Assuming this is valid for the trade checker, there's no way Utah makes this move.
1. They give up the 2 best players in the deal & a first. both players are starting-caliber.
2. AB is a bench guard, he's not starting material.
3. Bass is a bench big, he wouldn't start on a contender. Also Utah is rebuilding, adding Bass does nothing for them to help the rebuild.
4. Favors has more of a positive impact for Utah than Kanter. If either gets traded, it'll be Kanter.
5. Hayward is basically Jeff Green who we already have. why duplicate the player unless you've got a deal lined up to ship out Green. The thing is, your proposal has Hayward with a bigger contract. Rather keep Green that have 2 ok SFs making a combined 20 mill.
6. Favors has shown some promise but he's too inconsistent at this point to bank on him as a cornerstone of the future. He's still just an intriguing prospect.
7. Having a top pick in this draft should get us an established All-Star at a minimum if we trade it. Someone picked between 4-8 in this draft could very well be as good or better than Favors and certainly better than Hayward.
I was just going to say, I think the Celts win this deal by a landslide which is why Utah wouldn't do it.
I certainly like it for the Celts but I've got to think Utah considers Favors and Kanter as part of their future core.
I also think that if Utah did deal Favors to us, that we'd probably have to give up Sullinger. Not that I would necessarily be opposed to that because Favors is one inch taller, can play the center position and is more athletic.
So, if I may fine tune this trade, I think you'd have a better chance of this happening.
Celts offer Bradley, Green, Sullinger (whatever else, if necessary)
for Favors and Hayward.
I think that would be a little more even for more both teams.