Not interested in Hayward.
A team with IT, Hayward and Horford is a pretender in a league of GSW's, LA Clippers and Cleveland Cavs.
Just stay patient and wait for a top 10-15 player to become available.
I would rather wait 5 years and let Brown, Smart and other picks to develop than give Hayward 28 million a year.
We've worked hard and been so patient with this caproom and we can't squander it on 3rd/4th bananas like Hayward. AND we already have Crowder who was playing arguably just as well as Hayward from a two way player perspective..before his inury.
Wait for a true top 10 franchise guy to be let loose, and then get another one and hopefully draft one.
It's possible that no top 10-15 players will come the Celts way in the near future. Perhaps the Celts could sign a guy like Hayward, win 50+ games for a few years, and then turn the team over to the likes of Smart, Brown, and whoever the Celts get in the next two drafts once Horford, IT, and Hayward are in decline.
In 4-5 years, those young guys still won't have really hit their prime.
^this
and in any case, by signing Hayward or another player outside the top-10, it's not like we are signing an agreement we'll never trade for a top player...just give it some time.
Fair enough, but I'm not sure how many teams will want to trade for Gordon Hayward at 28 million. I just think he's going to be way overpaid when he's really not that much better than Jae Crowder. Better scorer, worse defender, slightly more versatillity on offense but Jae's defensive versatility is potentially more valuable.
I would rather give Jaylen Brown the minutes and see what happens than sign Hayward and then let Brown get his scraps minutes.
Now if it were Jimmy Butler we were talking about, that's a true top 10/15 NBA player on both ends. So I'd rather we have the flexibility to trade for real game changers like Butler, Cousins etc...
I get that we could use Hayward as a trade chip, I just don't think he's a great trade chip at 28 million, and he's taking time from Crowder and Brown.
It is not impossible to argue that Gordon Hayward is better offensively than Butler. Such a small portion of Hayward's shots are assisted -- just over 30% the last two years. That's not due to Hayward's shot selection. That's due to how the Jazz run their offense. He rarely is on the court with players who can get him good looks -- he has to do that for his teammates instead, despite not being the PG. It'll be more of the same with George Hill as the PG this year, who plays off the ball as much as he plays on it.
Of course, like most players he shoots better off the catch-and-shoot. Last year he had a .527 eFG in such situations (Butler merely had a .443 eFG). Hayward would get a lot better looks on the Celtics, and at the same time create better looks for everyone else. He's exactly what this team was missing in the playoffs last year when Atlanta decided to swarm IT.
Additionally, did you know that players shot 2 percentage points
better than their average last year when being defended by Butler, compared with only 1.7 percentage points better when being defended by Hayward? I didn't until just now when I looked it up. I don't know if that's the best defensive stat out there, but I do know that players shot 2.3 percentage points worse when being defended by Bradley, so there seems to be something to it.
Topic: What's the Max we could pay G Hayward next year (Read 11901 times)