Crowder and Brown have better value than Hayward

[obnoxiousmime]

The problem is that you can't make these judgements in a vacuum. The current situation the Celtics are in is they need to compete now while Thomas and Horford are in their peaks. They are trying to do that without just recklessly throwing away their valuable first rounders, unless a star becomes available. Thus, they can compete while also nursing the next generation in role player, not main roles.

I think that they considered George as a good enough player to deal and eventually pay a max for, but Indiana seemed to have their own agenda that wasn't necessarily based on getting the best possible deal. Also, George is most likely still going to run to the Lakers in a year. Was it a risk waiting for Hayward? Yes, but they were ultimately rewarded. Also, I think you're underrating Hayward a little here. He's not LeBron or Durant but then again, who is? Hayward potentially could play himself into the 2nd tier somewhere.

The way I judge a contract is by asking myself if the player needed to be moved tomorrow, could you get rid of the contract easily without giving up any assets? The answer to that is unequivocally YES, as Hayward will be making a lot but he will also be in his prime and he's not injury-prone.

You're right that in terms of production per dollar, Crowder is going to give more than Hayward, and everyone knows players with talent on rookie deals are the best bargains in the league other than super-superstars. The problem is that super-superstar is not available.

Let's say there was a team full of guys like Crowder on super cheap deals. How far would that team get in the playoffs? Not very far, even though you'd be getting amazing production relative to how much you're paying. You'd also have lots of empty cap space with no one "worthy" enough to spend it on according to your strategy of maximizing "value."

[SHAQATTACK]

Looks Danny wants to compete NOW with IT and Horford ...give them their chance for three years .  And stay in a position to let them go and still stay competitive as Lebron finally wears down or leaves for out west.   

He wants to compete now and latter both.  Without a bottom out period or famous tanking series of years in between.

[Roy H.]

We now have Hayward and Horford on Max contracts.  Neither is really that good. 

Regarding Hayward, what does "that good" mean?

He's an all-star who has been the best player on a 50+ win team. He plays good defense, and his offense is at a top-15 level, easily. He could be the headliner for half the team's in the NBA.

[RodyTur10]

We now have Hayward and Horford on Max contracts.  Neither is really that good. 

Regarding Hayward, what does "that good" mean?

He's an all-star who has been the best player on a 50+ win team. He plays good defense, and his offense is at a top-15 level, easily. He could be the headliner for half the team's in the NBA.

I disagree with the notion that Hayward was the best player on the Jazz. Gobert was a lot more important.

And with not ''that good'' we mean that Hayward is not in the elite club. He's obviously less good than superstars like James, Durant or Leonard. But also a lesser player than Antetokounmpo, George or even Butler. He's just an inch below that group, but a little better than Anthony or Porter.

[ssspence]

I expect Crowder's value around the league is low. I think Ainge is likely to get jack **** for him, which is why I've proposed trades like Noah Vonleh and John Henson for him.

NO ONE can back rim a line drive three early in the shot clock resulting in a looooong rebound / fast break bucket for the opposing team quite like Jae Crowder.

[SHAQATTACK]

Value is SECOND to talent in winnng Championships .  Never forget that fact.

[Fan from VT]

Value is SECOND to talent in winnng Championships .  Never forget that fact.

I agree. Pure talent is where you build your core; "value" is where you fill in to compete for a title.

[Neurotic Guy]

No one ever "says it like it is".  Those with conviction "say it as they THINK it is". And sometimes they are wrong.

[dreamgreen]

When I read what some people wrote I don't think they have watched Hayward play much. IMO he's the best player on our team. IT may be a better scorer but that's it. Hayward is a better passer, play maker and makes everyone around him better because of it. He was an all-star in the stacked west! Wait and see you're going to love this kid!

[Vermont Green]

We now have Hayward and Horford on Max contracts.  Neither is really that good. 

Regarding Hayward, what does "that good" mean?

He's an all-star who has been the best player on a 50+ win team. He plays good defense, and his offense is at a top-15 level, easily. He could be the headliner for half the team's in the NBA.

I disagree with the notion that Hayward was the best player on the Jazz. Gobert was a lot more important.

And with not ''that good'' we mean that Hayward is not in the elite club. He's obviously less good than superstars like James, Durant or Leonard. But also a lesser player than Antetokounmpo, George or even Butler. He's just an inch below that group, but a little better than Anthony or Porter.

When I say Hayward (and this applies to Horford too) isn't that good, it is compared to the other top players who are making $30M range money.  We are going to have two players who in my opinion are going to be in the lower end of the talent scale of this high end salary range.  Kind of like Jrue Holiday at $25M.  Yeah, he is a good player but how does he compare to other players at $25M.  It is tough to build the rest of the team around that contract.

With the NBA salary structure, you have to be able to complete with every dollar you commit.  If you overpay even one player, it hurts your ability to construct your roster.  I feel like we have reached some now for two players and that will for example hurt our ability to sign Thomas.  I am actually somewhat OK with one or the other of Hayward and Horford but definitely not both.

Maybe I am under-selling Hayward.  My opinion is that he is not much better than Clay Thompson.  Hopefully Gordon will come to Boston and prove me wrong.

[Diggles]

So Smart, Bradley and possibly IT will be in the same banana boat you are in.   Its just crazy that these players make so much $.  And if you do not through max money at a player like Hayward you will be just another playoff team.   

[Surferdad]

Let's say there was a team full of guys like Crowder on super cheap deals. How far would that team get in the playoffs? Not very far, even though you'd be getting amazing production relative to how much you're paying. You'd also have lots of empty cap space with no one "worthy" enough to spend it on according to your strategy of maximizing "value."

There's that, plus such a team might not even reach the salary floor. You gotta pay somebody.

[BostonClamCrowdah]

I'm soooo tired of hearing about Crowders "value"

Yeah, he's got a good deal, but he's not a very good player

How valuable is that?

Hayward is an all star level player. Crowder will never be that.
Brown probably won't either despite the board thinking he's the next MJ

to win you need superior players, even if you have to "over pay"

[danglertx]

I love the community work Jae does, like the house he built in the post season last year for the poor, brick by brick.  However, his defense wasn't good, his early shot clock pull up threes were morale killers, and he leaves a lot to be desired in fan relations. 

I'd be shocked if Crowder plays another game with the C's.

[mmmmm]

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

In a vacuum?  Hayward, hands-down without hesitation. 

If I am a playoff contender, this is not remotely debatable.  You don't win titles with value players and potential.  You win with stars.   Hayward costs a lot more because the marginal cost for a 'star' versus a 'value/potential' player is huge in this league.

And if I'm a rebuilding team, again, I go again with Hayward.  Because he's not so old he wouldn't fit my rebuilding cycle (he'll still be in his prime for most of the next 5-6 years).  And even if my rebuild cycle is too far out, I'd still take him because I could probably trade him for a lot more than just a value contract and a single potential star.