Celtics Better off without Hayward?

[crimson_stallion]

I think we're going to regress next year without any PFs but in all years beyond next we will improve as we are able to navigate the cap a bit better.

I tend to agree on the first point. 

I don't agree on the next point though.  How do you feel that we will be able to navicage the cap better beyond next year, when we are going almost certainly going to have Thomas, Horford and Hayward all on max contracts AND will also have to make the challenging decision on whether or not to retain Bradley?

I don't believe this team will have any cap flexibility at all until after Horford's contract expires - and even then we're still going to be pretty limited with Thomas and Hayward taking up about 60% of the cap on their own. 

With the acquisition of Hayward, I think it now becomes especially desperate for us to try to pursue a trade to bring a starting caliber big in to Boston - probably by trading out either one of Bradley or Crowder.  My money is on Bradley since Crowder's cost controlled contract becomes all the more critical now that our cap is maxed out, and this is probably the last time we can afford to trade Bradley while he has any real value (rather then let him walk for nothing next year).

[GreenCoffeeBean]

I think we're going to regress next year without any PFs but in all years beyond next we will improve as we are able to navigate the cap a bit better.

I tend to agree on the first point. 

I don't agree on the next point though.  How do you feel that we will be able to navicage the cap better beyond next year, when we are going almost certainly going to have Thomas, Horford and Hayward all on max contracts AND will also have to make the challenging decision on whether or not to retain Bradley?

I don't believe this team will have any cap flexibility at all until after Horford's contract expires - and even then we're still going to be pretty limited with Thomas and Hayward taking up about 60% of the cap on their own. 

With the acquisition of Hayward, I think it now becomes especially desperate for us to try to pursue a trade to bring a starting caliber big in to Boston - probably by trading out either one of Bradley or Crowder.  My money is on Bradley since Crowder's cost controlled contract becomes all the more critical now that our cap is maxed out, and this is probably the last time we can afford to trade Bradley while he has any real value (rather then let him walk for nothing next year).

I was being lazy. What I mean is with AB, IT, and Smart coming up we can figure out what moves to make. I actually don't see us giving IT a max. I think he's gone unless he's interested in taking less.

[crimson_stallion]

I think we're going to regress next year without any PFs but in all years beyond next we will improve as we are able to navigate the cap a bit better.

I tend to agree on the first point. 

I don't agree on the next point though.  How do you feel that we will be able to navicage the cap better beyond next year, when we are going almost certainly going to have Thomas, Horford and Hayward all on max contracts AND will also have to make the challenging decision on whether or not to retain Bradley?

I don't believe this team will have any cap flexibility at all until after Horford's contract expires - and even then we're still going to be pretty limited with Thomas and Hayward taking up about 60% of the cap on their own. 

With the acquisition of Hayward, I think it now becomes especially desperate for us to try to pursue a trade to bring a starting caliber big in to Boston - probably by trading out either one of Bradley or Crowder.  My money is on Bradley since Crowder's cost controlled contract becomes all the more critical now that our cap is maxed out, and this is probably the last time we can afford to trade Bradley while he has any real value (rather then let him walk for nothing next year).

I was being lazy. What I mean is with AB, IT, and Smart coming up we can figure out what moves to make. I actually don't see us giving IT a max. I think he's gone unless he's interested in taking less.

I think we will give him a Max, because I don't think we will have much of a choice.  We aren't going to have max cap space again for at last 2 years (when Horford expires) so if we let IT walk next year, we won't have the cap space to sign an adequate replacement, and we will suffer a big blow.

Maybe we can be patient, withstand that blow, and suck a bit for one year knowing that we can let Horford walk the following year...hope to god that our core of Brown, Tatum and Hayward is strong enough by that time to attract key free agents to come to Boston. 

But knowing Danny, he was the guy who gave Bradley what most considered an overpay when almost everybody was against it, because he was really the last old Celtic who was still around and was essentially the face of the Celtics. 

I think right now Thomas is clearly the face of the Celtics, and for that reason alone I think Danny will do what he needs to in order to keep him here.  Especially since Thomas is pretty much part of Ainge's personal success story - he plucked an unwanted IT away from Phoenix and turned him into a grand success story.  Thomas' career was basically forged in Boston, and I think he'll try to keep him here for that reason.  Plus he values 4th quarter performers, and there is none bigger then Thomas.

Could be wrong though, guess we'll have to see.

[mutineer33]

Cheers all.

First time logging in to post in over 5 years, although I have been a regular reader.  In fact, living in Southeast Asia, in a country where basketball is nonexistent, Celtics Blog has been invaluable to me in following the team, even if I do find the "In Danny We trust" crap a bit nauseating at times.

I just want to thank all who replied to this thread.  Some well thought out replies even though nobody seemed to like my trade idea. 

Looks like GH is official and that makes my KLove trade idea irrelevant now.  That said I really do not get all the hate for love (pun intended).  I will post their stats for last 4 years and then on move on to thoughts on the GH acquisition in my next post.

2014:
Love Started 77 Games with per 36 Averages of 25.9 PPG and 12.4 RPG, 37.6% 3P Pct, 26.9PER
Hwrd Started 77 Games  with per 36 Averages of 16.0 PPG and 5.0 RPG, 30.4% 3P Pct, 16.2PER

2015:
Love started 75 Games with per 36 averages of 17.5PPG and 10.4 RPG,  36.7% 3P Pct, 18.8 PER
Hwrd Started 76 Games  with per 36 Averages of 20.1 PPG and 5.1 RPG, 36.4% 3P Pct, 20.2PER


2016:
Love started 77 Games  with per 36 averages of 18.3PPG and 11.3 RPG,  36.0% 3P Pct, 19.0 PER
Hwrd Started 80 Games  with per 36 Averages of 19.6PPG and 4.9 RPG, 34.9% 3P Pct, 18.3PER

2017:
Love started 60 Games with per 36 averages of 21.8PPG and 12.3 RPG,  37.3% 3P Pct ,21.1 PER
Hwrd Started 73 Games  with per 36 Averages of 22.9 PPG and 5.6 RPG, 39.8% 3P Pct, 22.2PER

In terms of durability, Love has missed 41 Games over the past 4 years. and Hayward has missed 22; the only real difference being last year when Love missed 6 weeks with a minor knee surgery. 

2014 is probably not a fair comparison but I included it as it demonstrates Love's ceiling as a "Go to Guy" as opposed to the 3rd wheel role he has been forced to play in Cleveland.  I fear Hayward's ceiling is last years numbers (admittedly really good) but not comparable to Love's MVP type season in 2014.

Heyward is a bit younger and peaking now whereas it could be argued Love has already peaked. That said, last year Love's  per 36 PPG, RPG, 3Pt% and PER were all the highest. they have been since his MVP caliber year in Minnesota.  It is hard to argue he is in decline already.

Anyway, my point is not to argue who is better.  I just think Love would have been a much better roster fit -- addressing our rebounding woes while also not blocking the development of our young SFs (Brown/Tatum/Ojeyele).

We "fans" tend to fall in and out of love with players based on subjective things as well as timing.  Everyone is burned out on the Love rumors which have gone on for 3 y+ years now.  Love is also disliked because he plays on our (current) arch rival.

Sometimes numbers help clarify things a bit (and no I am not one of those ultra myopic stats nerds that cannot see the big picture.)

Anyway, interesting discussion and time to move on from Love as that ship has sailed.

Perhaps I was wrong and Dostoveski was right when he said " Love in action is a harsh and dreadful thing compared with love in dreams."  (Fyodor Dostoevski)   

[mutineer33]

Cheers all.

First time logging in to post in over 5 years, although I have been a regular reader.  In fact, living in Southeast Asia, in a country where basketball is nonexistent, Celtics Blog has been invaluable to me in following the team, even if I do find the "In Danny We trust" crap a bit nauseating at times.

Well GH is official and as far as I am concerned he is forgiven for all the drama yesterday (It was 4am where I live --- shaking my head at all this).  GH seemed to genuinely care about how his leaving Utah was handled and I respect that.

I admit about being ambivalent to the signing.

The Good:

1) For the second year in a row, a top 3 Free Agent has decided to Join us
2) Hayward is a very good player, in the prime of his career, and seems like a genuinely good guy.
3) He will bring instant offense to a team far too reliant on IT to get points
4) The CBS reunion is an interesting story line.

The Bad:

1) It seems like AB, JC and Now MS  may all be dealt.  I had resigned myself to losing AB (Pending FA)  and JC (Too many young 3s now), but too lose Smart as well will feel like a kick in the groin.  I have loved the defensive identity of this team.  Losing all three of these guys would be a huge loss in terms defensive identity, intensity, and toughness.  I  know pace and space is the trend now, but defense still matters and I really do not want us to be a soft, jump shooting, "no D"  team.

2) Still no rebounding!!! I know the roster is not finished yet but neither Theiss nor Zicic are likely to put up big minutes in year one of NBA career.  Horford is a mediocre rebounder.  We have nobody else.

3) Player Development will be hindered.  Brown, Tatum, Ojeyele are all SFs,  So is GH.  Brown may or may not be able to transition to the two.  Ojeyele is stout (250lbs plus) and strong enough to play some PF but he is only 6'5".  To find minutes it looks like we will have to force younger players to play out of position - not the greatest way to develop. Tatum is only 215 pounds so cannot really play the 4.  I get "small ball" and "positionless basketball" is the rage these days, but you still need roster balance, size and strength to win.

4) Hayward is a very good player. He is not a franchise changing player.  I don't think he gets us past Cleveland.  On another thread someone posted that our Vegas odds of winning a championship next year went from 15-1 to 12-1.  Not really a huge improvement.

I am excited to have Hayward aboard but also more worried as per the points above.  Some more moves are yet to come, but we cannot take any significant salary back.  It looks like we will improve offensively but be forced to regress defensively.  With key weaknesses not yet addressed, we are NOT a championship caliber team. We are also now much more cash strapped moving forward.

It is all Fireworks and Green Kool Aid today but i kind of feel that a year from now we may be regretting the move.  I remember last year all the excitement when we got Horford (still under appreciated by C's fans IMHO) and how quickly some of the fan base turned on him when the sparkle wore off.  AH and GH are similar in some ways --- really good players who do a lot of the small things well but are not guys who will truly elevate a franchise.

Of course I will support and cheer for GH, but I am really worried about what this team's identity will be moving forward.

If we lose Marcus Smart -- it will be so much worse.

Cheers!,

[SparzWizard]

A good offense wins championship nowadays.

[Quetzalcoatl]

People who are upset with the Horford signing are the most frustrating

[mutineer33]

A good offense wins championship nowadays.

You need Good Defense too. Balance is key.

From NBA.Com Top 5 offensive/Defensive rankings:

Offense:

1) Golden State (#2 Def)
2) Houston (#18 Def)
3) Cleveland (#22 Def)
4) LAC (#13 Def)
5) Denver (#29 Def)

Defense:

1) San Antonio (#7 Offense)
2) Golden State (#1 Offense)
3) Utah (#12 Offense)
4) Atlanta (#27 Offense)
5) Miami (#16 Offense)


FWIW Boston #8 Offense and #12 Defense.

If we lose Crowder, Bradley and Smart we may well end up looking like Houston (in the best case), Clippers, or even Denver (In the worst case).  I think Cleveland is a bit of an anomaly as they rested key players a lot in the 2nd half and gave up a lot of points as a result).

Without IT we would basically have been Miami or Atlanta.

http://stats.nba.com/teams/advanced/#!?sort=NET_RATING&dir=-1

[mutineer33]

People who are upset with the Horford signing are the most frustrating

To be fair -- I think only the most casual of fans got on Horford's case.  You could argue he was not a max player, but these are strange times in basketball economics with too many players getting over paid (The use it or lose it cap space mantra).  His signing was also viewed as a way to entice Kevin (Mr. Soft) Durant.

Cap hit or not, one must have a better understanding beyond box scores to understand what Horford brings to the table.

[mutineer33]

I think we're going to regress next year without any PFs but in all years beyond next we will improve as we are able to navigate the cap a bit better.

I tend to agree on the first point. 

I don't agree on the next point though.  How do you feel that we will be able to navicage the cap better beyond next year, when we are going almost certainly going to have Thomas, Horford and Hayward all on max contracts AND will also have to make the challenging decision on whether or not to retain Bradley?

I don't believe this team will have any cap flexibility at all until after Horford's contract expires - and even then we're still going to be pretty limited with Thomas and Hayward taking up about 60% of the cap on their own. 

With the acquisition of Hayward, I think it now becomes especially desperate for us to try to pursue a trade to bring a starting caliber big in to Boston - probably by trading out either one of Bradley or Crowder.  My money is on Bradley since Crowder's cost controlled contract becomes all the more critical now that our cap is maxed out, and this is probably the last time we can afford to trade Bradley while he has any real value (rather then let him walk for nothing next year).

I was being lazy. What I mean is with AB, IT, and Smart coming up we can figure out what moves to make. I actually don't see us giving IT a max. I think he's gone unless he's interested in taking less.

I think we will give him a Max, because I don't think we will have much of a choice.  We aren't going to have max cap space again for at last 2 years (when Horford expires) so if we let IT walk next year, we won't have the cap space to sign an adequate replacement, and we will suffer a big blow.

Maybe we can be patient, withstand that blow, and suck a bit for one year knowing that we can let Horford walk the following year...hope to god that our core of Brown, Tatum and Hayward is strong enough by that time to attract key free agents to come to Boston. 

But knowing Danny, he was the guy who gave Bradley what most considered an overpay when almost everybody was against it, because he was really the last old Celtic who was still around and was essentially the face of the Celtics. 

I think right now Thomas is clearly the face of the Celtics, and for that reason alone I think Danny will do what he needs to in order to keep him here.  Especially since Thomas is pretty much part of Ainge's personal success story - he plucked an unwanted IT away from Phoenix and turned him into a grand success story.  Thomas' career was basically forged in Boston, and I think he'll try to keep him here for that reason.  Plus he values 4th quarter performers, and there is none bigger then Thomas.

Could be wrong though, guess we'll have to see.

I think a lot will depend on how IT's hip holds up.  I respect what he has done over the past few years, but I am very wary about extending him for anything close to a max deal.  He is not a player likely to thrive if he loses as much as a half step.

It would be hard to trade him though, given his popularity and role as face of the franchise.
Then again, who knows .... PP and KG were traded.