnt it make to use his sallary to upgrade else where like bench, stretch big, or defensive center? Isnt it possible that subtratcing him and adding too those relatively weak points makes you better even if hes the best player in a deal?

So in conclusion you arent keeping him long term for money reasons. The Jays can probably replace alot of what you'd lose by trading him right now, and would be afforded increased developmental oppurtunities going forward (this point is critical). It desnt change your ultimate ceiling this year, while perhaps being a better use of resources that ultimately makes the team better (depending on the deal) in the long term.

I know conventional wisdom says its crazy. But I think it has to be considered. Now obviously if you truly believe this team is a real contender you probably dont do this, but I don't think its crazy.

I agree, it's not crazy.

Right now Jaylen Brown looks like he's better than Gordon Hayward.

So having them both is redundant.

The law of diminishing returns is setting in.

Against the Sixers, all of the core 5 Celtics were healthy and the Sixers didn't have Embiid.

But it was looking like there was not enough basketball to go around.

Marcus Smart wanted to score.

Kemba was being Kemba.

Jaylen was trying to be aggressive.

Tatum was not shooting well.

And Hayward was missing as well.

That's just too many players having the same skill set.

Right now KAT is not available and the Pacers are saying Myles Turner is not available.

So the next best thing is Drummond.

Replace Hayward with Drummond and the Celts will have more balance on offense and defense.

Trading Hayward for Drummond will allow the Celts to keep most of the team intact.

And like what keevsnick said, having or not having Hayward doesn't move the needle that much, so why not trade him for someone who can solve some of the flaws of the Celts.

[Fierce1]

Hayward is frustrating. I’d say peak Gordon - the guy we saw before he broke his hand - was at least an A-, maybe even an A. But we don’t have that guy now and I don’t know if/when he’s coming back. If he did come back he’d be well worth having.

Bottom line though, I can’t see a trade that makes sense for both teams.

Hayward, Poirier, and the Memphis pick for Drummond and Derrick Rose.

That trade makes sense for both teams as Detroit wants to rebuild and the Celts desperately need a starting Center.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

I chose the first option but not because it can happen but am hopeful that an all-NBA player becomes available.
If OKC offer Paul straight up for GH to get below the luxury line I would think long and hard whether to pull the trigger or not.

I wouldn't.

Paying Chris Paul over $40 million for the next two years doesn't sit too well with me.

is the goal to win championships or to be competitive while at the same time keeping the owners pockets full?
I am not saying that CP = Lary O'brien trophy but it looks like a lot of people on here are content with young and competitive team but that is it..

The goal is for the young competitive team to grow into a mature title-contender. Similar to the Warriors (obviously not expecting a dynasty).

CP3 is not the answer.

The warriors traded monta Elis for Bogut at the time. Warriors fans were upheaving because a fan favorite was sent for an injured center...
Joe Lacob had to state publicly that most fans can’t understand the trade at the time. He was right and the rest is history..
With that said I see a number of parallels between the two situations.

The difference is Monta Ellis wasn't a great fit next to Curry; his USG % and need to have the ball in his hands conflicted with Curry, who Lacob, correctly guessed had the far higher ceiling than Ellis. And while Bogut was oft hit with injury issues, and question marks, there was no doubt he was considered by many the 1st round pick based on his ability to change the game defensively.

The trade also included Stephen Jackson, who was brought in for his clutch scoring + veteran presence.

And as you can see the rest is history.

Hayward being traded for CP3, is the complete opposite of what the Warriors did.

So you do not see the parallels?

The difference is that CP3's teammate, Steven Adams, is a much better comparison for the trade.

The Cs have a redundancy at a position just like the Warriors have.
They need a glue big man who is a great teammate and a high-level two-way player.

Age 26 season's are really similar as well.

The difference is that Monte Ellis is much more like Jordan Clarkson than Gordon Hayward. Most teams knew that he was a good stats/meh team type player, but he couldn't ultimately contribute to a championship team.

Hayward plays winning basketball, plain and simple. He's just inconsistent and this team offense has a tendency to stall out.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Just for funzies:

Boston receives: Adams, Roberson
Denver receives: Paul, Hayward
OKC receives: Milsap, Barton, Harris, Porter Jr., 2020 Bucks 1st

Denver can run Jokic with Paul, Hayward, Murray, and Grant. That's a highly intelligent team on both sides of the court.

OKC sets up a new young due with Shai and Porter Jr., and pairs them with really good role players in Barton and Harris. They also get salary relief with Milsap's expiring.

Boston gets a little salary relief with Roberson's expiring and gets better roster balance with a center that can truly make his teammates better (and has been doing it his entire career).

[Fierce1]

Just for funzies:

Boston receives: Adams, Roberson
Denver receives: Paul, Hayward
OKC receives: Milsap, Barton, Harris, Porter Jr., 2020 Bucks 1st

Denver can run Jokic with Paul, Hayward, Murray, and Grant. That's a highly intelligent team on both sides of the court.

OKC sets up a new young due with Shai and Porter Jr., and pairs them with really good role players in Barton and Harris. They also get salary relief with Milsap's expiring.

Boston gets a little salary relief with Roberson's expiring and gets better roster balance with a center that can truly make his teammates better (and has been doing it his entire career).

Celts can get more for Hayward.

That's just too low of a return for Hayward.

[Fierce1]

Gary Washburn: Danny Ainge to the Globe: “I don’t think I’m looking at any short-term urgency to trade away all my young assets to get some veteran player,” he said. “But we’re looking. We’ll have conversations before trade deadline like we do every year.” #Celtics 46 mins ago – via Twitter GwashburnGlobe

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Just for funzies:

Boston receives: Adams, Roberson
Denver receives: Paul, Hayward
OKC receives: Milsap, Barton, Harris, Porter Jr., 2020 Bucks 1st

Denver can run Jokic with Paul, Hayward, Murray, and Grant. That's a highly intelligent team on both sides of the court.

OKC sets up a new young due with Shai and Porter Jr., and pairs them with really good role players in Barton and Harris. They also get salary relief with Milsap's expiring.

Boston gets a little salary relief with Roberson's expiring and gets better roster balance with a center that can truly make his teammates better (and has been doing it his entire career).

Celts can get more for Hayward.

That's just too low of a return for Hayward.

Perhaps. Your trade (before it was edited) included a lottery pick to get Drummond.

I'm not sure the difference between Drummond and Adams is a lottery pick. In fact, I'd rather have Adams, especially because he has another year on his contract. Drummond is an expiring.

Rose doesn't add much to our team either. We already have too many ball-handlers.

[Fierce1]

Just for funzies:

Boston receives: Adams, Roberson
Denver receives: Paul, Hayward
OKC receives: Milsap, Barton, Harris, Porter Jr., 2020 Bucks 1st

Denver can run Jokic with Paul, Hayward, Murray, and Grant. That's a highly intelligent team on both sides of the court.

OKC sets up a new young due with Shai and Porter Jr., and pairs them with really good role players in Barton and Harris. They also get salary relief with Milsap's expiring.

Boston gets a little salary relief with Roberson's expiring and gets better roster balance with a center that can truly make his teammates better (and has been doing it his entire career).

Celts can get more for Hayward.

That's just too low of a return for Hayward.

Perhaps. Your trade (before it was edited) included a lottery pick to get Drummond.

I'm not sure the difference between Drummond and Adams is a lottery pick. In fact, I'd rather have Adams, especially because he has another year on his contract. Drummond is an expiring.

Rose doesn't add much to our team either. We already have too many ball-handlers.

The lottery pick is looking like top 10 at best.
I wouldn't trade it if it was top 7 or top 8.
But Celts really don't need another top 10 or top 14 pick right now.

Drummond is a better offensive player than Adams.

And replacing Wanamaker with Rose makes the bench better.

[Fierce1]

From Sherrod:
https://www.nbcsports.com/boston/celtics/nba-notebook-popularity-or-producing-wins-which-matters-more-all-star-game

Among the teams talked about as a possible suitor is Boston. The Celtics would likely have to include Gordon Hayward in such a deal as well as a first-round pick.

Because like any team that takes on Drummond, the same concerns exist with Hayward, who can also opt out of the final year of his contract and become a free agent this summer.

Boston has resisted giving serious thought to moving Hayward for a center in part because of the solid play - most nights at least - of Enes Kanter and Daniel Theis.

But a three-game losing streak has in some respects exposed the Celtics on multiple levels, including their lack of frontcourt size.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Just for funzies:

Boston receives: Adams, Roberson
Denver receives: Paul, Hayward
OKC receives: Milsap, Barton, Harris, Porter Jr., 2020 Bucks 1st

Denver can run Jokic with Paul, Hayward, Murray, and Grant. That's a highly intelligent team on both sides of the court.

OKC sets up a new young due with Shai and Porter Jr., and pairs them with really good role players in Barton and Harris. They also get salary relief with Milsap's expiring.

Boston gets a little salary relief with Roberson's expiring and gets better roster balance with a center that can truly make his teammates better (and has been doing it his entire career).

Celts can get more for Hayward.

That's just too low of a return for Hayward.

Perhaps. Your trade (before it was edited) included a lottery pick to get Drummond.

I'm not sure the difference between Drummond and Adams is a lottery pick. In fact, I'd rather have Adams, especially because he has another year on his contract. Drummond is an expiring.

Rose doesn't add much to our team either. We already have too many ball-handlers.

The lottery pick is looking like top 10 at best.
I wouldn't trade it if it was top 7 or top 8.
But Celts really don't need another top 10 or top 14 pick right now.

Drummond is a better offensive player than Adams.

And replacing Wanamaker with Rose makes the bench better.

I don't agree that Drummond is a better offensive player than Adams. He is far more turnover prone (3.5 is a lot for a 17ppg guy). He makes a lot of dumb plays out there. The advanced stats have typically indicated Adams helps his team more than Drummond (although I'll admit teammates make a big difference there). I just don't think on this team there would be that big of a difference. I think Adams has a better feel for the game.

And again, Drummond is an expiring.

And you aren't replace Rose with Wanamaker--not directly. Part of the problem is that there are too many players all wanting to attack in different ways. Rose needs the ball too much on offense and adds nothing on defense or as a shooter. At least Wanamaker is a decently versatile defender.

[nickagneta]

Gary Washburn: Danny Ainge to the Globe: “I don’t think I’m looking at any short-term urgency to trade away all my young assets to get some veteran player,” he said. “But we’re looking. We’ll have conversations before trade deadline like we do every year.” #Celtics 46 mins ago – via Twitter GwashburnGlobe

Danny looks a lot. But lately rarely trades in season. He dumped Bird last year but you have to go back to the 2014-15 season to see Ainge doing any type of meaningful in season trade.

As he said, he will have convos like he always does but recently, in season, that's all he does is look and talk.

I could see a small trade...Poirier and/or Semi and/or Edwards and/or a pick(s) going for someone but nothing that will significantly help or change this team.

[Phantom255x]

Entertaining a Hayward trade is fine. But I'm sorry, Andre Drummond is NOT the guy they should do it for. Obviously if you look at stats, Drummond's looks better than Kanter, but I mean, is he really that big of an upgrade over him? Kanter to me is a cheaper version of Drummond and I feel he'd be putting similar numbers if he plays a ton. And Drummond has questions on defense like Kanter (at least against the likes of Embiid, Giannis, etc.)

And while I like Gallinari, I really don't think we're improving all that much by trading Smart or Hayward for him in a package. Marginally, sure, but it doesn't "move the needle".

I like Adams too, but again, are we really improving that much at the expense of someone like Hayward, as frustrating as he's looked lately.

Truth is, I think we're better off keeping Hayward and hoping he can get back to his pre-fractured hand form. I mean, that team we saw before his injury had us thinking "Big 4", and not in a joking way.

Bigs certainly help win championships, as the likes of Gasol, Ibaka, Bogut, etc. have shown us over the years. But those guys aren't often the primary guys who lead the team to the chip. It's often wings nowadays