(11-17-2020, 05:03 PM)cjeter24 Wrote: [ -> ]I'm curious to hear what you would pay him contract wise.
I think the 4 for 80 deal that's been thrown around for several different guys would make sense. Do you extend him and then do a 3 for 60?
I'd do that. to me a good starter at 20 mill is completely fair pricing.
I'm not excited to speculate and have egg on my face later, but I bet he's got a LEGIT offer from Atlanta, NY...some dumpster team with cap room where he doesn't want to play.
I think 4/80 might be towards the BOTTOM of what's possible, not the top. And THAT's why people are going to freak out if this happens. He might end up with 4/100!!
That is the bidding war, and I don't think it has dick to do with Boston. Just my read on things.
(11-17-2020, 05:05 PM)Scott41theMavs Wrote: [ -> ]without an extension only.
Why would you not want to extend a guy who this last year....
1) Played 33.5 mins/gm
2) Had a 18.1 PER
3) Shot 50%/38%/86%
4) Was +4.0 on O and +0.5 on D
5) Is a legit wing
6) Can be a secondary playmaker to help Luka in crunch time.
Yes, he has had some bad luck with injuries but nothing actually points to a chronic issue you need to run from.
(11-17-2020, 05:06 PM)Scott41theMavs Wrote: [ -> ] (11-17-2020, 05:03 PM)cjeter24 Wrote: [ -> ] (11-17-2020, 04:58 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]Here's my prediction:
IF this happens (big IF), there will be people who love it and others who hate it, just like any other move.
But, my feeling is that those who hate it will hate it because of the CONTRACT Hayward gets MORE than they hate what the Mavs send to Boston in the trade.
Could be wrong.
I'm curious to hear what you would pay him contract wise.
I think the 4 for 80 deal that's been thrown around for several different guys would make sense. Do you extend him and then do a 3 for 60?
I'd do that. to me a good starter at 20 mill is completely fair pricing.
If teams are competing for his services based on the best extension, I doubt that's happening.
You may be right... I'd rather have Oubre at that point tho. He's got 6 years of youth on him and he probably comes cheaper.
You pay too much for Hayward and you are stuck with him for a long time. He's on the wrong side of 30 with health concerns.
I know VanVleet is good but I just can never get excited about him.
So seems like we are split on the who... But we all are in agreement that we all want to get a legit wing right? ha.
That seems to be the common theme.
(11-17-2020, 05:13 PM)cjeter24 Wrote: [ -> ]So seems like we are split on the who... But we all are in agreement that we all want to get a legit wing right? ha.
That seems to be the common theme.
Time Machine + Michael Jeffrey Jordan = 100% consesus
(11-17-2020, 05:10 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ] (11-17-2020, 05:03 PM)cjeter24 Wrote: [ -> ]I'm curious to hear what you would pay him contract wise.
I think the 4 for 80 deal that's been thrown around for several different guys would make sense. Do you extend him and then do a 3 for 60?
I'd do that. to me a good starter at 20 mill is completely fair pricing.
I'm not excited to speculate and have egg on my face later, but I bet he's got a LEGIT offer from Atlanta, NY...some dumpster team with cap room where he doesn't want to play.
I think 4/80 might be towards the BOTTOM of what's possible, not the top. And THAT's why people are going to freak out if this happens. He might end up with 4/100!!
That is the bidding war, and I don't think it has dick to do with Boston. Just my read on things.
I think you are right FWIW. I just don't think I want Hayward on that contract value if so. It's more about the age than anything.
Maybe the extension is for 3 years and it's a bidding war on that #. With next year's salary that 4 for 100 would be more like 3 for 65. That's not too terrible.
(11-17-2020, 05:11 PM)cjeter24 Wrote: [ -> ] (11-17-2020, 05:06 PM)Scott41theMavs Wrote: [ -> ] (11-17-2020, 05:03 PM)cjeter24 Wrote: [ -> ] (11-17-2020, 04:58 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]Here's my prediction:
IF this happens (big IF), there will be people who love it and others who hate it, just like any other move.
But, my feeling is that those who hate it will hate it because of the CONTRACT Hayward gets MORE than they hate what the Mavs send to Boston in the trade.
Could be wrong.
I'm curious to hear what you would pay him contract wise.
I think the 4 for 80 deal that's been thrown around for several different guys would make sense. Do you extend him and then do a 3 for 60?
I'd do that. to me a good starter at 20 mill is completely fair pricing.
If teams are competing for his services based on the best extension, I doubt that's happening.
You may be right... I'd rather have Oubre at that point tho. He's got 6 years of youth on him and he probably comes cheaper.
You pay too much for Hayward and you are stuck with him for a long time. He's on the wrong side of 30 with health concerns.
No assets for Oubre... it hurts, please stop.
(11-17-2020, 05:11 PM)cjeter24 Wrote: [ -> ]You may be right... I'd rather have Oubre at that point tho. He's got 6 years of youth on him and he probably comes cheaper.
You pay too much for Hayward and you are stuck with him for a long time. He's on the wrong side of 30 with health concerns.
But that's the thing. Oubre isn't a Free Agent, and has no way to become one until next summer.
So, THAT deal is about OKC's asking price and THEN the cost of an extension. Even if the Mavs want him, and they might, do they have what OKC wants? They don't really have much draft capital to offer, and OKC is much less likely to send an expiring asset out for incoming players than Boston, because Oubre expiring is something they can actually USE, if they don't get an offer for him they like before then.
Hell, OKC might have him in their future plans, for all we know.
(11-17-2020, 05:16 PM)Scott41theMavs Wrote: [ -> ]No assets for Oubre... it hurts, please stop.
On THIS you and I are like....
![[Image: barney-stinson.gif]](https://www.reactiongifs.com/r/2012/12/barney-stinson.gif)
Here is a point nobody has touched yet.
Why doesn´t Ainge simply extend Hayward or why doesn´t Hayward wait to sign an extension next summer?
He´s a starter on a title contender after all.
Why does Danny Ainge, one of the league´s leading GMs, decide that he does not want to hand such an extension to Gordon Hayward.
What are his concerns? Cause they should be ours.
Maybe he does not like the timeline with Tatum/Brown. Why do we with equally young Luka/Porzingis?
Maybe he believes Gordon Hayward on his downward age/health trajectory is an awful long-term investment next to two young studs.
Letting Hayward walk for nothing has no immediate impact on their capspace, to sign a different player. So why would Ainge not extend Hayward (as a trade asset)?
Maybe he thinks the contract Hayward wants will immediately be a liability and not an asset.
Those are all questions Ainge has played out in his head and HE DOES NOT WANT TO PAY Hayward.
This is almost the same scenario as DAJ and Jerry West. Luckily in that case, we only gave DAJ a one year deal. Imagine if we gave him four years like Hayward (likely) wants now.
I don't know that there are big injury concerns with Hayward. He had a freak injury that's now a couple years removed and he's looking more like his old self. He would fit much better in the Mavs' offense.
(11-17-2020, 05:12 PM)cow Wrote: [ -> ]I know VanVleet is good but I just can never get excited about him.
What about VanVleet + another $20M FA next year? I think bringing him is much more enticing if max space in 2021 is no longer a priority.
(11-17-2020, 05:18 PM)Mavs2019 Wrote: [ -> ]Why doesn´t Ainge simply extend Hayward or why doesn´t Hayward wait to sign an extension next summer?
Hayward is unhappy in his role was my understanding......
(11-17-2020, 05:18 PM)Mavs2019 Wrote: [ -> ]Here is a point nobody has touched yet.
Why doesn´t Ainge simply extend Hayward or why doesn´t Hayward wait to sign an extension next summer?
He´s a starter on a title contender after all.
Why does Danny Ainge, one of the league´s leading GMs, decide that he does not want to hand such an extension to Gordon Hayward.
What are his concerns? Cause they should be ours.
Maybe he does not like the timeline with Tatum/Brown. Why do we with equally young Luka/Porzingis?
Maybe he believes Gordon Hayward on his downward age/health trajectory is an awful long-term investment next to two young studs.
Letting Hayward walk for nothing has no immediate impact on their capspace, to sign a different player. So why would Ainge not extend Hayward (as a trade asset)?
Maybe he thinks the contract Hayward wants will immediately be a liability and not an asset.
Those are all questions Ainge has played out in his head and HE DOES NOT WANT TO PAY Hayward.
This is almost the same scenario as DAJ and Jerry West. Luckily in that case, we only gave DAJ a one year deal. Imagine if we gave him four years like Hayward (likely) wants now.
Hard Cap + Tatum extension looming means there is no room to extend Hayward as you've also got Kemba and Brown on the books for big money.
(11-17-2020, 05:18 PM)Mavs2019 Wrote: [ -> ]Here is a point nobody has touched yet.
Why doesn´t Ainge simply extend Hayward or why doesn´t Hayward wait to sign an extension next summer?
He´s a starter on a title contender after all.
Why does Danny Ainge, one of the league´s leading GMs, decide that he does not want to hand such an extension to Gordon Hayward.
What are his concerns? Cause they should be ours.
The noise (and there has been a lot of it) has been that HAYWARD doesn't want to go back, not that the Celtics are itching to get rid of him.
Please don't ask me for links, because I've seen so much crap over the past week I wouldn't even know where to start looking, but I've heard everything from "Hayward feels betrayed by his role" to "Hayward doesn't think much of the young players in Boston" to "there was a locker room theft that seems to have been directed specifically at Gordon Hayward."
He's breaking up with them, not the other way around.
(11-17-2020, 05:16 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ] (11-17-2020, 05:11 PM)cjeter24 Wrote: [ -> ]You may be right... I'd rather have Oubre at that point tho. He's got 6 years of youth on him and he probably comes cheaper.
You pay too much for Hayward and you are stuck with him for a long time. He's on the wrong side of 30 with health concerns.
But that's the thing. Oubre isn't a Free Agent, and has no way to become one until next summer.
So, THAT deal is about OKC's asking price and THEN the cost of an extension. Even if the Mavs want him, and they might, do they have what OKC wants? They don't really have much draft capital to offer, and OKC is much less likely to send an expiring asset out for incoming players than Boston, because Oubre expiring is something they can actually USE, if they don't get an offer for him they like before then.
Hell, OKC might have him in their future plans, for all we know.
Then I wait them out for an offer I want or wait until FA next summer and sign him.
I'm completely fine with drafting 18,31 and signing someone with the MLE. I'm not making deals to just make deals.
(11-17-2020, 05:18 PM)Mavs2019 Wrote: [ -> ]Why does Danny Ainge, one of the league´s leading GMs, decide that he does not want to hand such an extension to Gordon Hayward.
What are his concerns? Cause they should be ours.
It is very simple. It's something like 100 million of tax payments, if they extend him. They will have Kemba max, Tatum max, Brown 24 mil and Smart 14 mil in 2021. That is over 100 million on 4 players. Langfor and Williams brothers add another 10 million. And so on.