Hayward, Hayward, Hayward!!!!!
I know I am in the minority but I don't think Hayward at $29M (I think that is about the starting money) is a good deal. We are not getting enough talent for the money (especially when you consider the amount of talent we are getting for Horford and his max contract) to be able to have a good enough team.
Think about if Golden State was paying Clay Thompson $29M instead of about $17.8M (yes, I am saying I don't think Hayward is any better than Clay Thompson). They would not have enough money left to pay other players and they would not beat Cleveland. Durant and Curry are already there at a discount.
So maybe, maybe, if we totally gut the team of all depth, we can run a team of Thomas, Hayward, George, Horford for one season. With what the balance of that roster will look like, I don't know, we might get by Cleveland. It will be a good team for sure but unless we go super deep into luxury tax, no way we can sign IT and George is only 50/50 at best so after one year, where are we? We are back in the pack with our max players being Hayward and Horford.
My plan would be sign Griffin (hopefully for less than max), trade for George if we can, make our one year run with our sort of super team but then after we lose IT to FA and probably lose George to Cleveland or LA, trade Horford for younger players and concede to rebuilding around Griffin with our young studs we have and will draft. I don't think we need Hayward. Let someone else overpay him.
I would rather take my chances overpaying Griffin. This is basketball. Size matters. Plus if we have Griffin, it will be easier to trade Horford as we won't be stuck with Horford being our only decent big.