If Crowder has ANY problem with Hayward he gets moved

[ThePaintedArea]

Naawww, I rather keep crowder Hayward is overrated and will be overpaid

I would take Hayward over Crowder 100 out of 100 times.

 I'm with you too. Crowder over Hayward is laughable. Crowder is a three andD guy and that's it. And his three is suspect.

He shot .398 from three! That's not suspect, it's sterling. And on about 5.5 attempts per game. He also shot .540 from two and .739 at the rim. He shot .811 at the line - that's grade-A.

Those numbers say that he's one of the better shooters in the league.

And oh, by the way, his D is sterling, too.

[ThePaintedArea]

Not if he voices displeasure over Hayward. You can see it coming. He hates Hayward. He's gonna be irate once it happens.

Do you know Crowder? How can you know this about him?

Hopefully we can extend Smart on a team friendly extension, he can be the new Crowder.

You have more optimism about Smart's shooting than I do.  I think that if he had a career average of .333 from the arc it would be quite an accomplishment, for instance.

[KG Living Legend]

 Hey what's up painted. Here is the interview where Crowder was complaining ​about the said situation. This was extremely unprofessional Imo.

 I've admittedly soured on the guy ever since. It's not personal Jae it's business. He's better than you.

 https://youtu.be/rB0AmrwZQHk

[inverselock]

Can't see how you are connecting the dots.   Completely different situations.   Does not speak badly about Hayward at all.   

Considering the contract Crowder signed, I am sure he knows his place in the league.   I doubt he would be that immature.   Crazy hypothetical.

[ThePaintedArea]

Why on earth would we trade Crowder. He's better than Bradley and Smart, and he's the only one of our rotation guards/wings who isn't up for a massive new contract. Besides, there's no reason that Hayward can't start at the 2 or Crowder can't start at the 4.

Of course there is. Hayward is not a SG and Crowder is not a PF.

You raise good questions.

Of course, Crowder played at the 4 in small lineups, including significant minutes in the playoffs.

Boston always started the game with two bigs, so we could at least say that Crowder was not used as a full-time 4.

On the other hand, it's probably better to ditch the whole 1-5 thing, at least as far as Brad Stevens is concerned; he says that he sees four positions (ballhandlers, wings, swings, and bigs), and we really ought to take him at his word.

Crowder is a swing, not a big. I would agree with you that he is not suited to play full-time or start as a big.

The most commonly used lineup with Crowder as the "4" was Thomas-Smart-Bradley-Crowder-Horford, which was +43 for the season - not bad at all. That one allowed Thomas to play off the ball, using Smart posting with four good 3-pt shooters around him. That one you could call the high-speed lineup.

If Crowder could play PF with any semblance of reliability, this would have been made evident this season when we had no big other than Horford that was worth their salt.

I think that Crowder had a very good year, and was a key player in Boston's substantial success.  His coach, for one, obviously thinks that he contributes playing the "4".

In the end, I'm puzzled why posters here are so down on Olynyk and Johnson. They were sixth and seventh in minutes on a team that made it to the top seed and the conference finals. That doesn't happen without good bench play.  Those two bigs were pluses on both ends.  Definitely "worth their salt". Boston will keep both of those guys as long as the money is workable.

[ThePaintedArea]

 Hey what's up painted. Here is the interview where Crowder was complaining ​about the said situation. This was extremely unprofessional Imo.

 I've admittedly soured on the guy ever since. It's not personal Jae it's business. He's better than you.

 https://youtu.be/rB0AmrwZQHk

Well hey, thanks for the shout.

I think that Crowder was bothered by Celtics fans cheering for an opponent. I think that that is understandable.

[Boston Garden Leprechaun]

... Crowder is on a great contract and has hit his peak. I'd love to keep him but if he's gonna cause any chemistry problems losing his starting spot than he must go.
...

I don't see Crowder and Hayward co-existing.  Danny will move him and he will not wait for problems or moaning.  He will do what's best for the team.

agreed. we get hayward jae needs to go and even then we have to find minutes for jaylen at the 2/3 or just replace hayward when he sits.not sure that would be enough time so we would hve to play him at the 2 also.  same for fultz when IT sits at PG.

[Boston Garden Leprechaun]

Why on earth would we trade Crowder. He's better than Bradley and Smart, and he's the only one of our rotation guards/wings who isn't up for a massive new contract. Besides, there's no reason that Hayward can't start at the 2 or Crowder can't start at the 4.

better than AB ??  not sure if serious.

[Boston Garden Leprechaun]

We need guys that can play against GSW units. Crowder is one of those and on a cheap contract. That enables having a few max guys while having depth. He could be the Posey we couldn't retain. I am not saying he is off limits, just that he is valuable in many ways, even if he is not spectacular.

i get the cheap contract and if we have to keep him then so be it but he can ride the bench and like it. I personally wanted him gone but whatever helps us best money wise.

[tonydelk]

There are zero reasons to trade Crowder.  He has no power and would be amazing leading the 2nd unit.  Plus when the go small he would play PF and will still get his minutes and finish games.  He will really help Fultz acclimate to the NBA in the 2nd unit.

[More Banners]

There are zero reasons to trade Crowder.  He has no power and would be amazing leading the 2nd unit.  Plus when the go small he would play PF and will still get his minutes and finish games.  He will really help Fultz acclimate to the NBA in the 2nd unit.

He's a role player. He isn't leading anything.

[KGs Knee]

Why on earth would we trade Crowder. He's better than Bradley and Smart, and he's the only one of our rotation guards/wings who isn't up for a massive new contract. Besides, there's no reason that Hayward can't start at the 2 or Crowder can't start at the 4.

better than AB ??  not sure if serious.

In no way, shape, or form is Crowder a better player than Bradley.

He just isn't.

[chilidawg]

The reason to trade Crowder is that he may have more value to other teams because of his contract than guys like Bradley and Smart, and thus is likely to bring a higher return.

OTOH, unless we're signing Hayward, trading him makes no sense.  The arguments for keeping him are the same as trading him, he has value because of his contract and because he is a solid, tough minded role player who is an important cog.

[ETNCeltics]

There are zero reasons to trade Crowder.  He has no power and would be amazing leading the 2nd unit.  Plus when the go small he would play PF and will still get his minutes and finish games.  He will really help Fultz acclimate to the NBA in the 2nd unit.

Crowder's already pouted over fans cheering Hayward. If we acquired Hayward, Crowder might turn into a real distraction.

[ThePaintedArea]

OTOH, unless we're signing Hayward, trading him makes no sense.  The arguments for keeping him are the same as trading him, he has value because of his contract and because he is a solid, tough minded role player who is an important cog.

Sounds like a good argument for not signing Hayward.

But Crowder is more than "a solid... role player". He's one of the top wing defenders in the league, and one of the top shooters in the league.

Hayward is a shot-creator, while Crowder needs other guys to get him the ball, mostly.  Gordon's skillset is coveted around the league, and Boston needs someone who does what he does.

So... will Jaylen Brown give you some of that? Yes, clearly that's in his future, with more trips to the line and stopper defense.

Will Markelle Fultz give you some of that? Obviously.

Question is, is Boston willing to wait while those guys develop their games?  I'm not sure the argument that GS/Clev are unbeatable for the next couple of years is as good as it sounds - but there is a lot to be said for playing the long game.

People have questioned Blake Griffin's reliability because of his injury history.  That's hard to evaluate - while he doesn't have a chronic problem in some part of his body, perhaps he's just one of those injury-prone people (I think that there are people like that). However, his list of injuries does not really seem to follow a pattern, I'd say.

Given the talent in the pipeline and the current success of the team, I think that Griffin is a good bet - worth the risk, whatever it might be, of his playing 60 games next year. He's a triple-threat, great passer, ups the defensive rebounding, fills a spot.  The Celtics have a lot of strength at the wings already but few guaranteed contracts for the bigs.  So Blake solves three immediate problems: shot-creation, defensive rebounding, and the roster need for a big.  In my view those are the three most urgent things the team needs to address, and you can solve them by signing one player.  Hayward only solves one of them, and creates an unworkable logjam.