Cleveland Game Shows Us Why We Shouldn't Sign Hayward To The Max...

[Phantom255x]

(Hear Me Out)

First off, let me acknowledge that yes, we entered the Cleveland game with limited rest (the second night of a back to back), and without Crowder, Horford, and KO. I get that. It was a "scheduled loss" of some sorts because of those circumstances.

However, what didn't change was Cleveland's size and superior rebounding that hurt us a lot throughout the game. Look, a healthy Horford, KO and Crowder would have helped a ton and may have improved the rebounding, and neutralized Thompson to an extent.

But, if we want to really get close to Cleveland's level, we're just going to have to find another big who can score and rebound. Hayward might be a great shooter and a solid 2 or 3, but with Bradley/Crowder/Brown taking minutes at those positions, adding Hayward may complicate things.

Cleveland may have great shooters, no doubt, but they also got tons of size and they do a great job rebounding and creating second-chance points. At many points yesterday, the Cavs with their size stacked up the paint on defense and forced Boston to shoot outside the paint, and if the C's did attack the paint, many times they were blocked or stripped of the ball.

On offense, you saw the Cavs bigs driving to the paint and drawing double coverage, which led to the open pass to an open shooter (and trust me, you don't want to leave guys like Irving or James with space outside). Otherwise, fairly easy drives into the paint.

We might have Horford, but many of you will agree that Horford alone won't do it, they still need another big to go alongside Horford.

Again, don't get me wrong, we did well considering the circumstances, and the defense did have many great stands late in the game (kudos to Brown and Smart), but to get close to Cleveland's level, we need a guy like Griffin or Cousins, not Hayward. Hayward doesn't thread the needle for us, but a Griffin-caliber player does. Just what I feel. Now hopefully we get KO, Horford and Crowder back healthy for the next meeting against Cleveland.

[D Dub]

Agreed.   Might only be 12-18 months before Jaylen is considered far superior.  Maybe only 12-18 days until AB is considered superior...honestly.     

With what I'm seeing, I'm content to hold our cards *unless* Boogie becomes available.    No other trade target can deliver the franchise a better, more sustainable path forward.    With Smart learning from IT, and Jaylen from Crowder, the fact that we already have our stretch big (KO) I'm absolutely fine letting this group evolve together.   

[The Oracle]

Points in the paint Bos. 56  Cle. 38
2nd chance points Bos. 20  Cle. 11
fastbreak points    Bos. 6    Cle. 23

The rebounding was fairly even considering the C's missed 5 more shots.  The C's put Cle. on the line 37 times, got beat on the break and didn't defend the 3 point line well.  Rebounding is only a minor problem, the C's inability to defend is the real problem and that will be fixed with the return of Crowder, Horford and Olynyk. 

[jambr380]

I would love Griffin as a FA or Cousins in a trade, but neither of those things are necessarily likely to happen. Hayward, on the other hand, seems basically gift-wrapped to us if we want him. That will also leave Crowder or AB and the '17 BKN pick left to offer in a trade for a legit big.

I get that there are probably better options than Hayward, but just like Horford, if extremely talented free agents want to join your team (and you don't need to give up any assets to get them), then you need to jump at the opportunity. Danny did an amazing job leaving cap space available to sign guys, and I would gladly take Hayward if he wants to come here.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Wait, so the reason we shouldn't go after Hayward is because we should instead invest on top NBA players... what a concept!

[Monkhouse]

If there is any GM, that I believe could somehow go past the deepest loopholes in the CBA, and scrounge up any contract deals, or trades work; it's Ainge.

If he signed Hayward, I would be absolutely content with it. Ainge always has an next step, and if Ainge is convinced maybe by word of mouth personally from Brad Stevens, he would be willing to do whatever it takes to sign him. With flexibility in his mind, of course.

If Ainge passes up on Hayward, then oh well.

Move on.

I'm in the same camp that Hayward is a great 2nd player, but would require a high and massive contract that could eat up our flexibility.

I'm rooting for Boogie.

This team would certainly lose some of its pieces, and players that formed as a brotherhood, but I'm truly convinced we were lacking in size and intimidation.

Boogie is it.

He's the spark.

He's the man who can spread the floor now, and is still a threat from mid range. I think he has the perfect opportunity to thrive with Stevens, Horford, Ainge, etc, by his side.

 

[mr. dee]

Rebounding is not really much of an issue. Rim protection was in this game. Guards have to over compensate their perimeter game to defend the post, leaving the Cavs 3 pointers open. With Horford, I'm expecting those issue to be minimized.

[Phantom255x]

Wait, so the reason we shouldn't go after Hayward is because we should instead invest on top NBA players... what a concept!

Well I'd hope we don't just settle on Hayward at the end just because he's available because he doesn't thread the needle for us either.

[TheSundanceKid]

Question for the OP. Through free agency this summer is realistically our last major chance at landing a big fish. So if Griffin decides to go elsewhere and Hayward is the best on offer what would you do?

Sign Hayward? Or continue to pursue trade options? For me I think it's important for us to capitalise on the cap space this summer in one way or another.

[Evantime34]

I'm all for Hayward, he would give us an another asset. His addition would allow us to move Crowder or AB as part of a deal with another team to acquire the big we need.

We donn't want to sit on our cap space for too long, because if we wait then it will become time for extensions/new contracts for Smart, Bradley, and Thomas.

My plan if we can't get Blake Griffin is to sign Hayward, then use whoever becomes the extra man in the rotation for a center.

To be fair, we could easily draft the type of big you suggested with one of the next two Nets picks. If Giles checks out medically, he could be exactly the guy we need.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Wait, so the reason we shouldn't go after Hayward is because we should instead invest on top NBA players... what a concept!

Well I'd hope we don't just settle on Hayward at the end just because he's available because he doesn't thread the needle for us either.

This is pretty much our last chance to use cap space if we intend to keep our current core beyond next season... and by cap space I mean money to offer a MAX contract. Pretty sure we won't have it beyond this summer. Of course, we'd have some more available if you're ready to part with a combination of Thomas, Smart, Bradley. Not sure if that'd be the optimal route.

So it's an interesting position to be in. Nevertheless, the argument shouldn't be don't spend on Hayward because you rather spend on Griffin/Cousins... that's a no-brainer.

But I had us at a good chance of going after Hayward, but as the season has began... I see it slimmer. Bradley is playing incredibly, Brown is emerging.

Do we replace Smart (2/1/3) or AB (2/1) for the chance of playing Hayward (3/2) and Brown (3/4)? Do we replace Brown? Do we replace Crowder (3/4)?

Do we keep them all and play a lot of small ball? Can we keep them all, give them enough playing time and still find playing time for another solid PF/C (and the resources) type? And by him I mean a player you're comfortable with playing alongside Horford to start and/or finish games, and also to play without Horford if needed?

But if you ask me, if all we can come up with is Hayward, then I'm OK with it. I rather than not use our cap space at all honestly (might chance my mind later) and then deal with it... make trades if needed. Hard to see it a bit with Bradley playing so well right now and Brown as well.

[otherdave]

This is a very good thread...

The Cleveland game showed me why C's should not sign IT to the max (I guess I am just frustrated when the Cavs pack the paint, he continues to attempt to penetrate & maneuver in
the pack to not much avail).

I don't want to part with any of our defensive studs (MS, AB, JC, JB).  If Gordon is the only UFA that wants to dance with us, and we feel compelled to use (or lose) our cap space, I would only bring on Gordon if we were really committed to playing a lot of small ball (a lot of JC & JB minutes at the four).  Of course if IT were gone (essentially subtracting IT and adding GH), that might open up enough minutes to go around at one thru three (MS/TR at one, AB/GH at two, JC/JB at three, with them playing some four as well, and GH sliding to the three).

It might be that our best chance to get another big (which I agree we need, don't want to see JC/JB at the four all of the time) is through the draft the next 2 years with the Nets picks - a healthy Harry Giles type.  That might require actually drafting for position, rather than BPA, which I know is not the preferred way.

Bottom line:  I totally trust in Danny.

[BudweiserCeltic]

This is a very good thread...

The Cleveland game showed me why C's should not sign IT to the max (I guess I am just frustrated when the Cavs pack the paint, he continues to attempt to penetrate & maneuver in
the pack to not much avail).

I don't want to part with any of our defensive studs (MS, AB, JC, JB).  If Gordon is the only UFA that wants to dance with us, and we feel compelled to use (or lose) our cap space, I would only bring on Gordon if we were really committed to playing a lot of small ball (a lot of JC & JB minutes at the four).  Of course if IT were gone (essentially subtracting IT and adding GH), that might open up enough minutes to go around at one thru three (MS/TR at one, AB/GH at two, JC/JB at three, with them playing some four as well, and GH sliding to the three).

It might be that our best chance to get another big (which I agree we need, don't want to see JC/JB at the four all of the time) is through the draft the next 2 years with the Nets picks - a healthy Harry Giles type.  That might require actually drafting for position, rather than BPA, which I know is not the preferred way.

Bottom line:  I totally trust in Danny.

You're aware that he got to the line 14 times and scored 30 points in that game correct?

[tazzmaniac]

With the cap holds for Olynyk and the Nets 1st, I don't believe we'll have enough for a MAX contract assuming a 102/103M cap.

[otherdave]

With the cap holds for Olynyk and the Nets 1st, I don't believe we'll have enough for a MAX contract assuming a 102/103M cap.

I agree with your math.  C's would have to make some other moves, i.e. not offer KO a QO, thus removing his 7.7 cap hold.