Explain - Why No TPE With The Hayward Trade?

[ozgod]

Answer 5. Hayward is a crybaby punk.

Addition by subtraction

Irony is oozing from this post

It is ironic, given Darth has been the one crying the most about Hayward's walking away. You'd almost think that he'd miss the guy, no one left to get stuck into when the team's not doing well. I know a lot of people will 

I think that if Danny really, really wanted to get something back for Hayward there would have been a number of paths to doing so, but Danny is notorious for sticking to his guns and not giving anyone an inch for fear of getting screwed. He probably just didn't like what was being offered back from Indiana. Maybe he felt that it was worth more to grow the distance between the payroll and the luxury tax that he didn't want to replace Hayward's $34m with other assets that he might get stuck with that would keep the team at the luxury tax. It's also possible Indiana wasn't willing to give Hayward $120m. There's plenty of scenarios.

Here's what the folks from the Athletic thought:

On the other side of the coin, did the Celtics make a bad move to let him walk for nothing, given the circumstances?

Aldridge: You’d obviously have rather gotten some pieces back, but Danny Ainge is fairly notorious for asking a lot from teams for anything he has, whether players or picks, which is why Boston so often winds up not doing anything. (See: last half-dozen or so drafts.) Not only have they given Jaylen Brown a new deal, but also they have a max deal with Jayson Tatum waiting in the wings. There are still plenty of veteran centers Boston can go get via trade besides Myles Turner (who I like, very much, by the way), or in free agency.

Hollinger: Boston had no other choice but to let Hayward walk if signing a contract like this was the alternative. If there is at least a flicker of possibility that Hayward might be worth $30 million a year in Charlotte, there was certainly no chance of it in Boston – not with two better and younger wings already on the roster. Meanwhile, once Tatum’s supermax extension kicked in, a deal like this would have left Boston with a phenomenal luxury tax bill while limiting the Celtics’ roster options. A more fair question is whether Boston could have executed a sign-and-trade with Indiana that preserved some value from Hayward’s departure.

Vardon: The Celtics accomplished quite a bit without him in his three seasons. In Year 1, they pushed the Cavs to a seventh game of the Eastern finals; in September they stormed through the bubble while he recovered from a sprained ankle. What he did for them when he was on the court — perform as a serviceable, middle option — is replaceable outside of the trade market. Boston maintained some long-term flexibility by letting him walk, so, no. This is fine.

Amick: You have to know more about the Celtics’ talks with Indiana to truly know the answer to this question. It was widely reported that Hayward wanted to return to his home state and play for the Pacers via sign-and-trade, but it was also widely assumed that Ainge’s penchant for stubbornness in trade talks might make that path difficult. What’s more, it’s not clear how the money in Indiana would have compared to this Charlotte pot of gold. Either way, it’s never ideal to lose a core player like this in free agency while getting nothing in return. That much is indisputable.

https://theathletic.com/2213120/2020/11/21/nba-free-agency-news-gordon-hayward-contract-hornets-celtics/

As for JP's original post I think it's still very possible we get a TPE out of this. It looks like it would make sense for the Hornets to do it.

[michigan adam]

 Semi is non-guaranteed for a few more days I think...and injuries happen.  So do trades

[Roy H.]

Semi is non-guaranteed for a few more days I think...and injuries happen.  So do trades

Nope.  He and Theis were fully guaranteed last night I believe.

[nickagneta]

Don't the Celtics have to bring back nothing in the S&T with Charlotte in order to still have the regular MLE to sign Thompson. Gotta remember the order of everything.

In order to have the full MLE, Hayward's Bird rights have to renounced, expired or traded for a TPE. If we bring back Batum, our cap situation is such that we aren't out of the tax and not eligible for the full MLE.

So order of what transpires has to be something like.

S&T of Hayward for a TPE. That gets the team out of the tax.

Sign Thompson using the full MLE

Sign Teague using BAE

Do sign and trade with Sactown for Bogdanovic at an amount that keeps the team out of the tax.

Does this sound right?

[Darth_Yoda]

Don't the Celtics have to bring back nothing in the S&T with Charlotte in order to still have the regular MLE to sign Thompson. Gotta remember the order of everything.

In order to have the full MLE, Hayward's Bird rights have to renounced, expired or traded for a TPE. If we bring back Batum, our cap situation is such that we aren't out of the tax and not eligible for the full MLE.

So order of what transpires has to be something like.

S&T of Hayward for a TPE. That gets the team out of the tax.

Sign Thompson using the full MLE

Sign Teague using BAE

Do sign and trade with Sactown for Bogdanovic at an amount that keeps the team out of the tax.

Does this sound right?

Right

[Big333223]

I think stretching Batum is terrible for Charlotte. It handcuffs their cap so badly for the next 3 years, I gotta think they're looking for any other way to do it. I don't think Boston wants to take him back but if there's a third team that wants a big expiring contract or thinks they can rehab Batum, they can get involved.

Boston gets the trade exception, Charlotte doesn't have $9 mil of dead money on their books for the next 3 years, this mystery third team gets whatever appeal Batum still has (which is maybe none and this doesn't happen but maybe that's why this is taking so long because Charlotte and Boston are looking for that third team).

[Moranis]

Don't the Celtics have to bring back nothing in the S&T with Charlotte in order to still have the regular MLE to sign Thompson. Gotta remember the order of everything.

In order to have the full MLE, Hayward's Bird rights have to renounced, expired or traded for a TPE. If we bring back Batum, our cap situation is such that we aren't out of the tax and not eligible for the full MLE.

So order of what transpires has to be something like.

S&T of Hayward for a TPE. That gets the team out of the tax.

Sign Thompson using the full MLE

Sign Teague using BAE

Do sign and trade with Sactown for Bogdanovic at an amount that keeps the team out of the tax.
Does this sound right?

What about Zeller?  Hayward, protected 1st for Zeller, 2nd

I think that keeps Boston below the hard cap line so that they can use the MLE and clears enough salary from Charlotte that they can do the trade.

[RodyTur10]

Don't the Celtics have to bring back nothing in the S&T with Charlotte in order to still have the regular MLE to sign Thompson. Gotta remember the order of everything.

In order to have the full MLE, Hayward's Bird rights have to renounced, expired or traded for a TPE. If we bring back Batum, our cap situation is such that we aren't out of the tax and not eligible for the full MLE.

So order of what transpires has to be something like.

S&T of Hayward for a TPE. That gets the team out of the tax.

Sign Thompson using the full MLE

Sign Teague using BAE

Do sign and trade with Sactown for Bogdanovic at an amount that keeps the team out of the tax.
Does this sound right?

What about Zeller?  Hayward, protected 1st for Zeller, 2nd

I think that keeps Boston below the hard cap line so that they can use the MLE and clears enough salary from Charlotte that they can do the trade.

Zeller makes a lot of sense. Do feel that 1st should go the Celtics way.
TPE is nice, but we facilitate Charlotte to sign Hayward without having to burn $18M in dead cap.

[Moranis]

Don't the Celtics have to bring back nothing in the S&T with Charlotte in order to still have the regular MLE to sign Thompson. Gotta remember the order of everything.

In order to have the full MLE, Hayward's Bird rights have to renounced, expired or traded for a TPE. If we bring back Batum, our cap situation is such that we aren't out of the tax and not eligible for the full MLE.

So order of what transpires has to be something like.

S&T of Hayward for a TPE. That gets the team out of the tax.

Sign Thompson using the full MLE

Sign Teague using BAE

Do sign and trade with Sactown for Bogdanovic at an amount that keeps the team out of the tax.
Does this sound right?

What about Zeller?  Hayward, protected 1st for Zeller, 2nd

I think that keeps Boston below the hard cap line so that they can use the MLE and clears enough salary from Charlotte that they can do the trade.

Zeller makes a lot of sense. Do feel that 1st should go the Celtics way.
TPE is nice, but we facilitate Charlotte to sign Hayward without having to burn $18M in dead cap.

They'd rather burn the 18 million then give up their starting center and a 1st round pick.  Zeller is injury prone, but he was an 11/7 player in just 23 mpg last year.  He isn't a bum.  He still has life in them legs.  And he is their only big man on the roster.  If we get Zeller it will cost us a 1st (if they'd even move him).

[footey]

Don't the Celtics have to bring back nothing in the S&T with Charlotte in order to still have the regular MLE to sign Thompson. Gotta remember the order of everything.

In order to have the full MLE, Hayward's Bird rights have to renounced, expired or traded for a TPE. If we bring back Batum, our cap situation is such that we aren't out of the tax and not eligible for the full MLE.

So order of what transpires has to be something like.

S&T of Hayward for a TPE. That gets the team out of the tax.

Sign Thompson using the full MLE

Sign Teague using BAE

Do sign and trade with Sactown for Bogdanovic at an amount that keeps the team out of the tax.
Does this sound right?

What about Zeller?  Hayward, protected 1st for Zeller, 2nd

I think that keeps Boston below the hard cap line so that they can use the MLE and clears enough salary from Charlotte that they can do the trade.

Zeller makes a lot of sense. Do feel that 1st should go the Celtics way.
TPE is nice, but we facilitate Charlotte to sign Hayward without having to burn $18M in dead cap.

They'd rather burn the 18 million then give up their starting center and a 1st round pick.  Zeller is injury prone, but he was an 11/7 player in just 23 mpg last year.  He isn't a bum.  He still has life in them legs.  And he is their only big man on the roster.  If we get Zeller it will cost us a 1st (if they'd even move him).

Celtics are not giving up a 1st for Cody Zeller.  C'mon.

[todd_days_41]

Some (very) basic analysis on this topic:

https://www.masslive.com/celtics/2020/11/why-a-gordon-hayward-sign-and-trade-is-so-important-for-the-boston-celtics.html

p.s. ~ I'm not interested in Harden.

[mmmmm]

Answer 5. Hayward is a crybaby punk.

Addition by subtraction

Irony is oozing from this post

It is ironic, given Darth has been the one crying the most about Hayward's walking away. You'd almost think that he'd miss the guy, no one left to get stuck into when the team's not doing well. I know a lot of people will 

I think that if Danny really, really wanted to get something back for Hayward there would have been a number of paths to doing so, but Danny is notorious for sticking to his guns and not giving anyone an inch for fear of getting screwed. He probably just didn't like what was being offered back from Indiana. Maybe he felt that it was worth more to grow the distance between the payroll and the luxury tax that he didn't want to replace Hayward's $34m with other assets that he might get stuck with that would keep the team at the luxury tax. It's also possible Indiana wasn't willing to give Hayward $120m. There's plenty of scenarios.

Here's what the folks from the Athletic thought:

On the other side of the coin, did the Celtics make a bad move to let him walk for nothing, given the circumstances?

Aldridge: You’d obviously have rather gotten some pieces back, but Danny Ainge is fairly notorious for asking a lot from teams for anything he has, whether players or picks, which is why Boston so often winds up not doing anything. (See: last half-dozen or so drafts.) Not only have they given Jaylen Brown a new deal, but also they have a max deal with Jayson Tatum waiting in the wings. There are still plenty of veteran centers Boston can go get via trade besides Myles Turner (who I like, very much, by the way), or in free agency.

Hollinger: Boston had no other choice but to let Hayward walk if signing a contract like this was the alternative. If there is at least a flicker of possibility that Hayward might be worth $30 million a year in Charlotte, there was certainly no chance of it in Boston – not with two better and younger wings already on the roster. Meanwhile, once Tatum’s supermax extension kicked in, a deal like this would have left Boston with a phenomenal luxury tax bill while limiting the Celtics’ roster options. A more fair question is whether Boston could have executed a sign-and-trade with Indiana that preserved some value from Hayward’s departure.

Vardon: The Celtics accomplished quite a bit without him in his three seasons. In Year 1, they pushed the Cavs to a seventh game of the Eastern finals; in September they stormed through the bubble while he recovered from a sprained ankle. What he did for them when he was on the court — perform as a serviceable, middle option — is replaceable outside of the trade market. Boston maintained some long-term flexibility by letting him walk, so, no. This is fine.

Amick: You have to know more about the Celtics’ talks with Indiana to truly know the answer to this question. It was widely reported that Hayward wanted to return to his home state and play for the Pacers via sign-and-trade, but it was also widely assumed that Ainge’s penchant for stubbornness in trade talks might make that path difficult. What’s more, it’s not clear how the money in Indiana would have compared to this Charlotte pot of gold. Either way, it’s never ideal to lose a core player like this in free agency while getting nothing in return. That much is indisputable.

https://theathletic.com/2213120/2020/11/21/nba-free-agency-news-gordon-hayward-contract-hornets-celtics/

As for JP's original post I think it's still very possible we get a TPE out of this. It looks like it would make sense for the Hornets to do it.

I get frustrated with some of the 'analysis' by so-called 'experts'.   Hollinger's points are closest to on the mark.  It boils down to budget:

Unless either Boston or IND was willing to pay Hayward ~28M+ per, there was nothing Danny could do to stop Hayward from signing with CHA.   And millions of reasons for Hayward to sign with CHA.

It's that simple.

[SteveD]

Some (very) basic analysis on this topic:

https://www.masslive.com/celtics/2020/11/why-a-gordon-hayward-sign-and-trade-is-so-important-for-the-boston-celtics.html

p.s. ~ I'm not interested in Harden.

Great article, Thanks.
I hear Danny doesn't use TPEs very often. Why would that be ?

[Roy H.]

It sucks how life works sometimes.

If Klutch client Montrezzel Harrell had taken more money to go to Charlotte, instead of joining his boss on the Lakers, Hayward probably goes to Indiana.

[KGs Knee]

I wouldn't expect a TPE out this. Charlotte really has no good reason to unless Danny is willing to give them something. Danny is too cheap for that, though.