"Is Gordon Hayward Worth The Cap Space For Boston" Article

[Phantom255x]

https://hardwoodhoudini.com/2017/05/31/is-gordan-hayward-worth-the-cap-space-for-the-boston-celtics/

The Boston Celtics would love to sign Gordon Hayward to a max contract, but that does not come without risks

There is no sense in wasting your time asking whether or not Gordon Hayward would make the Boston Celtics a better team. The answer is yes, always yes and there is no hesitation. Hayward would impact every facet of what this team tires to do, and it is hard to see him having a negative impact in any area, other than some minor positional issues in the starting lineup, the kind of thing Stevens has accommodated every year.

That being said, when not only a max contract is in play, but probably the last max contract fee agent this core will be able to acquire, things can change. If the Celtics go out and fill up the rest of their cap room with Hayward, this current core will be a finished product.

Committing to Hayward means the Celtics have the main players that they believe will win them a championship. That then begs the question, are the Celtics a good enough team if Hayward is added to this roster?

Obviously there are other factors. Markelle Fultz could come in and transforms things as a rookie. Other young players could elevate their game, and make up some of that seemingly massive gap between the Celtics and true championship contention.

Unfortunately, the Celtics cannot bank on that. Championship aspirations cannot be completely changed because of what a 19 year old rookie might be able to, and whether or not the inconsistent role players finally have a better impact.

If the Celtics go out and get Hayward, it is because they believe that with the role players they have, the top end trio of Hayward, Isaiah Thomas and Al Horford is enough to win a championship. Considering how well the Celtics did this year with much less talent, it certainly is a possibility.

There is no doubting that the Celtics have to consider giving Hayward the max, because he has the kind of high end potential that can elevate the team to where they want to be. That being said, how much confidence can we have that Hayward will be that much of a difference maker.

Assuming the Celtics plan on giving Thomas the max, and everything that has come out of the Celtics camp suggests that decision is a no brainier, then they really want that final free agent acquisition to be the kind of player that can dominate on his own, and carry this team that way the top superstars in the league do.

The standard of greatness in the NBA is no longer a collection of stars. Having a set core of star caliber players are the basic start, but from there you need that one guy that can truly take over and be the best player on the court when it is needed most. Thomas has shown flashes of it, and Horford has some of that potential if he keeps up how he played in the playoffs this year. That being said, there is still uncertainty that either one of them can be that next level tier of player that teams need to be a true contender today.

With Hayward, there is that same uncertainty. The fact of the matter is that as good as Hayward is and as much better that he can make this team, they may still need something more to reach the heights of the Cavaliers and the Warriors.

Fans are clamoring for Hayward because he truly is a top tier free agent, and would change the landscape of this franchise. That being said, the Celtics will still need him to be better than any point in his short career.

If the Celtics are committing that final max contract to Hayward, then they are trusting that his prime is about to begin, and the contract he is about to sign is going to define what he is fully capable of as a player.

The good news is that is very much a possibility. Hayward is 26 years old, and has steadily been improving in his career. Hayward has all the signs of turning into an offensive Juggernaut, while not being the kind of ball stopper that could slow down the Celtics.

It would be more than foolish to doubt Stevens’ ability to find Hayward’s offensive potential. The problem, however, lies in the fact that the potential of Hayward is still undetermined. Hayward may be the best bet this offseason, but there could be some regret. If Hayward does not improve the way a lot of people believe he will, the Celtics will never reach that next level with this core.

The bottom line is that the Celtics probably do not have much of a choice. Hayward has been too good and has shown too much promise to not give that max contract. Hayward is a great piece to believe in right now and with Stevens at the helm there is a really great chance that he will become that player that can transforms the trajectory of this team.

If the opportunity is there, the Celtics will sign Hayward to a max contract. It is the kind of deal that could transform this franchise, but do not ignore the potential for this to set the team back, and close the window for this current core as they wait for their young players to develop into players that can lead a championship team.

This article mostly discusses whether adding Hayward would actually make us legit contenders, which I guess is a valid point.

Another factor, which they didn't discuss, is that to sign Hayward, you likely need to lose a lot of guys (KO, Jerebko, Green, Mickey, Amir, Zeller), as well as Rozier and one of Crowder/Bradley/Smart to make it all work just $$-wise. Also means NO MLE so that option is gone too to add front court help (Gibson?)

It does also ask the question of whether Hayward has already peaked, and that it's possible he regresses a bit in the near future, which could be a bad thing for the C's.

Just thought it was an interesting piece to post here.

[mef730]

It is interesting, and I can't make up my mind regarding the answer to the question, "Just how long should we avoid maxing out A- players in the hopes of landing an A or an A+ while waiting for the rookies to make a difference and get us the title?" I'm nervous that we're always going to be chasing next year (while fully acknowledging that this team with Hayward and Fultz still can't beat Cleveland next year).

Mike

[ETNCeltics]

I love Hayward's game. For that matter, I love Jimmy Butler and Paul George's games, too. Hayward is 27 years old. Does his game have another gear once he gets under the tutelage of Brad Stevens? Or is he at his peak?

Personally, I wouldn't do it. I'd focus on building around our young players, because Hayward+IT+Horford as our core simply isn't good enough, at least not until if/when our youngsters mature, and if we make that move, we're hamstrung on doing much of anything else.

IMO, the centerpiece of the franchise from now going forward should be Brown and Fultz, plus hopefully another great prospect from BRK 18.

What if the young players don't turn out like we hope, you might ask? Well, we won't win a championship with them as our core. But then, we aren't winning one with Gordon Hayward either if Jaylen Brown and Fultz bust.  Adding Hayward solidifies our spot as #2 in the East, but IMO, it doesn't move anything enough to get us past CLE or GSW. I think those teams are just too far ahead of us until they get broken up for Lebron gets old.

 

[wdleehi]

So if the Celtics do not take the chance to sign Hayward (or Blake), what exactly changes about building to a contender?   


The Celtic's draft pick is closer to number 20 vs. 30? 


The Celtics keep all the role players while adding other talented pieces that will fight for minutes?



Do they really think there is just one move that makes a team a title contender?

[csfansince60s]

.................................................................
 

............................Another factor, which they didn't discuss, is that to sign Hayward, you likely need to lose a lot of guys (KO, Jerebko, Green, Mickey, Amir, Zeller), as well as Rozier and one of Crowder/Bradley/Smart to make it all work just $$-wise. Also means NO MLE so that option is gone too to add front court help (Gibson?)

Or, another way to look at it is "would

1.you trade KO, Jerebko, Green, Mickey, Amir and Zeller for Hayward, and

2. then trade Rozier and one of the Crowder/Smart/Bradley trio (Bradley is the logical choice both in terms of what he can bring back and contract-wise for us, despite the fact that he is my favorite player) for the at big who's better than Gibson or for Gibson in an S&T. (You could get more than that for that package).

I'll take Hayward for a bunch of reasons. The primary one being that we add him for free while still keeping our primary assets for now and the future.

(As an aside, I'd take Melo or Milsap for the same primary reason, but Hayward is my first choice.)

TP for the article, too, Phantom.
 

[ETNCeltics]

I don't think we can afford the salary hit to max IT, sign Hayward, and then trade for a veteran big man.

Reference the article on the cap from a couple days ago. Hayward+IT+Horford would already put us in a significant salary cap penalty for 2019 even with adding no free agents. If we sign Hayward, I suspect we're looking at a pretty low caliber of bigs to add to the roster, other than our Eurostashes coming on board.

[byennie]

The problem I have with this, is that Hayward is more of a no-brainer than IT or Horford. He's the youngest at the end of any theoretical contract by a couple of years and the best all-around talent of the 3.

Personally, I'm the boat that you can't reserve max deals for "superstars" only. LeBron is really worth 50% of the cap, but that's just not how it works. Other stars are still worth 30%.

We have enough rookie deals and staggering between the max contracts, that I think we're fine. If we're still one piece away with IT/Hayward/Horford we don't need cap room to get it. Trade Fultz, Brown, Crowder, future picks for yet another star. We'll have options even if they aren't 100% clear in advance.

[ETNCeltics]

Rick Pitino isn't making this pick, and the talent pool available is much better than Ron Mercer and Chauncey Billups.

No trade scenario should involve giving up BRK 17 or 18.

And there is absolutely no way that Boston or anyone else is going to pay the luxury tax that would result from 4 max contracts.

[Roy H.]

Another factor, which they didn't discuss, is that to sign Hayward, you likely need to lose a lot of guys (KO, Jerebko, Green, Mickey, Amir, Zeller), as well as Rozier and one of Crowder/Bradley/Smart to make it all work just $$-wise. Also means NO MLE so that option is gone too to add front court help (Gibson?)

That's not all true, though. Bradley on his own makes it work, without adding KO and Rozier, for instance.

Also, Taj Gibson isn't signing for the MLE, and we retain the $4.3 million room exception.

[Celtics4ever]

I think that a player of his caliber would help us immensely.   We have IT who is a star and need another star.   We have the roleplayers folks.

We still have the Net's picks to take to build for the future.   It is clear some of our present assets presently are not stars in the making.  Is he LeBron or Durant?  No.   Is he a big improvement over some of our guys now, I think so. 

Add a Draft pick and Ainge has options to make the team better, which we need to be in all honestly.   How can anyone think we are up there with CLE and GS, after the 4-1 beatdown we got and all losses were double digits and two of the four, were absolute beat downs.   I think this ought to show that some of our CORE pieces need to change or improve.

Even with all the play the young guys modes your going to have to pick what you sign someday.

[JBcat]

I know it's a riskier move for health reasons ect but for roster fit I still prefer letting KO and the other free agents walk, and signing Griffin as he is a natural fit at PF.  When he is on he is maybe a top 10 player.  It also really comes down to either paying Bradley eventually or re-signing KO to a large deal, and I'd rather pay Bradley.  Maybe you can work a S&T deal with KO to gain maybe a pick back, and you can always trade Bradley or one of the other guards later on if you want.

[Phantom255x]

I know it's a riskier move for health reasons ect but for roster fit I still prefer letting KO and the other free agents walk, and signing Griffin as he is a natural fit at PF.  When he is on he is maybe a top 10 player.  It also really comes down to either paying Bradley eventually or re-signing KO to a large deal, and I'd rather pay Bradley.  Maybe you can work a S&T deal with KO to gain maybe a pick back, and you can always trade Bradley or one of the other guards later on if you want.

Unfortunately I think there's a better chance Griffin stays put than Hayward.

He just screams, "LA", and not sure many other teams would be willing to give him a max, they'd hesitate a bit.

[obnoxiousmime]

Yeah this article is stupid. Nobody thinks Hayward is the final piece to a championship puzzle. The question is, is that player actually out there and is he even available to us? If the answer is no, you can blow it up or just be happy with a good team for the time being.

[TheSundanceKid]

Yeah this article is stupid. Nobody thinks Hayward is the final piece to a championship puzzle. The question is, is that player actually out there and is he even available to us? If the answer is no, you can blow it up or just be happy with a good team for the time being.

Exactly. Whether we sign Hayward or not the goal should be to keep building for the end of the GS, CLE reign.

[Surferdad]

Yeah this article is stupid. Nobody thinks Hayward is the final piece to a championship puzzle. The question is, is that player actually out there and is he even available to us? If the answer is no, you can blow it up or just be happy with a good team for the time being.

Exactly. Whether we sign Hayward or not the goal should be to keep building for the end of the GS, CLE reign.

As I said in the "It may be up to the Celtics to stop the Warriors" thread:
It very well could go down this way.  If so, many of us C's fans need to acknowledge that the "Horford/IT era" may just be a bridge to the future championship foundation, not a core that the Celtics will build on for a near-term run.  The turning point to moving to this longer-term strategy was the inability to attract KD last off-season to make a Big-3 of KD/IT/Horford.  Danny got close though (got a meeting).

But I'll add that Durant >> Hayward which supports my point.