Would Hayward be bigger coup than Horford?

[footey]

Reading the back and forth on merits of Hayward got to wondering: Would his addition add more value to this team than Horford? Different players. Just trying to gauge perceived impact.

[Phantom255x]

I truthfully think so.

Lethal scorer, underrated defender, with size and ability to match up against other tall forwards.

Also allows for more spacing since now no team will double cover Isaiah, which could open it up for the offense even more.

Horford is a great player too and in a sense, a "game manager" to me, but Hayward provides a HUGE scoring upgrade at the wing position. Easily can give you 20-25 every night (potential for 30+ as well).

[max215]

On the court, I'll say yes. Plain and simple, Gordon Hayward is a better basketball player than Al Horford. On the other hand, convincing Horford to come here meant more for this franchise. First of all, we dispelled the "free agents don't like Boston" narrative. Furthermore, we got Horford by selling him on Boston's future, which a guy with other excellent options thought to be the brightest. Then Horford's excellent play took us to the next level as a team and opended the door for guys like Hayward to see an opportunity. I also think landing Hayward would be less impressive due to the extenuating circumstance of his relationship with CBS. With Hayward, we very well may end up getting him not due to the strength of our pitch/team, but due to circumstances beyond our control, making it ever so slightly less impressive of a win.

[Ilikesports17]

Hayward is a better player, but Horford was bigger for the team.

Primarily because we desperately needed big man help.

[A Future of Stevens]

I truthfully think so.

Lethal scorer, underrated defender, with size and ability to match up against other tall forwards.

Also allows for more spacing since now no team will double cover Isaiah, which could open it up for the offense even more.

Horford is a great player too and in a sense, a "game manager" to me, but Hayward provides a HUGE scoring upgrade at the wing position. Easily can give you 20-25 every night (potential for 30+ as well).

Plus he just turned 27, so as a shooter, it isn't far fetched to assume he will be in his full prime the entire length of his max contract with us. As opposed to Horford who will probably slowly decline over the length of his contract.

Horford + IT + Hayward is a great core going forward. And to think we could feasibly add Fultz, Brown, Zizic, and BRK 18 to that core, and dare I say we might be staring down the barrell of a contender for the next 10ish years. My ideal scenario is for IT to take a 3 year max contract so that his contract lines up with Horfords, so while we have 3 maxs, we should ideally be using super high upside rookie scale contracts to back fill that team. When the 3 years are up, we free up 60ish million in one shot, and we make the long term decisions that summer.

[footey]

Hayward is a better player, but Horford was bigger for the team.

Primarily because we desperately needed big man help.

I agree.

[Future Celtics Owner]

One could argue that Hayward is bigger because it means we are going for IT and not trading IT nor backing off from Golden State and the Cavs. Signing IT has to mean the end for certain players as well: Smart/AB or both

[timpiker]

I'll say Hayward because he's in his prime.

[Cman]

Some really well thought out ideas on this thread so far. I agree with the basic ideas that Hayward is probably better than Horford (of course not apples to apples), but the Horford signing was a really big deal, ending years of not being able to land a big FA and addressing an area of need at the same time.

The idea of how much Hayward would be able to open up things for IT gives me shivers.

[Phantom255x]

Some really well thought out ideas on this thread so far. I agree with the basic ideas that Hayward is probably better than Horford (of course not apples to apples), but the Horford signing was a really big deal, ending years of not being able to land a big FA and addressing an area of need at the same time.

The idea of how much Hayward would be able to open up things for IT gives me shivers.

Hayward AND Fultz.

Hopefully Brown's offense takes an extra step next year as well.

[fantankerous]

Yes.  However, Hayward would also make Horford even better.

[Future Celtics Owner]

Some really well thought out ideas on this thread so far. I agree with the basic ideas that Hayward is probably better than Horford (of course not apples to apples), but the Horford signing was a really big deal, ending years of not being able to land a big FA and addressing an area of need at the same time.

The idea of how much Hayward would be able to open up things for IT gives me shivers.

Hayward AND Fultz.

Hopefully Brown's offense takes an extra step next year as well.

I honestly believe he will be on another level next year...both ways.

[Chief Macho]

I think the idea of Horford being a monumental signing was overwritten and Boston centric.  Durant would have been what people pretend Horfords storyline is.  These guys just arent good enough to be as significant as this narrative suggests

[aingeforthree]

Horford. Much harder to get a big in this league

[RockinRyA]

You guys clearly haven't been reading this blog. Al Horford is the worst signing ever.