Crowder and Brown have better value than Hayward

[RodyTur10]

Ok, I'm saying it like it is. No reason to be thrilled with the signing of Hayward. He's just barely worth a max contract. And don't tell me that there are inferior players who get paid the same, because I understand that. Those are bad contracts. I would call the upcoming contract of Hayward neutral at best.

To me the build of a championship team consists of collecting good contracts on players who fit together in terms of production (playing level/specialties), position, age/experience and playing style.

We have a lot of good contracts. Crowder and Brown are examples of that (I won't even mention Tatum). Actually if you look at the production they give you in comparison to their salary they are in the top of the league. Only underpaid stars like Butler, George, Leonard (and Wiggins on his rookie contract) or superstars like Durant and James are definitely more valuable.

Although Hayward is clearly a better player (right now) than Crowder or Brown I don't believe he can give you the same value per dollar like them. The difference in salary is just too big. 20+ million is a lot of money to sacrifice for this upgrade. I really fear that it will chain our options to make the necessary improvement in the front court to being a real contender.

Simply stated in a vacuum in which order would you pick these players if you wanted to build a team:

Gordon Hayward 30 million a year
Jae Crowder 7 million a year
Jaylen Brown 5 million a year

[Surferdad]

This is not a 'value proposition'.  Sorry, but you just can't look at it that way:
- Brown won't be at his peak level until at least next year, maybe the following year
- Crowder is not going to give you more than he has now, which is not enough
- There is a salary floor, you gotta pay somebody
- Winning breeds winning, stay competitive even if it costs a little more.  Don't be Philly.

DON'T RAIN ON THIS PARADE

[Roy H.]

To win, we need to upgrade our talent.  I mean, per dollar, Gerald Green was one of our most productive players. Champions aren't won because of vet minimum guys though, and they're not won due to role players, either.

You need the top end guys to win, and they're expensive.

[Sketch5]

Went to bed with good feels. Wake up to this crap

[jambr380]

Even though GSW is raining on everybody's parade, you win with stars in this league.

Everybody wants to have contracts like Crowder on their team. In this new CBA, he is incredibly valuable - that is why I hope he isn't just a salary dump.

Brown and Tatum are on rookie salary contracts and are top 3 picks in the last two drafts - of course they are valuable.

In the end, of course you sign players like Hayward and Horford when you don't have to give up anything (other than $$) to get them. Cap space is great, but if you have a bunch of average players on good contracts, you get our 2015-16 team - fun to watch, but zero chance to compete.

[BitterJim]

30/30 teams in the NBA would take Hayward at the max over Brown+Crowder on their current contracts. Stars win in this league, not role players. No, Hayward's contract isn't as good a value as Lebron, Durant, or Harden on the same contract, but that doesn't make him overpaid. Saying "only superstars deserve max contracts" ignores reality.

[Darío SpanishFan]

This is not a dollar-value league. This is a league where you have to put a ball into an orange, round basket from which a net is hanging.

And Hayward is much better than Crowder, and the current Brown.

[lbgreen33]

Wouldn't it be awesome to have both, Oh ya we do!!   

[Surferdad]

Went to bed with good feels. Wake up to this crap

Don't let this debbie-downer ruin your day.  All is good in Celticland.

[Celtics4ever]

Simply stated in a vacuum in which order would you pick these players if you wanted to build a team:

Gordon Hayward 30 million a year
Jae Crowder 7 million a year
Jaylen Brown 5 million a year

Sure, they have better value contracts but none of these guys are better players than Hayward.   Crowder, I think has peaked.   Brown is a open case.  I would take Hayward because he is a better player.   Did you see the way Utah has been reacting after losing him?   He was their leadership and best player.   He may even be that on the Celtics when he gets here, but I think IT has the edge there.


I think Ainge took stock of Crowder the first game after IT went down in the playoffs and he responded with 6 points.  Where was the great leadership then?

[SHAQATTACK]

get over it already , Hayward is not MJ.  but is a decent  upgrade over Crowder , who plays great defense most times , but is not gifted at offense much as Hayward at getting his shot in traffic.

Brown , is coveted for his star potiental, and is a keeper along with Tatum .

They will be Haywards under studies .....three guys that can score and still put some pressure on the likes of Lebron for 48 minutes .  If Lebron comes out , then Tatum and Brown will run over the 40 year old bench guys for the Cavs .

Cavs are only better when Lebron is on the floor .  Pretty much any game you watch Cavs play a top three conference team, when Lebron sits , the Cavs leads quickly disappear or the the oppoenet goes ahead .  Irving kinda sucks as a defender.  When they take a seat , the Cavs become a near lottery team.

[Vermont Green]

Those who are saying that Hayward is a good player and an upgrade are correct but I share the OP's concern to an extent.  We now have Hayward and Horford on Max contracts.  Neither is really that good.  Those two contracts are going to limit us.  Olynyk has already been renounced and there is talk of trading Crowder and others for nothing to "clear space".  And even if we clear Crowder, Bradley, Olynyk, and a couple of others, we probably still don't have enough to sign Thomas nest season.

Signing Hayward is about more than just the getting a good player.  I think the idea is that we can replace the Crowder or Olynyk type players we will have to lose with Brown, Zizic, and other young low cost players.  That may work for some players but not for Thomas.  I imagine that Danny has a plan so I will have to see what that is.

[Greyman]

This is not a 'value proposition'.  Sorry, but you just can't look at it that way:
- Brown won't be at his peak level until at least next year, maybe the following year
- Crowder is not going to give you more than he has now, which is not enough
- There is a salary floor, you gotta pay somebody
- Winning breeds winning, stay competitive even if it costs a little more.  Don't be Philly.

DON'T RAIN ON THIS PARADE

TP Sums up what I was thinking as I read the OP.

[SHAQATTACK]

Cavs put out a better team , because they are way over the cap ...... IF they had to stay under the cap , their team would drop off .  Their bench would be alot worse and Lebron would be nothing but crying and whining 24/7 .


You pay for what you get .    To beat GS .....I honestly think the owners will have to pony up the money to put 4 stars on the court .   The think we can squeeze by a aging Lebron with three Star players . 

To win the shooting match , its about who carries the biggest guns . 

[Granath]

Ok, I'm saying it like it is. No reason to be thrilled with the signing of Hayward. He's just barely worth a max contract. And don't tell me that there are inferior players who get paid the same, because I understand that. Those are bad contracts. I would call the upcoming contract of Hayward neutral at best.

To me the build of a championship team consists of collecting good contracts on players who fit together in terms of production (playing level/specialties), position, age/experience and playing style.

We have a lot of good contracts. Crowder and Brown are examples of that (I won't even mention Tatum). Actually if you look at the production they give you in comparison to their salary they are in the top of the league. Only underpaid stars like Butler, George, Leonard (and Wiggins on his rookie contract) or superstars like Durant and James are definitely more valuable.

Although Hayward is clearly a better player (right now) than Crowder or Brown I don't believe he can give you the same value per dollar like them. The difference in salary is just too big. 20+ million is a lot of money to sacrifice for this upgrade. I really fear that it will chain our options to make the necessary improvement in the front court to being a real contender.

Simply stated in a vacuum in which order would you pick these players if you wanted to build a team:

Gordon Hayward 30 million a year
Jae Crowder 7 million a year
Jaylen Brown 5 million a year

You're not saying it "like it is". Your entire premise is incorrect because of the economics of the NBA. NBA players don't exist on a straight line supply/demand line. It's a steep supply curve otherwise known as inelastic supply.

A Championship team is not built on "collecting good contracts on players who fit together in terms of production (playing level/specialties), position, age/experience and playing style." You can build a winning team based on that and that's where we are. But you can't build a Championship team. Ask Utah. Ask Atlanta. Ask Boston. Championship teams are built with stars and that's where the price premium comes into play. Inelastic supply - no matter what the price change is, there's no new manufactured top talent. Thus the price goes up incredibly each little bit a player gets better. Getting guys like IT for $7m is almost unheard of. That's why Steph Curry just got $200m. Not because he's worth it but because he commands that kind of price premium.

To answer your last question, it's all situational which order these players get picked. Need a star and have cap space (aka Boston)? Hayward is the easy choice. Capped out and need a tough vet (GSW)? Crowder looks pretty good. Building for the future (Philly)? Brown is your choice.

You can build a decent team with bargain contracts. But you can't build a Championship-contending one.