AB is likely gone on draft draft (speculation)

[Vermont Green]

One of many possible actions but I would not categorize it as likely.  The original idea was essentially trading:

Bradley, Rozier, Yabusele (+some less than max FA, Olynyk)
for
A chance to overpay Hayward and a mid-lottery draft pick

Do we even come out ahead in this transaction?  If we keep Bradley et al, we have room to sign someone but just not a max so  the deal really also includes losing out on a more modest but potentially helpful FA.  Say that is Olynyk.

Why are we working so hard to get Hayward?  The whole point in potentially overpaying for him (like we did Horford) is that we get him for just money (vs. trading for say Butler).  That is why the Horford deal was even thinkable.  If we have to trade Bradley plus two promising young players along with letting Olynyk walk, just to be able to sign him, I no longer see the point.

[PAOBoston]

One of many possible actions but I would not categorize it as likely.  The original idea was essentially trading:

Bradley, Rozier, Yabusele (+some less than max FA, Olynyk)
for
A chance to overpay Hayward and a mid-lottery draft pick

Do we even come out ahead in this transaction?  If we keep Bradley et al, we have room to sign someone but just not a max so  the deal really also includes losing out on a more modest but potentially helpful FA.  Say that is Olynyk.

Why are we working so hard to get Hayward?  The whole point in potentially overpaying for him (like we did Horford) is that we get him for just money (vs. trading for say Butler).  That is why the Horford deal was even thinkable.  If we have to trade Bradley plus two promising young players along with letting Olynyk walk, just to be able to sign him, I no longer see the point.

The reality is Hayward would probably be the best player on the team (at worst second best). He's a significant upgrade at the wing and is a good fir for this offense. And yes, all he costs is money for 4 years.

Trading for Butler (who is older than Hayward) is still going to cost you a lot (picks/young players/maybe one of Bradley/Crowder/Smart) and you will need to make a significant investment dollar wise once he opts out after 2 years.

[RodyTur10]

I don't see the point of signing Hayward for the max at all. What are we trying to accomplish here?
Is there any trade out there that would make the Celtics a contender? With having Hayward and Horford on max contracts there is hardly any room for improvement for the team in the short term. We actually will lose a couple of important players by the luxury tax which we'll be avoiding to pay. In the long term when Fultz, Brown and Zizic are ready to lead the team, will Hayward even be here by then?

Please explain why this would be wise move, otherwise than simply stating that Hayward is a good player to have.

[jambr380]

I don't see the point of signing Hayward for the max at all. What are we trying to accomplish here?
Is there any trade out there that would make the Celtics a contender? With having Hayward and Horford on max contracts there is hardly any room for improvement for the team in the short term. We actually will lose a couple of important players by the luxury tax which we'll be avoiding to pay. In the long term when Fultz, Brown and Zizic are ready to lead the team, will Hayward even be here by then?

Please explain why this would be wise move, otherwise than simply stating that Hayward is a good player to have.

The trade as originally proposed is not necessary. If we are trading AB, then we can keep Rozier and retain the rights to Yabusele, while still holding on to KO or JJ (if that is what Danny wants to do). Trading AB also allows us to bring back (future) value rather than him likely walking for nothing next summer.

By signing Hayward, we solidify ourselves as the 2nd best team in the east while still having an amazing young core. The team we are putting together now isn't a favorite to win the title, but is probably the 3rd-4th best team in the NBA; that is how far away everybody is from GSW and (to a lesser extent) the Cavs. An ill-timed injury could change everything, though, and we would best equipped to take advantage of that opportunity.

As Horford/Hayward/IT begin to age, they could be great complementary pieces to what hopefully will be all of our top picks reaching all-star status. We could be really good for a really long time.

[Jvalin]

Bradley is gone. He is too expensive and we have to move him before we can make any max offers.

We certainly don't have to move him. There are many ways for us to create enough space for Hayward

- renounce Kelly, trade Rozier+Jackson for future pick(s)/salary relief
- trade Smart + renounce Kelly
- trade Crowder
- trade IT + renounce Kelly
- trade Bradley

(just to name a few)

The way I see it, the odd man out is IT. I 'd trade him either on draft night or at the trade deadline and I'd resign/extend Bradley-Smart.

bolded doesnt work.

both are ~1 million short.

They both work (assuming we stash Yabu as well which is a given).

Scenario #1 : renounce Kelly, trade Rozier+Jackson for future pick(s)/salary relief

For the sake of discussion, let's say we do the following :

1. trade Rozier - Jackson for future pick(s)/salary relief
2. renounce Kelly - Amir - Jerebko - Green - Young
3. decline team option on Mickey
4. stash Yabu overseas/in the D-League

We will still have :

Horford - $27,734,405
Bradley - $8,808,989
Crowder - $6,796,117
Thomas - $6,261,394
Brown - $4,956,480
Smart - $4,538,019

SUM : $59,095,404 for 6 players

+ cap hold for the #1 pick : $7,026,240
+ cap hold for Zizic (#23) : $1,645,200

SUM : $67,766,844 for 8 players

Teams are assessed a $815,615 roster charge for each open spot below 12 players. According to saltlover and Roy H., the way it works is that you add up all the salaries, cap holds and cap charges after Hayward signs a max.

$815,615 x 3 = $2,446,845

$67,766,844 + $2,446,845 = $70,213,689 for 11 players + Hayward = 12 players

The latest salary cap projection has the cap at $101,000,000.

$101,000,000 - $70,213,689 = $30,786,311 available in cap space

The max contract for 7-year vets starts at 30% of the cap.

101,000,000 x 30% = $30,300,000

$30,786,311 > $30,300,000   so we have enough cap space

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scenario #2 : trade Bradley

For the sake of discussion, let's assume we do the following :

1. trade Bradley for future pick(s)
2. renounce Amir - Jerebko - Green - Young
3. decline team option on Mickey
4. release Jackson ($650,000* guaranteed if not waived on or before 7/15/17)
4. stash Yabu overseas/in the D-League

*$650,000 < $815,615 (the rookie minimum)
If I'm not mistaken his cap hold becomes $815,615.

We will still have :

Horford - $27,734,405
Crowder - $6,796,117
Thomas - $6,261,394
Brown - $4,956,480
Smart - $4,538,019
Rozier - $1,988,520

SUM : $52,274,935 for 6 players

+ cap hold for the #1 pick : $7,026,240
+ cap hold for Zizic (#23) : $1,645,200
+ cap hold for Kelly : $7,735,034
+ cap hold for Jackson : $815,615

SUM : $69,497,024 for 10 players

Teams are assessed a $815,615 roster charge for each open spot below 12 players. According to saltlover and Roy H., the way it works is that you add up all the salaries, cap holds and cap charges after Hayward signs a max.

$69,497,024 + $815,615 = $70,312,639 for 11 players + Hayward = 12 players

The latest salary cap projection has the cap at $101,000,000.

$101,000,000 - $70,312,639 = $30,687,361 available in cap space

The max contract for 7-year vets starts at 30% of the cap.

101,000,000 x 30% = $30,300,000

$30,687,361 > $30,300,000   so we have enough cap space

[ETNCeltics]

Trading Bradley isn't just a matter of salaries, it's common sense. We're about to add yet another perimeter player in Fultz, when we already don't have enough minutes for the guys we have. We will likely try to sign Hayward as well to add to the logjam. If that happens, Crowder or Rozier may be gone as well, though, with the potential he's shown and his low salary, trading Rozier makes little sense given what we'd get in return. 

Keeping Bradley on the last year of his deal doesn't add a lot of value long-term, unless you're resigning him, which at ~$20M or more, takes away a lot of flexibility to do much else. The only way it makes sense to keep Bradley is if you're not going to extend or re-sign IT, which I think is a given.

Also, when did stash Yabu become a given? Paraphrasing Austin Ainge, he's expected to help the Celts this season. Unless we find a big in the 2nd round we really like or trade up for an additional first, Yabu's likely on the roster next season.

[Darío SpanishFan]

Trading Bradley isn't just a matter of salaries, it's common sense. We're about to add yet another perimeter player in Fultz, when we already don't have enough minutes for the guys we have. We will likely try to sign Hayward as well to add to the logjam. If that happens, Crowder or Rozier may be gone as well, though, with the potential he's shown and his low salary, trading Rozier makes little sense given what we'd get in return. 

Keeping Bradley on the last year of his deal doesn't add a lot of value long-term, unless you're resigning him, which at ~$20M or more, takes away a lot of flexibility to do much else. The only way it makes sense to keep Bradley is if you're not going to extend or re-sign IT, which I think is a given.

Also, when did stash Yabu become a given? Paraphrasing Austin Ainge, he's expected to help the Celts this season. Unless we find a big in the 2nd round we really like or trade up for an additional first, Yabu's likely on the roster next season.

Common sense? No. My common sense says there is another odd man out.

[Jvalin]

Trading Bradley isn't just a matter of salaries, it's common sense. We're about to add yet another perimeter player in Fultz, when we already don't have enough minutes for the guys we have. We will likely try to sign Hayward as well to add to the logjam. If that happens, Crowder or Rozier may be gone as well, though, with the potential he's shown and his low salary, trading Rozier makes little sense given what we'd get in return. 

Keeping Bradley on the last year of his deal doesn't add a lot of value long-term, unless you're resigning him, which at ~$20M or more, takes away a lot of flexibility to do much else. The only way it makes sense to keep Bradley is if you're not going to extend or re-sign IT, which I think is a given.

Also, when did stash Yabu become a given? Paraphrasing Austin Ainge, he's expected to help the Celts this season. Unless we find a big in the 2nd round we really like or trade up for an additional first, Yabu's likely on the roster next season.

Common sense? No. My common sense says there is another odd man out.

Agreed, my odd man out is IT as well. Having said that, a case can be made for anyone but Horford. No matter your choice, that's a painful desision.

[CFAN38]

One of many possible actions but I would not categorize it as likely.  The original idea was essentially trading:

Bradley, Rozier, Yabusele (+some less than max FA, Olynyk)
for
A chance to overpay Hayward and a mid-lottery draft pick

Do we even come out ahead in this transaction?  If we keep Bradley et al, we have room to sign someone but just not a max so  the deal really also includes losing out on a more modest but potentially helpful FA.  Say that is Olynyk.

Why are we working so hard to get Hayward?  The whole point in potentially overpaying for him (like we did Horford) is that we get him for just money (vs. trading for say Butler).  That is why the Horford deal was even thinkable.  If we have to trade Bradley plus two promising young players along with letting Olynyk walk, just to be able to sign him, I no longer see the point.

Do you trade AB (going to be FA 20+Mill per year) + KO (at 12mill per year) + Yabu (#16 pick) + Rozier for Hayward (30mill) and #7 (Isaac)?

Its a tough call but Hayward is better then AB and I think Isaac has a greater long term value than Yabu, KO or Rozier. Its a tough pill to swallow but basketball is a 5 v 5 game and at some point depth is a waste and needs to be consolidated. 

[CFAN38]

Trading Bradley isn't just a matter of salaries, it's common sense. We're about to add yet another perimeter player in Fultz, when we already don't have enough minutes for the guys we have. We will likely try to sign Hayward as well to add to the logjam. If that happens, Crowder or Rozier may be gone as well, though, with the potential he's shown and his low salary, trading Rozier makes little sense given what we'd get in return. 

Keeping Bradley on the last year of his deal doesn't add a lot of value long-term, unless you're resigning him, which at ~$20M or more, takes away a lot of flexibility to do much else. The only way it makes sense to keep Bradley is if you're not going to extend or re-sign IT, which I think is a given.

Also, when did stash Yabu become a given? Paraphrasing Austin Ainge, he's expected to help the Celts this season. Unless we find a big in the 2nd round we really like or trade up for an additional first, Yabu's likely on the roster next season.

I agree by the trade deadline either AB or IT is going to be moved. Smart is also a possibility but he will be a smaller contract and I suspect he is retained. As for Yabu its a numbers game. Its tough to get the cap space needed to sign Hayward without trading or stashing Yabu. 

[CoachBo]

Trading Bradley isn't just a matter of salaries, it's common sense. We're about to add yet another perimeter player in Fultz, when we already don't have enough minutes for the guys we have. We will likely try to sign Hayward as well to add to the logjam. If that happens, Crowder or Rozier may be gone as well, though, with the potential he's shown and his low salary, trading Rozier makes little sense given what we'd get in return. 

Keeping Bradley on the last year of his deal doesn't add a lot of value long-term, unless you're resigning him, which at ~$20M or more, takes away a lot of flexibility to do much else. The only way it makes sense to keep Bradley is if you're not going to extend or re-sign IT, which I think is a given.

Also, when did stash Yabu become a given? Paraphrasing Austin Ainge, he's expected to help the Celts this season. Unless we find a big in the 2nd round we really like or trade up for an additional first, Yabu's likely on the roster next season.

You have a link for Austin Ainge's comments?

[td450]

Trading Bradley isn't just a matter of salaries, it's common sense. We're about to add yet another perimeter player in Fultz, when we already don't have enough minutes for the guys we have. We will likely try to sign Hayward as well to add to the logjam. If that happens, Crowder or Rozier may be gone as well, though, with the potential he's shown and his low salary, trading Rozier makes little sense given what we'd get in return. 

Keeping Bradley on the last year of his deal doesn't add a lot of value long-term, unless you're resigning him, which at ~$20M or more, takes away a lot of flexibility to do much else. The only way it makes sense to keep Bradley is if you're not going to extend or re-sign IT, which I think is a given.

Also, when did stash Yabu become a given? Paraphrasing Austin Ainge, he's expected to help the Celts this season. Unless we find a big in the 2nd round we really like or trade up for an additional first, Yabu's likely on the roster next season.

Outside flexibility here has a shelf life of about 45 days. By the time the C's were to sign Bradley, everything would need to be settled, either way.

Bottom line is that it comes down to choosing Bradley, or keeping Crowder and $30-40M per year in team profits for a two year window. On a championship contender, Bradley is the more useful player by a significant margin. For a competitive team that is incubating young stars, that's a lot of money. We'll see which team the C's think they are soon.

[ETNCeltics]

Trading Bradley isn't just a matter of salaries, it's common sense. We're about to add yet another perimeter player in Fultz, when we already don't have enough minutes for the guys we have. We will likely try to sign Hayward as well to add to the logjam. If that happens, Crowder or Rozier may be gone as well, though, with the potential he's shown and his low salary, trading Rozier makes little sense given what we'd get in return. 

Keeping Bradley on the last year of his deal doesn't add a lot of value long-term, unless you're resigning him, which at ~$20M or more, takes away a lot of flexibility to do much else. The only way it makes sense to keep Bradley is if you're not going to extend or re-sign IT, which I think is a given.

Also, when did stash Yabu become a given? Paraphrasing Austin Ainge, he's expected to help the Celts this season. Unless we find a big in the 2nd round we really like or trade up for an additional first, Yabu's likely on the roster next season.

You have a link for Austin Ainge's comments?

It's been posted here before.

[ETNCeltics]

Trading Bradley isn't just a matter of salaries, it's common sense. We're about to add yet another perimeter player in Fultz, when we already don't have enough minutes for the guys we have. We will likely try to sign Hayward as well to add to the logjam. If that happens, Crowder or Rozier may be gone as well, though, with the potential he's shown and his low salary, trading Rozier makes little sense given what we'd get in return. 

Keeping Bradley on the last year of his deal doesn't add a lot of value long-term, unless you're resigning him, which at ~$20M or more, takes away a lot of flexibility to do much else. The only way it makes sense to keep Bradley is if you're not going to extend or re-sign IT, which I think is a given.

Also, when did stash Yabu become a given? Paraphrasing Austin Ainge, he's expected to help the Celts this season. Unless we find a big in the 2nd round we really like or trade up for an additional first, Yabu's likely on the roster next season.

I agree by the trade deadline either AB or IT is going to be moved. Smart is also a possibility but he will be a smaller contract and I suspect he is retained. As for Yabu its a numbers game. Its tough to get the cap space needed to sign Hayward without trading or stashing Yabu.

I suspect that when the dust settles, we won't get Hayward. Hope I'm wrong, he'd be a nice addition.

[Jvalin]

Trading Bradley isn't just a matter of salaries, it's common sense. We're about to add yet another perimeter player in Fultz, when we already don't have enough minutes for the guys we have. We will likely try to sign Hayward as well to add to the logjam. If that happens, Crowder or Rozier may be gone as well, though, with the potential he's shown and his low salary, trading Rozier makes little sense given what we'd get in return. 

Keeping Bradley on the last year of his deal doesn't add a lot of value long-term, unless you're resigning him, which at ~$20M or more, takes away a lot of flexibility to do much else. The only way it makes sense to keep Bradley is if you're not going to extend or re-sign IT, which I think is a given.

Also, when did stash Yabu become a given? Paraphrasing Austin Ainge, he's expected to help the Celts this season. Unless we find a big in the 2nd round we really like or trade up for an additional first, Yabu's likely on the roster next season.

What I meant was that stashing Yabu is a given in pretty much every scenario where the C's acquire Hayward. Having said that, I 'd love to see Yabu being part of our rotation next year.