"Resurrect" might have been too strong, but right now Love isn't worth much (if any) more than his old-max contract. If you trade for him you're gambling that you can put him in a featured role and bring back the Minnesota version of Love.
This is nonsense. There's no reason Love isn't worth exactly as much as Al Horford and Gordon Heyward right now.
He's coming off of a season where he averaged 19 and 11 in just 31 minutes, while shooting 37% from three. Don't forget he did this on a team with LeBron James and Kyrie Irving.
He's also coming off a season in which he:
* Shot < 45% from the field
* Took only 20% of his shots inside 3 feet (and shot a woeful 56% on those shots)
* Played only 60 games
* Choked on the big stage when his team needed him most.
Three facts that seem to be characteristics that seem to be defining characteristics for a guy who, in 9 NBA seasons:
* Has played 75+ games only twice
* Has shot over 46% from the field only once
* Has shot over 60% inside 3" only four times
* Didn't play a single playoff game until jumping on Lebron's coattails in Cleveland
Kevin Love is a career loser who is soft mentally, is fragile physically, is the ultimate definition of anti-clutch, and has among some of the worst leadership skills among all high profile players in the NBA.
Yeah. Most of this also applies to Gordon Heyward, and yet folks around here are literally ready to beg on their knees for him to take their money.
If Love were a FA today, teams would be lining up to offer him max money. The idea that he's "barely worth his old max" is preposterous.
You're right - I have the exact same criticism's of Hayward for the most part.
Although there is one distinction - Hayward led the Jazz to a pretty strong record this year (and even put up a hell of a fight in the playoffs) in an incredibly strong Western Conference. And he did that as the clear best player on that Utah team.
That fact alone has raised my confidence in him quite a bit compared to where it was 6 months ago - however I'm still skeptical based on the fact that it was really the first season he's put together that was really all that impressive, and it happens to also been a contract year.
I remain extremely skeptical in Hayward's ability to turn this team around from a team that got nearly swept by Cleveland a couple of months ago, to one that can go toe-to-toe with them now.
I'm concerned by Hayward's defensive limitations (which I feel were covered up by Gobert's defensive brilliance), by his merely average rebounding for his size, and by his relative inability to create his own shot in ISO situations.
I really see Hayward as more of a complimentary star who would strive playing off the ball, rather than a guy who you can just get the ball to at the end of a game and watch him make something happen.
I'm also concerned by the fact that clearing enough cap space to sign Hayward also means renouncing Olynyk, which (combined with the inevitable loss of Amir) leaves is entirely void of a second starting big man...or the cap space to try and sign one.
This means our best option (if we did get him) may be to trade Crowder or Bradley away in return for a starting PF...in which case you need to ask yourself - how much do you gain from adding Hayward above what you would lose by giving up an Avery Bradley / Jae Crowder?
I also don't have any real confidence in the idea of either Hayward or Tatum playing the four over the duration of a whole season. I think both could play it in stretches in certain small ball lineups, but not for a full season. That leaves a huge logjam at the SF spot with Hayward, Crowder, Tatum and Brown all being deserving of minutes.
So yeah...on paper I like the idea of adding Hayward. In reality, I wonder if it may actually make us worse, not better.
I can't help but feel that our best chance to improve this team would be trading out Horford, but I know Danny would never do that.
Topic: Idea: If we sign Hayward, could a trade for Kevin Love be next? (CLE/NY/Boston?) (Read 7176 times)