Author Topic: Hayward is such a great player.  (Read 15850 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Hayward is such a great player.
« Reply #60 on: September 07, 2017, 01:26:31 AM »

Offline crimson_stallion

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5964
  • Tommy Points: 875
He did go for Butler.  Ainge has said multiple times on video that he offered "a lot" for players like Butler and George.  Other teams don't always agree.  However, Gordon was signed with cap space; George and Butler weren't available in free agency.  Gordon was acquired with money on his choice while Butler and George needed assets to be traded, salaries to be matched and the other team to agree. It's not so easy.

Ainge has also been on record saying he chose Hayward over those guys because (a) he wasn't confident Paul George would re-sign with Boston and (b) he wasn't sure about Butler's fit on the team. 

Danny really cannot use "having to give up assets" as an excuse for not making trades.  He just gave up Boston's best player (Thomas), most valuable asset (Brooklyn 2018 1st) and one of it's most versatile two-way role players (Crowder) for Kyrie Irving. 

I'm not convinced Kyrie is a better player then Jimmy Butler, and I can guarantee you that if Danny's offer for Butler was anywhere near that strong then Butler would be in a Celtics jersey right now. 

The eventual return that Chicago got for Butler (Zach Lavine, Khris Dunn, #7) gives a clear indication of how much Chicago wanted to get for him - and it should not have been hard for Boston to make a stronger offer then that.

Seems clear to me that Ainge's heart was set on Hayward from day one, and any offers he made for George / Butler were half-arsed offers that were made just in case there was a chance to grab a bargain, else they would have hung on for Hayward regardless.  I could be wrong, but that's how it looks for me, and I feel that might be a mistake. 

But its ok - we have Kyrie and Hayward now, and I'm excited about that regardless.
I would take Kyrie over Butler all day. We might have a Butler lite in Jaylen if he takes a leap this year.

Anything is possible, but I highly doubt Jaylen Brown will ever be even close to as good as Jimmy Butler.

If I were to provide my probably estimate of that happening, I'd put it at something like 5%.

Considering Jaylen Brown just had a very statistically comparable first season at age 20 to Jimmy Butler's Second Season at age 23, I'm not sure how you have the foresight or information to make a call like that, let alone put a percentage chance on it.

For a number of reasons.

1.  I don't feel they are similar players/people.  Butler is a special playmaker for a wing, he showed signs of being an elite defensive player from day one, he has a tough, mature, highly focussed attitude that I feel has driven him to become the player he is. 

By comparison Brown struggled defensively last year, his playmaking is questionable, and he has a cocky and slightly egotistical attitude that I am truthfully a little bit concerned about - sometimes I feel he is getting ahead of himself, and sometimes I get the impression he doesn't always take the game as seriously as he possibly could.  That said he's only 19 so there's obviously lots of time for that to change, but RIGHT NOW I don't see a star's attitude in Jaylen Brown yet.  That's my personal opinion, your welcome to take it or leave it.

2. Its very rare for guys to go from having very "under the radar" rookie years, to exploding out to the realm of "two-way superstar" the way Jimmy Butler did.  It happens, but it happens pretty rarely. Guys who end up big stars usually look like stars from day one, and Jaylen doesn't strike me as one...yet.

3. Well I just did.

Re: Hayward is such a great player.
« Reply #61 on: September 07, 2017, 01:47:29 AM »

Offline crimson_stallion

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5964
  • Tommy Points: 875
He didn't bloom any later that George or Butler, and they all scored at the same rate last year.

No, they didn't. 

Butler averaged 23.3 PPG. George averaged 23.7 PPG.  Gordon Hayward averaged 21.9 PPG.

When you are playing at this end of the spectrum, that difference is significant.  Especially when you consider that Hayward is the only one of those three who was in a contract year - hence he had extra incentive to produce, while the others did not. 


Counting 19.7ppg and 19.3ppg on high efficiency as "not averaging 20ppg" is kind silly, no?

I didn't.  You didn't read my post very well, apparently.  I was replying to a quote saying that Hayward averaged "Over 20 PPG".  Over, being the operative word. 

19.7 PPG is not OVER 20 PPG.
19.3 PPG is not OVER 20 PPG.

That's pretty simple to grasp, I think.


And then comparing unfavorably to a guy who put up 20 and 20.9 in the same seasons, with more minutes?

Jimmy Butler has put up two straight seasons in which he averaged at least 20 points, 5 rebounds and 4.5 assists.  He has made the All-Defensive 2nd team three times in the past four seasons (15/16, 14/15, 13/14).

Paul George (if you ignore 14/15, where he played 6 games due to injury) has averaged at least 21.7 points, 6.6 rebounds and 3.3 assists in his last three seasons.   He has made the All-Defensive 2nd team twice (12/13, 15/16) and the All Defensive 1st team once (2013/14).

Gordon Hayward over his past three years have averaged lows of 19.3 points, 4.9 rebounds and 3.5 assists, and he has never made an All-Defensive team, nor do I recall him ever even receiving any votes for one. 

Hayward put up betting scoring numbers then Butler in one of the last three seasons (14/15).  Aside from that Butler and George have been better two-way players then Hayward for at least their past two years running.

Hayward is very good, and he isn't by any means FAR behind George and Butler. But when you have two guys who have put up better overall numbers AND made multiple all defensive teams - there is no question who is the better player.


It's fine to prefer Butler, but you can't just assume one guy regresses and the other marches on towards superstardom, despite similar ages, career arcs, and opportunities.

When did I say anybody would regress, or anybody else would improve?

I projected Haywards numbers to drop because:
1) Last season was a contract year, this season will not be
2) Last season he as by far the #1 option on his team, this year he shares the ball with Irving and Horford

 

Cool, we didn't. Every team in the league would have given Hayward the max. Detroit outbid themselves. Not remotely similar.

Not every team in the league would have signed Hayward over trading for Butler. 

Doing so because Hayward is a free agent is the wrong reason.  Doing so because you think he's the better player or has more positive impact on the team would be the RIGHT reason. 

I don't believe either of the latter two points, and I doubt many GM's would either.


See above. Lots of teams lining up to pay him the max with or without Brad Stevens.

See above.  If you sign a guy, you do it for the right reason - that isn't it.

Re: Hayward is such a great player.
« Reply #62 on: September 07, 2017, 03:23:31 AM »

Offline crimson_stallion

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5964
  • Tommy Points: 875
When you have cap space to sign a max free agent, you use it for that.  Especially on a guy that has a decade old relationship with your superstar coach. You don't trade and end up with extra salary and stifle the cap space you've been building for years on a guy that you have no idea if he'll resign. 

Doing it in the order we did allowed us to sign a max free agent and then trade for another star while still hanging onto a lot of assets.  You can say we lost a star in Thomas but I really don't think we planned on resigning him anyway.  The order we operated in netted us great returns and set us up for the future much better.

I strongly disagree with the bolded text here.

When you have max cap space, you make the move that is the best for your team, and the move that is going to make your team better now and in the future.

Maybe that means using that cap space to sign a max free agent. If that free agent is the best player available, and acquiring him is the best move for your team, then that's what you do.

Maybe that means using that cap space to trade for a star player and absorb his contract. If that star player is the best player available, and acquiring him is the best move for your team, then that's what you do.

You absolutely DO NOT use your cap space to sign a max free agent just because the cap space is there and you can.  That's the worst thing you can do, and is an idiotic move for a GM.  If you aren't convinced, then just ask Detroit fans how they feel about Ben Gordon, Charlie Villenueva and Josh Smith.

You absolutely DO NOT sign a free agent just because he has a prior personal relationship with your coach. That's letting emotional attachments / relationships influence business decisions.  Danny specifically made it a point NOT to do this when he traded KG/PP to Brooklyn, and we are where we are today because of it.  He also made it a point NOT to do it a month ago when he traded Avery Bradley for Morris/Baynes, and again a week ago when he traded IT and pieces for Kyrie Irving.  If you want to be the best possible GM, then you don't ever allow emotional bias to influence business decisions - and signing Gordon because he "has a decade old relationship with your superstar coach" would be doing exactly that.
 
In the case of Paul George, I understand. The risk of losing him was high, not worth it.

Jimmy Butler however has been nothing but 100% loyal to Chicago thus far.  He could have demanded trades, could have happily welcomed them - but through every step of the way, he has done nothing by preach his loyalty and his desire to stay in Chicago.  They forced him out because they wanted to take a new direction, but there's nothing in Butler's history that indicates he would be anything but loyal to any team that gives him fair reason to want to return.  He's got a personality that screams Celtic through and through (tough, physical, loyal, hard working, wants to win) and if he spent two seasons on a winning Celtics team, surrounded by all the Celtics pride/history, I find it very hard to image he's the type of player who would walk away from that. 

Especially when considering the fact that he's been the best player on a team that seems to be the Cavs' kryptonite thus far - and the Cavs are the team we need to go through if we want to take the next step.

Come on man, obviously you don't go out and blow 30 mil just because you can, that is not what I was saying at all.  When the team's in a position where they've finally built up the ability to sign a $30 mil guy through smart decisions and salary clearing over the course of years and it makes sense for them at the time, (which is does for us) you do it.  When you can sign a guy that you want that fits, instead of spending assets you do it.  It's more efficient and that is the right you've earned with good planning.  The fact that the personal relationship exists with Hayward is just gravy.  It makes it that much sweeter.  Obviously you don't go out and make a bad decision based solely on emotion.  Signing Gordon Hayward is a little different than signing Charlie Villenueva and Ben Gordon, let's use my points in context.

Jimmy Butler has a tough personality to deal with.  He's a really hard worker and has come a long way but it's no secret that he's doesn't get along with everyone and doesn't shy away from conflict; kind of like Rondo.  (We've clearly been avoiding these personalities and this is another point in favor of Hayward) Brad and Danny are developing a culture and clearly avoiding potentially poor character guys and potential locker room toxicity. (No Cousins)  Again, you have Butler for 2 years and then who knows with Thibs recruiting him, and with Hayward 4 years, maybe more.

It is what it is, this is the direction the team is going and it makes perfect sense if you see it with the right perspective.

The part I have highlighted in bold is one of my key points here. 

We DID have to give up assets in order to get Hayward.  We had to renounce Gerald Green and Kelly Olynyk.  We also had to trade away Avery Bradley. 

We wouldn't have made it past the first round without the amazing job Avery did on Jimmy Butler on both ends of the court.  We wouldn't have made it past Washington without Kelly's huge game 7.  Danny Green came up huge on multiple nights when everybody else was struggling - good chance we wouldn't have made it past Chicago without him either.  Take away any of those three guys, and we most likely would not have made the ECF. 

Yet we had to sacrifice all three, plus more (Amir, Zeller, Jonas Jerebko) in order to generate enough cap space to sign Gordon Hayward.

Basically, we turned:
-Avery Bradley
-Kelly Olynyk
-Gerald Green
- Amir Johnson
-Jonas Jerebko
-Tyler Zeller
-Lots of cap flexibility

Into:
- Gordon Hayward
- Marcus Morrus
- Aaron Baynes
- Zero cap flexibility

So this whole concept of wanting to sign a FA rather then give up assets in a trade makes no sense.  Because we effectively gave up two starters, 4 role players and every ounce of our cap flexibility in return for 3 guys.

If we were going to give up Bradley anyway, then we may as well have included him in a package for Butler and at least retained some cap flexibility. 

I'm actually pretty concerned without top-heavy out team is right now.  We have Kyrie, Gordon Hayward and Al Horford as our only clear starting calibre players.  Then we have Smart and Morris as fringe starters, and a bunch of prospects to fill out the bench.  To paraphrase Lebron James, "we are top heavy as ****".

Which wouldn't be so bad if we had any cap space, any remaining role players with trade value, or any really valuable draft picks - but we don't, because:

* We gave up all of our cap space to sign Hayward
* We gave up our best support players (Bradley and Crowder) for Hayward and Kyrie
* We gave up our two most intriguing young bigs (Olynyk and Zizic) for Hayward and Kyrie
* We gave up our last uber-valuable draft pick (Brk 2018 1st) for Kyrie

Now we are left to pinning the next 3-5 years of this franchise's success on the hope that guys like Jaylen Brown, Terry Rozier and Jason Tatum will break out and blossom into stars - because our 'biggish three' of Kyrie, Hayward and Horford just isn't big enough to cut it on their own. 

And maybe that happens, and one or two of those guys does explode and become that extra piece we needed to take us all the way - but that's a very big gamble. 

And unless we do something really huge (like trade Horford or one of Brown/Tatum) we have little of value left to offer if another big star, like AD/DMC, gets auctioned off at the trade deadline.  We likely have no hope bargaining against Cleveland, for example, who now have the ability to produce a package around any collection assets including Crowder, Kevin Love, Derrick Rose, Isaiah Thomas and the Brooklyn 2018 1st.  We can't compete with that. 

So my question feeling at the end of all this is yes, we got Brad Steven's favourite kid from Butler, and we got Danny Ainge's love affair from Cleveland...but at what cost?  What do we have left?!?

But anyway, enough beating on this dead horse.  What's done is done, we have what we have, and we have to have faith that Danny knows what he's doing and that things are going to work out.  I'm excited to watch this team either way, because I think it will be incredibly fun to watch, but I'm not sure how strong we will be in the win column.  Time will tell.
« Last Edit: September 07, 2017, 03:50:31 AM by crimson_stallion »

Re: Hayward is such a great player.
« Reply #63 on: September 07, 2017, 02:33:38 PM »

Offline liam

  • NCE
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 45920
  • Tommy Points: 3340
When you have cap space to sign a max free agent, you use it for that.  Especially on a guy that has a decade old relationship with your superstar coach. You don't trade and end up with extra salary and stifle the cap space you've been building for years on a guy that you have no idea if he'll resign. 

Doing it in the order we did allowed us to sign a max free agent and then trade for another star while still hanging onto a lot of assets.  You can say we lost a star in Thomas but I really don't think we planned on resigning him anyway.  The order we operated in netted us great returns and set us up for the future much better.

I strongly disagree with the bolded text here.

When you have max cap space, you make the move that is the best for your team, and the move that is going to make your team better now and in the future.

Maybe that means using that cap space to sign a max free agent. If that free agent is the best player available, and acquiring him is the best move for your team, then that's what you do.

Maybe that means using that cap space to trade for a star player and absorb his contract. If that star player is the best player available, and acquiring him is the best move for your team, then that's what you do.

You absolutely DO NOT use your cap space to sign a max free agent just because the cap space is there and you can.  That's the worst thing you can do, and is an idiotic move for a GM.  If you aren't convinced, then just ask Detroit fans how they feel about Ben Gordon, Charlie Villenueva and Josh Smith.

You absolutely DO NOT sign a free agent just because he has a prior personal relationship with your coach. That's letting emotional attachments / relationships influence business decisions.  Danny specifically made it a point NOT to do this when he traded KG/PP to Brooklyn, and we are where we are today because of it.  He also made it a point NOT to do it a month ago when he traded Avery Bradley for Morris/Baynes, and again a week ago when he traded IT and pieces for Kyrie Irving.  If you want to be the best possible GM, then you don't ever allow emotional bias to influence business decisions - and signing Gordon because he "has a decade old relationship with your superstar coach" would be doing exactly that.
 
In the case of Paul George, I understand. The risk of losing him was high, not worth it.

Jimmy Butler however has been nothing but 100% loyal to Chicago thus far.  He could have demanded trades, could have happily welcomed them - but through every step of the way, he has done nothing by preach his loyalty and his desire to stay in Chicago.  They forced him out because they wanted to take a new direction, but there's nothing in Butler's history that indicates he would be anything but loyal to any team that gives him fair reason to want to return.  He's got a personality that screams Celtic through and through (tough, physical, loyal, hard working, wants to win) and if he spent two seasons on a winning Celtics team, surrounded by all the Celtics pride/history, I find it very hard to image he's the type of player who would walk away from that. 

Especially when considering the fact that he's been the best player on a team that seems to be the Cavs' kryptonite thus far - and the Cavs are the team we need to go through if we want to take the next step.

Come on man, obviously you don't go out and blow 30 mil just because you can, that is not what I was saying at all.  When the team's in a position where they've finally built up the ability to sign a $30 mil guy through smart decisions and salary clearing over the course of years and it makes sense for them at the time, (which is does for us) you do it.  When you can sign a guy that you want that fits, instead of spending assets you do it.  It's more efficient and that is the right you've earned with good planning.  The fact that the personal relationship exists with Hayward is just gravy.  It makes it that much sweeter.  Obviously you don't go out and make a bad decision based solely on emotion.  Signing Gordon Hayward is a little different than signing Charlie Villenueva and Ben Gordon, let's use my points in context.

Jimmy Butler has a tough personality to deal with.  He's a really hard worker and has come a long way but it's no secret that he's doesn't get along with everyone and doesn't shy away from conflict; kind of like Rondo.  (We've clearly been avoiding these personalities and this is another point in favor of Hayward) Brad and Danny are developing a culture and clearly avoiding potentially poor character guys and potential locker room toxicity. (No Cousins)  Again, you have Butler for 2 years and then who knows with Thibs recruiting him, and with Hayward 4 years, maybe more.

It is what it is, this is the direction the team is going and it makes perfect sense if you see it with the right perspective.

The part I have highlighted in bold is one of my key points here. 

We DID have to give up assets in order to get Hayward.  We had to renounce Gerald Green and Kelly Olynyk.  We also had to trade away Avery Bradley. 

We wouldn't have made it past the first round without the amazing job Avery did on Jimmy Butler on both ends of the court.  We wouldn't have made it past Washington without Kelly's huge game 7.  Danny Green came up huge on multiple nights when everybody else was struggling - good chance we wouldn't have made it past Chicago without him either.  Take away any of those three guys, and we most likely would not have made the ECF. 

Yet we had to sacrifice all three, plus more (Amir, Zeller, Jonas Jerebko) in order to generate enough cap space to sign Gordon Hayward.

Basically, we turned:
-Avery Bradley
-Kelly Olynyk
-Gerald Green
- Amir Johnson
-Jonas Jerebko
-Tyler Zeller
-Lots of cap flexibility

Into:
- Gordon Hayward
- Marcus Morrus
- Aaron Baynes
- Zero cap flexibility

So this whole concept of wanting to sign a FA rather then give up assets in a trade makes no sense.  Because we effectively gave up two starters, 4 role players and every ounce of our cap flexibility in return for 3 guys.

If we were going to give up Bradley anyway, then we may as well have included him in a package for Butler and at least retained some cap flexibility. 

I'm actually pretty concerned without top-heavy out team is right now.  We have Kyrie, Gordon Hayward and Al Horford as our only clear starting calibre players.  Then we have Smart and Morris as fringe starters, and a bunch of prospects to fill out the bench.  To paraphrase Lebron James, "we are top heavy as ****".

Which wouldn't be so bad if we had any cap space, any remaining role players with trade value, or any really valuable draft picks - but we don't, because:

* We gave up all of our cap space to sign Hayward
* We gave up our best support players (Bradley and Crowder) for Hayward and Kyrie
* We gave up our two most intriguing young bigs (Olynyk and Zizic) for Hayward and Kyrie
* We gave up our last uber-valuable draft pick (Brk 2018 1st) for Kyrie

Now we are left to pinning the next 3-5 years of this franchise's success on the hope that guys like Jaylen Brown, Terry Rozier and Jason Tatum will break out and blossom into stars - because our 'biggish three' of Kyrie, Hayward and Horford just isn't big enough to cut it on their own. 

And maybe that happens, and one or two of those guys does explode and become that extra piece we needed to take us all the way - but that's a very big gamble. 

And unless we do something really huge (like trade Horford or one of Brown/Tatum) we have little of value left to offer if another big star, like AD/DMC, gets auctioned off at the trade deadline.  We likely have no hope bargaining against Cleveland, for example, who now have the ability to produce a package around any collection assets including Crowder, Kevin Love, Derrick Rose, Isaiah Thomas and the Brooklyn 2018 1st.  We can't compete with that. 

So my question feeling at the end of all this is yes, we got Brad Steven's favourite kid from Butler, and we got Danny Ainge's love affair from Cleveland...but at what cost?  What do we have left?!?

But anyway, enough beating on this dead horse.  What's done is done, we have what we have, and we have to have faith that Danny knows what he's doing and that things are going to work out.  I'm excited to watch this team either way, because I think it will be incredibly fun to watch, but I'm not sure how strong we will be in the win column.  Time will tell.

AB was the only "Starter we gave up"...

Re: Hayward is such a great player.
« Reply #64 on: September 07, 2017, 03:11:42 PM »

Offline C3LTSF4N

  • Jrue Holiday
  • Posts: 384
  • Tommy Points: 41
smh

Re: Hayward is such a great player.
« Reply #65 on: September 07, 2017, 03:23:23 PM »

Online Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34526
  • Tommy Points: 1597
When you have cap space to sign a max free agent, you use it for that.  Especially on a guy that has a decade old relationship with your superstar coach. You don't trade and end up with extra salary and stifle the cap space you've been building for years on a guy that you have no idea if he'll resign. 

Doing it in the order we did allowed us to sign a max free agent and then trade for another star while still hanging onto a lot of assets.  You can say we lost a star in Thomas but I really don't think we planned on resigning him anyway.  The order we operated in netted us great returns and set us up for the future much better.

I strongly disagree with the bolded text here.

When you have max cap space, you make the move that is the best for your team, and the move that is going to make your team better now and in the future.

Maybe that means using that cap space to sign a max free agent. If that free agent is the best player available, and acquiring him is the best move for your team, then that's what you do.

Maybe that means using that cap space to trade for a star player and absorb his contract. If that star player is the best player available, and acquiring him is the best move for your team, then that's what you do.

You absolutely DO NOT use your cap space to sign a max free agent just because the cap space is there and you can.  That's the worst thing you can do, and is an idiotic move for a GM.  If you aren't convinced, then just ask Detroit fans how they feel about Ben Gordon, Charlie Villenueva and Josh Smith.

You absolutely DO NOT sign a free agent just because he has a prior personal relationship with your coach. That's letting emotional attachments / relationships influence business decisions.  Danny specifically made it a point NOT to do this when he traded KG/PP to Brooklyn, and we are where we are today because of it.  He also made it a point NOT to do it a month ago when he traded Avery Bradley for Morris/Baynes, and again a week ago when he traded IT and pieces for Kyrie Irving.  If you want to be the best possible GM, then you don't ever allow emotional bias to influence business decisions - and signing Gordon because he "has a decade old relationship with your superstar coach" would be doing exactly that.
 
In the case of Paul George, I understand. The risk of losing him was high, not worth it.

Jimmy Butler however has been nothing but 100% loyal to Chicago thus far.  He could have demanded trades, could have happily welcomed them - but through every step of the way, he has done nothing by preach his loyalty and his desire to stay in Chicago.  They forced him out because they wanted to take a new direction, but there's nothing in Butler's history that indicates he would be anything but loyal to any team that gives him fair reason to want to return.  He's got a personality that screams Celtic through and through (tough, physical, loyal, hard working, wants to win) and if he spent two seasons on a winning Celtics team, surrounded by all the Celtics pride/history, I find it very hard to image he's the type of player who would walk away from that. 

Especially when considering the fact that he's been the best player on a team that seems to be the Cavs' kryptonite thus far - and the Cavs are the team we need to go through if we want to take the next step.

Come on man, obviously you don't go out and blow 30 mil just because you can, that is not what I was saying at all.  When the team's in a position where they've finally built up the ability to sign a $30 mil guy through smart decisions and salary clearing over the course of years and it makes sense for them at the time, (which is does for us) you do it.  When you can sign a guy that you want that fits, instead of spending assets you do it.  It's more efficient and that is the right you've earned with good planning.  The fact that the personal relationship exists with Hayward is just gravy.  It makes it that much sweeter.  Obviously you don't go out and make a bad decision based solely on emotion.  Signing Gordon Hayward is a little different than signing Charlie Villenueva and Ben Gordon, let's use my points in context.

Jimmy Butler has a tough personality to deal with.  He's a really hard worker and has come a long way but it's no secret that he's doesn't get along with everyone and doesn't shy away from conflict; kind of like Rondo.  (We've clearly been avoiding these personalities and this is another point in favor of Hayward) Brad and Danny are developing a culture and clearly avoiding potentially poor character guys and potential locker room toxicity. (No Cousins)  Again, you have Butler for 2 years and then who knows with Thibs recruiting him, and with Hayward 4 years, maybe more.

It is what it is, this is the direction the team is going and it makes perfect sense if you see it with the right perspective.

The part I have highlighted in bold is one of my key points here. 

We DID have to give up assets in order to get Hayward.  We had to renounce Gerald Green and Kelly Olynyk.  We also had to trade away Avery Bradley. 

We wouldn't have made it past the first round without the amazing job Avery did on Jimmy Butler on both ends of the court.  We wouldn't have made it past Washington without Kelly's huge game 7.  Danny Green came up huge on multiple nights when everybody else was struggling - good chance we wouldn't have made it past Chicago without him either.  Take away any of those three guys, and we most likely would not have made the ECF. 

Yet we had to sacrifice all three, plus more (Amir, Zeller, Jonas Jerebko) in order to generate enough cap space to sign Gordon Hayward.

Basically, we turned:
-Avery Bradley
-Kelly Olynyk
-Gerald Green
- Amir Johnson
-Jonas Jerebko
-Tyler Zeller
-Lots of cap flexibility

Into:
- Gordon Hayward
- Marcus Morrus
- Aaron Baynes
- Zero cap flexibility

So this whole concept of wanting to sign a FA rather then give up assets in a trade makes no sense.  Because we effectively gave up two starters, 4 role players and every ounce of our cap flexibility in return for 3 guys.

If we were going to give up Bradley anyway, then we may as well have included him in a package for Butler and at least retained some cap flexibility. 

I'm actually pretty concerned without top-heavy out team is right now.  We have Kyrie, Gordon Hayward and Al Horford as our only clear starting calibre players.  Then we have Smart and Morris as fringe starters, and a bunch of prospects to fill out the bench.  To paraphrase Lebron James, "we are top heavy as ****".

Which wouldn't be so bad if we had any cap space, any remaining role players with trade value, or any really valuable draft picks - but we don't, because:

* We gave up all of our cap space to sign Hayward
* We gave up our best support players (Bradley and Crowder) for Hayward and Kyrie
* We gave up our two most intriguing young bigs (Olynyk and Zizic) for Hayward and Kyrie
* We gave up our last uber-valuable draft pick (Brk 2018 1st) for Kyrie

Now we are left to pinning the next 3-5 years of this franchise's success on the hope that guys like Jaylen Brown, Terry Rozier and Jason Tatum will break out and blossom into stars - because our 'biggish three' of Kyrie, Hayward and Horford just isn't big enough to cut it on their own. 

And maybe that happens, and one or two of those guys does explode and become that extra piece we needed to take us all the way - but that's a very big gamble. 

And unless we do something really huge (like trade Horford or one of Brown/Tatum) we have little of value left to offer if another big star, like AD/DMC, gets auctioned off at the trade deadline.  We likely have no hope bargaining against Cleveland, for example, who now have the ability to produce a package around any collection assets including Crowder, Kevin Love, Derrick Rose, Isaiah Thomas and the Brooklyn 2018 1st.  We can't compete with that. 

So my question feeling at the end of all this is yes, we got Brad Steven's favourite kid from Butler, and we got Danny Ainge's love affair from Cleveland...but at what cost?  What do we have left?!?

But anyway, enough beating on this dead horse.  What's done is done, we have what we have, and we have to have faith that Danny knows what he's doing and that things are going to work out.  I'm excited to watch this team either way, because I think it will be incredibly fun to watch, but I'm not sure how strong we will be in the win column.  Time will tell.

AB was the only "Starter we gave up"...
Um last year Bradley, Crowder, and Johnson all started basically every game they were healthy (Amir played in 3 games he didn't start).  The only other players to start games last year were obviously Thomas and Horford and then Smart, Brown, Olynyk, Jerebko, Zeller, and Mickey who combined started just 62 games total.  We obviously replaced Thomas and Crowder with upgrades in Irving and Hayward, but Bradley has been replaced by one of his back-ups last year and we downgraded Johnson's position pretty heavily imo. 
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: Hayward is such a great player.
« Reply #66 on: September 07, 2017, 03:52:24 PM »

Offline liam

  • NCE
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 45920
  • Tommy Points: 3340
When you have cap space to sign a max free agent, you use it for that.  Especially on a guy that has a decade old relationship with your superstar coach. You don't trade and end up with extra salary and stifle the cap space you've been building for years on a guy that you have no idea if he'll resign. 

Doing it in the order we did allowed us to sign a max free agent and then trade for another star while still hanging onto a lot of assets.  You can say we lost a star in Thomas but I really don't think we planned on resigning him anyway.  The order we operated in netted us great returns and set us up for the future much better.

I strongly disagree with the bolded text here.

When you have max cap space, you make the move that is the best for your team, and the move that is going to make your team better now and in the future.

Maybe that means using that cap space to sign a max free agent. If that free agent is the best player available, and acquiring him is the best move for your team, then that's what you do.

Maybe that means using that cap space to trade for a star player and absorb his contract. If that star player is the best player available, and acquiring him is the best move for your team, then that's what you do.

You absolutely DO NOT use your cap space to sign a max free agent just because the cap space is there and you can.  That's the worst thing you can do, and is an idiotic move for a GM.  If you aren't convinced, then just ask Detroit fans how they feel about Ben Gordon, Charlie Villenueva and Josh Smith.

You absolutely DO NOT sign a free agent just because he has a prior personal relationship with your coach. That's letting emotional attachments / relationships influence business decisions.  Danny specifically made it a point NOT to do this when he traded KG/PP to Brooklyn, and we are where we are today because of it.  He also made it a point NOT to do it a month ago when he traded Avery Bradley for Morris/Baynes, and again a week ago when he traded IT and pieces for Kyrie Irving.  If you want to be the best possible GM, then you don't ever allow emotional bias to influence business decisions - and signing Gordon because he "has a decade old relationship with your superstar coach" would be doing exactly that.
 
In the case of Paul George, I understand. The risk of losing him was high, not worth it.

Jimmy Butler however has been nothing but 100% loyal to Chicago thus far.  He could have demanded trades, could have happily welcomed them - but through every step of the way, he has done nothing by preach his loyalty and his desire to stay in Chicago.  They forced him out because they wanted to take a new direction, but there's nothing in Butler's history that indicates he would be anything but loyal to any team that gives him fair reason to want to return.  He's got a personality that screams Celtic through and through (tough, physical, loyal, hard working, wants to win) and if he spent two seasons on a winning Celtics team, surrounded by all the Celtics pride/history, I find it very hard to image he's the type of player who would walk away from that. 

Especially when considering the fact that he's been the best player on a team that seems to be the Cavs' kryptonite thus far - and the Cavs are the team we need to go through if we want to take the next step.

Come on man, obviously you don't go out and blow 30 mil just because you can, that is not what I was saying at all.  When the team's in a position where they've finally built up the ability to sign a $30 mil guy through smart decisions and salary clearing over the course of years and it makes sense for them at the time, (which is does for us) you do it.  When you can sign a guy that you want that fits, instead of spending assets you do it.  It's more efficient and that is the right you've earned with good planning.  The fact that the personal relationship exists with Hayward is just gravy.  It makes it that much sweeter.  Obviously you don't go out and make a bad decision based solely on emotion.  Signing Gordon Hayward is a little different than signing Charlie Villenueva and Ben Gordon, let's use my points in context.

Jimmy Butler has a tough personality to deal with.  He's a really hard worker and has come a long way but it's no secret that he's doesn't get along with everyone and doesn't shy away from conflict; kind of like Rondo.  (We've clearly been avoiding these personalities and this is another point in favor of Hayward) Brad and Danny are developing a culture and clearly avoiding potentially poor character guys and potential locker room toxicity. (No Cousins)  Again, you have Butler for 2 years and then who knows with Thibs recruiting him, and with Hayward 4 years, maybe more.

It is what it is, this is the direction the team is going and it makes perfect sense if you see it with the right perspective.

The part I have highlighted in bold is one of my key points here. 

We DID have to give up assets in order to get Hayward.  We had to renounce Gerald Green and Kelly Olynyk.  We also had to trade away Avery Bradley. 

We wouldn't have made it past the first round without the amazing job Avery did on Jimmy Butler on both ends of the court.  We wouldn't have made it past Washington without Kelly's huge game 7.  Danny Green came up huge on multiple nights when everybody else was struggling - good chance we wouldn't have made it past Chicago without him either.  Take away any of those three guys, and we most likely would not have made the ECF. 

Yet we had to sacrifice all three, plus more (Amir, Zeller, Jonas Jerebko) in order to generate enough cap space to sign Gordon Hayward.

Basically, we turned:
-Avery Bradley
-Kelly Olynyk
-Gerald Green
- Amir Johnson
-Jonas Jerebko
-Tyler Zeller
-Lots of cap flexibility

Into:
- Gordon Hayward
- Marcus Morrus
- Aaron Baynes
- Zero cap flexibility

So this whole concept of wanting to sign a FA rather then give up assets in a trade makes no sense.  Because we effectively gave up two starters, 4 role players and every ounce of our cap flexibility in return for 3 guys.

If we were going to give up Bradley anyway, then we may as well have included him in a package for Butler and at least retained some cap flexibility. 

I'm actually pretty concerned without top-heavy out team is right now.  We have Kyrie, Gordon Hayward and Al Horford as our only clear starting calibre players.  Then we have Smart and Morris as fringe starters, and a bunch of prospects to fill out the bench.  To paraphrase Lebron James, "we are top heavy as ****".

Which wouldn't be so bad if we had any cap space, any remaining role players with trade value, or any really valuable draft picks - but we don't, because:

* We gave up all of our cap space to sign Hayward
* We gave up our best support players (Bradley and Crowder) for Hayward and Kyrie
* We gave up our two most intriguing young bigs (Olynyk and Zizic) for Hayward and Kyrie
* We gave up our last uber-valuable draft pick (Brk 2018 1st) for Kyrie

Now we are left to pinning the next 3-5 years of this franchise's success on the hope that guys like Jaylen Brown, Terry Rozier and Jason Tatum will break out and blossom into stars - because our 'biggish three' of Kyrie, Hayward and Horford just isn't big enough to cut it on their own. 

And maybe that happens, and one or two of those guys does explode and become that extra piece we needed to take us all the way - but that's a very big gamble. 

And unless we do something really huge (like trade Horford or one of Brown/Tatum) we have little of value left to offer if another big star, like AD/DMC, gets auctioned off at the trade deadline.  We likely have no hope bargaining against Cleveland, for example, who now have the ability to produce a package around any collection assets including Crowder, Kevin Love, Derrick Rose, Isaiah Thomas and the Brooklyn 2018 1st.  We can't compete with that. 

So my question feeling at the end of all this is yes, we got Brad Steven's favourite kid from Butler, and we got Danny Ainge's love affair from Cleveland...but at what cost?  What do we have left?!?

But anyway, enough beating on this dead horse.  What's done is done, we have what we have, and we have to have faith that Danny knows what he's doing and that things are going to work out.  I'm excited to watch this team either way, because I think it will be incredibly fun to watch, but I'm not sure how strong we will be in the win column.  Time will tell.

AB was the only "Starter we gave up"...
Um last year Bradley, Crowder, and Johnson all started basically every game they were healthy (Amir played in 3 games he didn't start).  The only other players to start games last year were obviously Thomas and Horford and then Smart, Brown, Olynyk, Jerebko, Zeller, and Mickey who combined started just 62 games total.  We obviously replaced Thomas and Crowder with upgrades in Irving and Hayward, but Bradley has been replaced by one of his back-ups last year and we downgraded Johnson's position pretty heavily imo.

I thought this was the list of players. Amir Johnson is not a starting caliber player. The only player on this list that I think is a starting caliber player is AB. I guess that's open to debate...

-Avery Bradley
-Kelly Olynyk
-Gerald Green
- Amir Johnson
-Jonas Jerebko
-Tyler Zeller
« Last Edit: September 07, 2017, 04:06:48 PM by liam »

Re: Hayward is such a great player.
« Reply #67 on: September 07, 2017, 11:25:24 PM »

Offline csfansince60s

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6245
  • Tommy Points: 2239
I'm excited about bringing in Hayward, too, but I also have nightmares about that game last season where Avery Bradley blocked his jump shot at the buzzer. Avery is a monster but even still, who gets their jump shot blocked by someone 6 inches shorter?

With Kyrie coming in, I'm more excited about Hayward, because I think Hayward is one of the best second options in the league, which is what he should be. A great second option.

That blocked shot was more about how good Avery is than anything bad about Hayward. AB timed that perfectly and surprised everyone. I think Hayward can get his shot off constantly against good defenders but AB does some spectacular things on defense sometimes just ask Kyrie...
Avery is amazing. All credit to him on the play.

But it's hard to shake that imagine when I'm trying to imagine Hayward being the best player on a championship team. I'm a lot more comfortable with thinking of him as the #2, where he'll be one of the best second options in the league.

Do you remember AB's epic block on WADE?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuVc7RW-B5Q
Oh, man. Thanks for that. I can watch Avery defensive highlights all day. So great.

But I do remember and I think the two blocks are different. For one, Hayward's was a jump shot 12 feet from the rim not a lay up near the basket which are much easier to block than a jumper. Hayward is also bigger than Wade.

But most importantly, Hayward's was an iso at the end of the game for the win. As I said, Avery gets all the credit for being an absolute monster of a defender but at the same time getting your jumper blocked on a buzzer-beating iso play is... not a good look.

Hard to judge Hayward on that ONE play.

If you did that you'd have to judge Kyrie the same exact way when AB played monster D on him to shut him down at the end of the game and win the 103-99 game.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivMIIbKJez0
Agree with your overall point, but if we are judging them on one play:

Hayward gets absolutely smothered. Kyrie gets off a very makeable 15 foot fallaway jumper.

Ive always felt ABs defense on that play was majorly overblown. Kyrie makes that shot pretty often. Not too different from his xmas game winner.

Kyrie doesn't think that AB's D was over blown. (See 1:50-2:00 minute mark)  " he forced me into taking a real tough shot at the end....AB's D squeezed Kyrie.

https://youtu.be/ivMIIbKJez0

Also later in the vid, I like what he says about Stevens and about the Cs Locker room being special.