CelticsStrong
Around the League => Transaction Ideas and Rumors => Topic started by: Tr1boy on August 20, 2013, 12:13:29 PM
-
Reasons to trade for hayward
1) stevens connection. Was considered one of stevens fav players at butler
2) though more of a sf/sg, not a liability defensively as a sg. The kind of lights out shooter celts been looking for since allen left
3) high iq, motor, team player
I think though it might take extra for jazz to give him up. Something like ab and future 1st could work. He was demoted last year for a little bit and maybe the jazz are losing some confidence in him.
Rondo could really benefit having a guy like gh by his side and it would open up the floor for everyone else in the lineup.
Thoughts
-
Great idea.....they lost Millsap and Jefferson.....how about Bass and a #1
-
I'd love to have him on my team but I don't understand why Utah would want to trade him.
-
I'm a big Hayward fan, but I think we'd have to be willing to give up this year's first to have a shot at him.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't he more or less play power forward at Butler? Now he's a two-guard in the league, and looking like a very good one. That's impressive.
-
Don't see what we have that they'd want to have, unless they're enamored with Bradley or something.
-
I'd love to have him on my team but I don't understand why Utah would want to trade him.
Yeah, I don't see it happening this year, unless they fell in love with Rondo or something, and wanted to turn the franchise around quickly, which is unlikely based on their moves this offseason.
Next offseason it could be a possibility as a sign and trade though. If Utah doesn't see him worth what he is asking for, Boston could try to swoop in with their trade exception, and give him a pretty big contract.
But, would we want to give him say, 4 years/$40 million, or something like that?
-
Don't see what we have that they'd want to have, unless they're enamored with Bradley or something.
Our first round draft pick?
-
I'd love to have him on my team but I don't understand why Utah would want to trade him.
Yeah, I don't see it happening this year, unless they fell in love with Rondo or something, and wanted to turn the franchise around quickly, which is unlikely based on their moves this offseason.
Next offseason it could be a possibility as a sign and trade though. If Utah doesn't see him worth what he is asking for, Boston could try to swoop in with their trade exception, and give him a pretty big contract.
But, would we want to give him say, 4 years/$40 million, or something like that?
interesting thought. I agree they're not trading him this year but if they don't think he's worth what he's asking, that TPE would come in very handy to get him.
I don't think he's worth $10 mill a year though. If he looks good this year, maybe $7 per or $23 for 3 years
-
I'd love to have him on my team but I don't understand why Utah would want to trade him.
Yeah, I don't see it happening this year, unless they fell in love with Rondo or something, and wanted to turn the franchise around quickly, which is unlikely based on their moves this offseason.
Next offseason it could be a possibility as a sign and trade though. If Utah doesn't see him worth what he is asking for, Boston could try to swoop in with their trade exception, and give him a pretty big contract.
But, would we want to give him say, 4 years/$40 million, or something like that?
interesting thought. I agree they're not trading him this year but if they don't think he's worth what he's asking, that TPE would come in very handy to get him.
I don't think he's worth $10 mill a year though. If he looks good this year, maybe $7 per or $23 for 3 years
And here is the problem. What will it take so Utah wouldn't match, and would agree to trade him? Would $7 million per do it? Maybe. Although if it does, it probably means he didn't have a great year.
-
Hayward would probably cost Boston Jeff Green.
-
I like hayward too but seriously how valuable is he.
Every proposal so far is way too much in my opinion.
He's the type of guy you hope to stumble on or get a good deal or short contract on.
He's a pretty good role player but that's about it.
Really don't think he's the type of guy you put that much effort into aqcuiring
-
I like hayward too but seriously how valuable is he.
Every proposal so far is way too much in my opinion.
He's the type of guy you hope to stumble on or get a good deal or short contract on.
He's a pretty good role player but that's about it.
Really don't think he's the type of guy you put that much effort into aqcuiring
TP - seriously, Rondo? AB and a first? Jeff Green? Yuck yuck yuck. He seems like a nice player, but unless he has future semi-superstar potential, you really don't consider any of these trades...and I definitely don't believe he does.
-
I like hayward too but seriously how valuable is he.
Every proposal so far is way too much in my opinion.
He's the type of guy you hope to stumble on or get a good deal or short contract on.
He's a pretty good role player but that's about it.
Really don't think he's the type of guy you put that much effort into aqcuiring
TP - seriously, Rondo? AB and a first? Jeff Green? Yuck yuck yuck. He seems like a nice player, but unless he has future semi-superstar potential, you really don't consider any of these trades...and I definitely don't believe he does.
Just to be clear (because I wasn't before), I was not suggesting we would trade Rondo straight up for him. I just think that Rondo might be the piece they would be interested for him.
Something like Rondo for Burks and Hayward could make sense, depending on what Danny thinks of those two guys.
Edit: sorry, I mean Burke, not Burks. The rookie PG.
-
Hayward would probably cost Boston Jeff Green.
Your right. But jeff green of so far and not the monster version late last year.
I dont know why but one way or another, either we trade for him or he comes here via fa in a few years, as long as stevens is still coach i think he will be a celtic.
This season if by trade deadline we are about 8th, 9th, place should we risk it and send our 1st as the main piece for hayward?
Imagine lineup of
Sullinger, olynyk, green, hayward, rondo. Suddenly there is a little less on defense without bradley but alot more offense with hayward. That ability to shoot the three is key. Isnt hayward and klay thompson comparable players?
-
Hayward would probably cost Boston Jeff Green.
Your right. But jeff green of so far and not the monster version late last year.
I dont know why but one way or another, either we trade for him or he comes here via fa in a few years, as long as stevens is still coach i think he will be a celtic.
This season if by trade deadline we are about 8th, 9th, place should we risk it and send our 1st as the main piece for hayward?
Imagine lineup of
Sullinger, olynyk, green, hayward, rondo. Suddenly there is a little less on defense without bradley but alot more offense with hayward. That ability to shoot the three is key. Isnt hayward and klay thompson comparable players?
I imagine years and years of mediocrity with that lineup.
-
I'd love to have him on my team but I don't understand why Utah would want to trade him.
Yeah, I don't see it happening this year, unless they fell in love with Rondo or something, and wanted to turn the franchise around quickly, which is unlikely based on their moves this offseason.
Next offseason it could be a possibility as a sign and trade though. If Utah doesn't see him worth what he is asking for, Boston could try to swoop in with their trade exception, and give him a pretty big contract.
But, would we want to give him say, 4 years/$40 million, or something like that?
interesting thought. I agree they're not trading him this year but if they don't think he's worth what he's asking, that TPE would come in very handy to get him.
I don't think he's worth $10 mill a year though. If he looks good this year, maybe $7 per or $23 for 3 years
And here is the problem. What will it take so Utah wouldn't match, and would agree to trade him? Would $7 million per do it? Maybe. Although if it does, it probably means he didn't have a great year.
I'm not going to overpay for a good player. Great, maybe. but not just good.
He hasn't put together enough years of really good play to merit $10 mill per year yet. He's not a center so he can't command that kind of money just based on height either so I think $7 mill for a decent starting SG is reasonable.
-
Hayward would probably cost Boston Jeff Green.
Your right. But jeff green of so far and not the monster version late last year.
I dont know why but one way or another, either we trade for him or he comes here via fa in a few years, as long as stevens is still coach i think he will be a celtic.
This season if by trade deadline we are about 8th, 9th, place should we risk it and send our 1st as the main piece for hayward?
Imagine lineup of
Sullinger, olynyk, green, hayward, rondo. Suddenly there is a little less on defense without bradley but alot more offense with hayward. That ability to shoot the three is key. Isnt hayward and klay thompson comparable players?
I imagine years and years of mediocrity with that lineup.
I disagree. Let me ask you, out of sully, oly, green, hayward who do you consider starting material?
-
Hayward would probably cost Boston Jeff Green.
Your right. But jeff green of so far and not the monster version late last year.
I dont know why but one way or another, either we trade for him or he comes here via fa in a few years, as long as stevens is still coach i think he will be a celtic.
This season if by trade deadline we are about 8th, 9th, place should we risk it and send our 1st as the main piece for hayward?
Imagine lineup of
Sullinger, olynyk, green, hayward, rondo. Suddenly there is a little less on defense without bradley but alot more offense with hayward. That ability to shoot the three is key. Isnt hayward and klay thompson comparable players?
I imagine years and years of mediocrity with that lineup.
I disagree. Let me ask you, out of sully, oly, green, hayward who do you consider starting material?
got to go with Moranis on this one. that line-up at its optimistic best is a lower-level playoff seed.
Miami, Nets (for a couple of years), Pacers, Knicks are all better.
Cavs, Detroit and Atlanta and possibly Washington would all be better if they're players played at their optimistic best levels.
Not seeing how this lineup gets higher than a 6 seed even if everything came together perfectly
-
Marvin Williams and Gordon Hayward FOR Bass and Lee and a first from LA or the first Nets pick we have.
http://basketball.realgm.com/tradechecker/check_trade
We get out of Bass and his years and Williams gets a look-see and is an EXPIRING!!
Thoughts??
I think this is fair.
Smitty77
-
Hayward would probably cost Boston Jeff Green.
Your right. But jeff green of so far and not the monster version late last year.
I dont know why but one way or another, either we trade for him or he comes here via fa in a few years, as long as stevens is still coach i think he will be a celtic.
This season if by trade deadline we are about 8th, 9th, place should we risk it and send our 1st as the main piece for hayward?
Imagine lineup of
Sullinger, olynyk, green, hayward, rondo. Suddenly there is a little less on defense without bradley but alot more offense with hayward. That ability to shoot the three is key. Isnt hayward and klay thompson comparable players?
I imagine years and years of mediocrity with that lineup.
I disagree. Let me ask you, out of sully, oly, green, hayward who do you consider starting material?
got to go with Moranis on this one. that line-up at its optimistic best is a lower-level playoff seed.
Miami, Nets (for a couple of years), Pacers, Knicks are all better.
Cavs, Detroit and Atlanta and possibly Washington would all be better if they're players played at their optimistic best levels.
Not seeing how this lineup gets higher than a 6 seed even if everything came together perfectly
The thing i dont like about some ppls thinking is how you have to have a top 3 pick or super athletic players to have a chance to be a good team.
You dont always have to have these things to be a top team in the nba
-
Hayward would probably cost Boston Jeff Green.
Your right. But jeff green of so far and not the monster version late last year.
I dont know why but one way or another, either we trade for him or he comes here via fa in a few years, as long as stevens is still coach i think he will be a celtic.
This season if by trade deadline we are about 8th, 9th, place should we risk it and send our 1st as the main piece for hayward?
Imagine lineup of
Sullinger, olynyk, green, hayward, rondo. Suddenly there is a little less on defense without bradley but alot more offense with hayward. That ability to shoot the three is key. Isnt hayward and klay thompson comparable players?
I imagine years and years of mediocrity with that lineup.
I disagree. Let me ask you, out of sully, oly, green, hayward who do you consider starting material?
got to go with Moranis on this one. that line-up at its optimistic best is a lower-level playoff seed.
Miami, Nets (for a couple of years), Pacers, Knicks are all better.
Cavs, Detroit and Atlanta and possibly Washington would all be better if they're players played at their optimistic best levels.
Not seeing how this lineup gets higher than a 6 seed even if everything came together perfectly
The thing i dont like about some ppls thinking is how you have to have a top 3 pick or super athletic players to have a chance to be a good team.
You dont always have to have these things to be a top team in the nba
You don't, but you have to have all time great players to win and really compete for titles and none of those players are all time great players and never will be. Rondo is a top 5 PG right now, but he isn't an all time great and he isn't a scorer.
Generally in the NBA you need the following 3 things to win a title:
1. Good all around big man
2. Go to scorer/slasher on the wing
3. Excellent shooters
The current Boston lineup (even adding Hayward) has none of those things. Sullinger could possibly someday become the good all around big, but that isn't likely and won't be soon. Green will never be a Pierce level scorer/slasher and certainly won't ever get to the Jordan/Lebron/Kobe level. Hell he will be lucky to ever get to Ginobli's level. Rondo just isn't that type of player. He can really elevate a team that has those components (even if they aren't all timers), but he isn't the type of guy you can build a title team around, because title teams are never built around a player with his skill set. They just don't work.
-
Reasons to trade for hayward
1) stevens connection. Was considered one of stevens fav players at butler
2) though more of a sf/sg, not a liability defensively as a sg. The kind of lights out shooter celts been looking for since allen left
3) high iq, motor, team player
I think though it might take extra for jazz to give him up. Something like ab and future 1st could work. He was demoted last year for a little bit and maybe the jazz are losing some confidence in him.
Rondo could really benefit having a guy like gh by his side and it would open up the floor for everyone else in the lineup.
Thoughts
only way Utah deals him is if they're "tanking" for Wiggins/Parker. If they feel like dealing Hayward gives them a better opportunity to stink this year AND can collect an asset or 2 for the future then they might be open to it. Hayward is a restricted Free Agent at the end of the year and projects to be a 4-40 type of guy. Utah might prefer a better shot at Wiggins/Parker/Randle/Smart, NOT having to pay Hayward PLUS a draft pick or 2 instead.
So if Ainge could do a Bass/Brooks/2015 first for Hayward then that would be great.
Rondo/Hayward/Green/Sully/KO
Bradley/Lee/Wallace/Hump/Faverani
Bogans/Pressey/Greene
that's a team! that's 6th seed with a promising future and cap space to work with.
-
Don't see what we have that they'd want to have, unless they're enamored with Bradley or something.
Our first round draft pick?
There is no way I'd trade our first round pick for Gordon Hayward. Not unless it's around draft time and we have a pick in the 10-15 range. Even then, I'd be reluctant.
He's a nice young player, but he's not that nice.
-
Reasons to trade for hayward
1) stevens connection. Was considered one of stevens fav players at butler
2) though more of a sf/sg, not a liability defensively as a sg. The kind of lights out shooter celts been looking for since allen left
3) high iq, motor, team player
I think though it might take extra for jazz to give him up. Something like ab and future 1st could work. He was demoted last year for a little bit and maybe the jazz are losing some confidence in him.
Rondo could really benefit having a guy like gh by his side and it would open up the floor for everyone else in the lineup.
Thoughts
only way Utah deals him is if they're "tanking" for Wiggins/Parker. If they feel like dealing Hayward gives them a better opportunity to stink this year AND can collect an asset or 2 for the future then they might be open to it. Hayward is a restricted Free Agent at the end of the year and projects to be a 4-40 type of guy. Utah might prefer a better shot at Wiggins/Parker/Randle/Smart, NOT having to pay Hayward PLUS a draft pick or 2 instead.
So if Ainge could do a Bass/Brooks/2015 first for Hayward then that would be great.
Rondo/Hayward/Green/Sully/KO
Bradley/Lee/Wallace/Hump/Faverani
Bogans/Pressey/Greene
that's a team! that's 6th seed with a promising future and cap space to work with.
that team is none of what you say it is.
-
Marvin Williams and Gordon Hayward FOR Bass and Lee and a first from LA or the first Nets pick we have.
http://basketball.realgm.com/tradechecker/check_trade
We get out of Bass and his years and Williams gets a look-see and is an EXPIRING!!
Thoughts??
I think this is fair.
Smitty77
My thoughts are the Jazz would laugh at us.
Jazz are tanking, they have no use for Lee and Bass. And they would be giving up the best player in the deal, and they most valuable contract. And all they get back is a likely late first rounder.
-
I like the idea of including Brooks OR Crawford INSTEAD of a #1 pick.
So, Bass, Lee, and either of the above for an expiring Williams and Hayward!!!!!
Do it Danny.
Smitty77
-
Hayward would probably cost Boston Jeff Green.
Your right. But jeff green of so far and not the monster version late last year.
I dont know why but one way or another, either we trade for him or he comes here via fa in a few years, as long as stevens is still coach i think he will be a celtic.
This season if by trade deadline we are about 8th, 9th, place should we risk it and send our 1st as the main piece for hayward?
Imagine lineup of
Sullinger, olynyk, green, hayward, rondo. Suddenly there is a little less on defense without bradley but alot more offense with hayward. That ability to shoot the three is key. Isnt hayward and klay thompson comparable players?
I imagine years and years of mediocrity with that lineup.
I disagree. Let me ask you, out of sully, oly, green, hayward who do you consider starting material?
got to go with Moranis on this one. that line-up at its optimistic best is a lower-level playoff seed.
Miami, Nets (for a couple of years), Pacers, Knicks are all better.
Cavs, Detroit and Atlanta and possibly Washington would all be better if they're players played at their optimistic best levels.
Not seeing how this lineup gets higher than a 6 seed even if everything came together perfectly
The thing i dont like about some ppls thinking is how you have to have a top 3 pick or super athletic players to have a chance to be a good team.
You dont always have to have these things to be a top team in the nba
You don't, but you have to have all time great players to win and really compete for titles and none of those players are all time great players and never will be. Rondo is a top 5 PG right now, but he isn't an all time great and he isn't a scorer.
Generally in the NBA you need the following 3 things to win a title:
1. Good all around big man
2. Go to scorer/slasher on the wing
3. Excellent shooters
The current Boston lineup (even adding Hayward) has none of those things. Sullinger could possibly someday become the good all around big, but that isn't likely and won't be soon. Green will never be a Pierce level scorer/slasher and certainly won't ever get to the Jordan/Lebron/Kobe level. Hell he will be lucky to ever get to Ginobli's level. Rondo just isn't that type of player. He can really elevate a team that has those components (even if they aren't all timers), but he isn't the type of guy you can build a title team around, because title teams are never built around a player with his skill set. They just don't work.
Whether or not Rondo is an all time great player is highly debatable. I say that he is, as does the article recently posted by Chambers about needing multiple superstars to win a title.
He's not at the very top level of all time greats, but at the (still young) age of 27, he has a very good likelihood of continuing to move up the rankings.
We need to continue to add talent around him to be a legitimate contender within the next couple of years. I think that Gordon Hayward could be a great guy to take a gamble on.
From what I've seen, I think he might have the potential to turn into a star player in the league.
-
Don't see what we have that they'd want to have, unless they're enamored with Bradley or something.
Our first round draft pick?
There is no way I'd trade our first round pick for Gordon Hayward. Not unless it's around draft time and we have a pick in the 10-15 range. Even then, I'd be reluctant.
He's a nice young player, but he's not that nice.
I know it sounds crazy, but It's actually the kind of move I'd love to see Danny make. Let's sell off that Golden Ticket to the highest bidder for a young player with the potential to be a top talent in the league.
People will be falling all over themselves if they know the Celtics lottery pick is up for sale. Who knows what we could get back. Maybe we could even package off Gerald Wallace in the process. We'd clear cap space, add some promising young talent, and (while we wouldn't have the Golden Ticket) we'd still have a number of first round draft picks coming up in the next few years.
Yeah, using that lottery pick in some kind of trade could be a really good way to accelerate the rebuild.
-
I really like addition of Hayward as a 6th man who would a great fit playing SF & SG. He, Bradley & Green would get all the minutes at those 2 spots, and you could go small with Green at PF.
I have fiddled with trade machine looking for a match, but it is not readily apparent. I also think Utah would really like to keep Hayward cause he is white.
I don't think Utah does it without one of our good young players and a pick.
-
What did Gordon Hayward ever really do.....he is very average...no post game.....not a great shooter, and weak defense....
-
Gordon Hayward?? People are talking about trading Jeff Green for Hayward? He shoots 43% and gets basically no assists, blocks, or rebounds. He was fun to watch in college and it'd be cool to reunite him with Stevens, but he really isn't anything special. I see him as a really good role player on a team (a la JJ Redick), but he isn't a superstar
-
I love when people talk about someone's poor defense with NO statistical support whatsoever!!!
http://www.82games.com/1112/ROLRTG3.HTM
http://www.utahjazz360.com/olwildcory723/gordon-hayward-elite-defender/
http://hoops-nation.com/community/topic/67763-where-does-gordon-hayward-rank-among-the-elite-defending-guards-in-the-league/
Hayward MORE concerned about defense!!!
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700073841/Utah-Jazz-Gordon-Hayward-is-more-concerned-about-defense-than-shooting.html?pg=all
Hayward schools Kobe: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eH-amQVfD7Q
I rest my case.
GET HIM DANNY!!!!!!!
Smitty77
-
What did Gordon Hayward ever really do.....he is very average...no post game.....not a great shooter, and weak defense....
He's a good defender but other than that there's absolutely zero chance I give up a top 12 pick for him.
He's a poor man Jeff Green without the speed to play the 2 guard spot. Looks good on a medicore team like the Jazz because they have no perimeter threats.
I'd rather gamble on a 2014 prospect with a higher ceiling.
Only way I'd want Hayward is if he replaced Avery Bradley. He's a good enough defender but his size wnd shooting come playoff time would be nice.
I'd rather use a lottery pick on someone like Aldridge or Greg Monroe-close to a new deal and either unhappy or the odd man out.
Perhaps 2014 pick+ nets pick + Olynyk +Wallace or something.
I think Dannys next move is to trade Bradley for he hits free agency and we get nothing for him so that might be incentive. I can't see the Jazz moving Hayward until they know whete they are picking in 2014.
-
I did NOT say to give up our likely upcoming lottery pick. I suggested giving up Bass, Lee, and EITHER a Nets' or Clips' #1 OR Crawford OR Brooks.
Would you trade Bass, Lee, and Crawford for Marvin Williams (expiring) and Hayward.
Smitty77
-
I did NOT say to give up our likely upcoming lottery pick. I suggested giving up Bass, Lee, and EITHER a Nets' or Clips' #1 OR Crawford OR Brooks.
Would you trade Bass, Lee, and Crawford for Marvin Williams (expiring) and Hayward.
Smitty77
You proposal will never work. Jazz wont give up hayward without another promising young star and or 1st round pick
I would think about giving up 14 and up pick. If we r 8th, 9th place by the trade deadline and need another guy for a push id give up the pick. With a 14 plus pick and if you want a sg/sf you are looking at a gr3 like potential who might just become an avg joe nba player vs hayward who could really excel as a celtic playing under stevens again
-
Brooks has potential. Lee could be good in their system. And Bass could help replace Milsap a little bit. That being said, I would include a lotto protected first to get him.
I had NO idea that he was that good a defender until researching him to be honest.
As you stated, re-uniting him with Stevens could be good for GH and for us!!!!
Smitty77
-
Gordon Haywood is the only scorer on Utah right now and he is probably their most popular player. I really doubt they'd want to get rid of him, even with their blatant tanking. He has an outside shot at 20 ppg this year
-
Brooks has potential. Lee could be good in their system. And Bass could help replace Milsap a little bit. That being said, I would include a lotto protected first to get him.
I had NO idea that he was that good a defender until researching him to be honest.
As you stated, re-uniting him with Stevens could be good for GH and for us!!!!
Smitty77
Are you really trying to argue that the Jazz, who are neck and neck with the 6ers in the blatant tanking race, would be interested in the long contracts of our mediocre veterans, in exchange for their talented young wing?
I really do not think so.
-
How about Bass (two more years), Lee (three more reasonable years IF he steps back up), Crawford (possible expiring and can keep for reasonable amount for 1 more after this year), AND Brooks (three years at a very reasonable amount IF they qualify offer him) for Hayward and an expiring Marvin Williams???????????? Brooks cannot traded in a package until September 12th.
The Jazz have less than $30 million committed for next year. IF they picked up the options on all their players and did this trade and got the #1 pick and payed him around 5-6 million, they would have 14 players signed for about $51 million.
I do think that the Jazz would give this some serious consideration Chris. That is my argument.
Smitty77
-
Gordon Hayward?? People are talking about trading Jeff Green for Hayward? He shoots 43% and gets basically no assists, blocks, or rebounds. He was fun to watch in college and it'd be cool to reunite him with Stevens, but he really isn't anything special. I see him as a really good role player on a team (a la JJ Redick), but he isn't a superstar
Are you describing Gordon Hayward or Jeff Green? I mean seriously. Jeff Green is a worse shooter, a worse passer, and only a slightly better rebounder than Hayward. He is also 4 years older, has a heart condition, and a much worse contract. I would trade Green for Hayward in an instant and wouldn't give it a second thought.
-
All of the proposed trades offered here would violate a Golden Rule of trades if the Jazz agreed: "Never trade a dollar for 4 quarters." They won't give up Hayward without getting one of Green/Oly/Bradley/Sullinger. And Jazz would also might ask for a first rounder. And I say again the price goes up cause Utah doesn't want to lose a talented white player.