Carry on my Hayward Son: Gordon to Charlotte for 4 years, $120M

FredCDobbs

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 5, 2004
557
Austin
The first guy that comes to mind to use the TPE to acquire is Aldridge. If Danny could pull that off, it would be a hell of an upgrade.
As a long-time LA watcher (I used to smoke a j and go get $10 upper deck seats at UT), he is a wonderfully skilled player who never seems to come through in the clutch. The ultimate leaves-you-wanting-more guy.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,511
Interesting, maybe only to me, I believe there is only one guy in the league that makes between the 27.9M exception the Celtics would've gotten if Hayward was structured to most common way, and the 28.5M one they got for starting Hayward just a tiny bit higher, and that's Otto Porter in the final year of his deal at 28.489M

Hmmm

Could just be a coincidence, but if Boston were willing to pay the tax this year...

He'd be quite a great fit here. Can really shoot it from 3, doesn't need a ton of shots, defends well enough on the wing, could fit in long-term since he's still 27 and maybe they can extend him at a much lower number than he's on. At a minimum, would have his Bird rights this offseason. If he doesn't work out, or gets injured again, can be flipped at the deadline for someone else since he's expiring.

I'm team Otto if Boston will pay the tax this year. If they won't, he's unrealistic.

Edit: forgot Thompson getting the full MLE caps them at the apron. No realistic way to fit Otto in under the apron. Goddamit that Thompson contract keeps biting me in the ass.

Re-edit: Could maybe still do it as long as Teague is on a one year minimum deal and not a BAE. Would probably require Romeo and a smaller contract like Carsen or RobWill going out. The dream still flickers alive!
 
Last edited:

greek_gawd_of_walks

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 14, 2009
5,837
el guapo's belly
Aldridge, Porter, Gobert and Fournier look like the obvious ones to me. One year deals at or below the TPE. In one way or another, each could help this roster-- on the surface anyway.

What assets we have to make a deal is another story.
 

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
6,638
Any interest in Buddy Hield? Contract goes down after this season and weren’t there reports he wanted out of Sacramento? He’s get some good looks playing with Tatum.
 

Jimbodandy

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
4,437
around the way
Great news. All set for the reset and loads of time to use this when the right guy comes along.

I'm a Turner fan, but apparently the Celtics aren't.

Looking forward to Pritchard's PR department putting out another piece about how unreasonable Danny is.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
9,577
Aldridge, Porter, Gobert and Fournier look like the obvious ones to me. One year deals at or below the TPE. In one way or another, each could help this roster-- on the surface anyway.

What assets we have to make a deal is another story.
Fournier is the only even remotely attractive player on that list. Far more likely that they wait until summer and make a sign & trade transaction for someone.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
9,577
I'm a Turner fan, but apparently the Celtics aren't.
They weren’t alone in that given that when they called around to find out if anyone was interested in MT the answer they got was “Sure, how many first round picks are you giving us to take that turkey deal?”
 

Jimbodandy

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
4,437
around the way
They weren’t alone in that given that when they called around to find out if anyone was interested in MT the answer they got was “Sure, how many first round picks are you giving us to take that turkey deal?”
Yeah, and that's probably true. But I don't take those reports as a given.
 

sezwho

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
537
Brooklyn by way of Orono
It's going to be fun having a year where almost every fake trade works without checking.
So true...the rumor mill will be en fuego!

I think you can’t put another player in a trade with a TPE, so it’s too bad we didn’t have this ammo along with all those draft picks, it will be interesting to see what comes of it
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
9,577
So true...the rumor mill will be en fuego!

I think you can’t put another player in a trade with a TPE, so it’s too bad we didn’t have this ammo along with all those draft picks, it will be interesting to see what comes of it
Yes and no, you can’t bundle Romeo with the TPE and combine the salaries. However, if they trade for a player making $28 million that team gains a TPE that Langford can be traded into.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
24,725
Tax-wise there’s a bunch of benefit to using only half the exception in season isn’t there? That still leaves a move next summer.

I’d guess they will be opportunistic. If there’s a low (asset) cost pickup in season they will use whatever of it they need to, but it is ok if they wait and can unexpectedly play big next offseason. They are now players in the FA class effectively
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
11,429
I don't get why CHA does this. Yes, last year, BOS did something similar in signing and trading Rozier. But creating a huge TPE for a championship contender is far different than giving a smaller one to the lowly Hornets
There's really no reason for Charlotte to not do this. They get a couple of free 2nd round picks out of the deal that could come in handy in the future. And if Kupchak doesn't play ball, it could make it harder for him to get a GM job at a different franchise once MJ decides it's time to move on.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
21,364
There's really no reason for Charlotte to not do this. They get a couple of free 2nd round picks out of the deal that could come in handy in the future. And if Kupchak doesn't play ball, it could make it harder for him to get a GM job at a different franchise once MJ decides it's time to move on.
Also, HOU just bought a 2nd round pick for $4.6M, so second round picks have a monetary value. If used correctly (fat chance of that), CHA should be able to get something out of it. As opposed to nothing if they decline.
 

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,883
Santa Monica
Also, HOU just bought a 2nd round pick for $4.6M, so second round picks have a monetary value. If used correctly (fat chance of that), CHA should be able to get something out of it. As opposed to nothing if they decline.
yea, but that was done with other stuff like the Wood S&T and Kennard deal...so a 2nd, by itself, wouldn't go for $4.6MM
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
21,364
yea, but that was done with other stuff like the Wood S&T and Kennard deal...so a 2nd, by itself, wouldn't go for $4.6MM
yeah not saying that the picks could be sold for $4.6M but just saying that there are teams that buy 2nd round picks so the picks have some value. CHA would be dumb to turn down that value and refuse doing a S&T. Even dumber than Hollinger points out.
 

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,883
Santa Monica
Yes and no, you can’t bundle Romeo with the TPE and combine the salaries. However, if they trade for a player making $28 million that team gains a TPE that Langford can be traded into.
and then that team that traded the $28MM player opens up salary and gains a TPE (-Langford's salary) that re-starts the clock on the Celtic TPE
yeah not saying that the picks could be sold for $4.6M but just saying that there are teams that buy 2nd round picks so the picks have some value. CHA would be dumb to turn down that value and refuse doing a S&T. Even dumber than Hollinger points out.
agreed, the Hornets would be silly not to do this.
 

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
6,638
yea, but that was done with other stuff like the Wood S&T and Kennard deal...so a 2nd, by itself, wouldn't go for $4.6MM
$4.6 million is unlikely, but for example the Warriors paid $3.5 million for a second round pick a few years ago to grab Jordan Bell as another example, those kind of deals happen from time to time.
 

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,883
Santa Monica
$4.6 million is unlikely, but for example the Warriors paid $3.5 million for a second round pick a few years ago to grab Jordan Bell as another example, those kind of deals happen from time to time.
I recall that but didn't realize it was $3.5MM.

So I stand corrected Wade, $4.6MM for a 2nd probably isn't out of the question

 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
67,428
Oregon
Tax-wise there’s a bunch of benefit to using only half the exception in season isn’t there? That still leaves a move next summer.
This stuff is beyond my pay grade. How many pieces can you split the exception into?
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
18,991
This stuff is beyond my pay grade. How many pieces can you split the exception into?
As many as you want.

The TPE is just a cap credit, you can take player into it until you hit the amount of it.

I don't know that there is a massive benefit tax-wise to splitting it. BUT, there is the idea that you probably aren't adding a $28M player long term given the Tatum super-max, Kemba max and Jaylen near max. So there might be an incentive to use part of it this year for an MLE or lower level role player (Bjelica, Rose, etc.) on a 1 year deal, then go into the summer hunting for a $15-20M player you want to add longer-term.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
47,488
deep inside Guido territory
Pacers didn’t want to match the 4-120 from Charlotte, so the deal fell through.

Celtics president of basketball operations Danny Ainge wanted Myles Turner, according to NBA sources, but he also wanted Victor Oladipo or T.J. Warren to complete the deal. Pritchard balked at that demand.

What casual observers have tended to ignore is Hayward needed to agree to such a deal. If he didn’t, there would be no deal because he had opted out of the final year of his contract and was officially a free agent. While Hayward wanted to go home to Indiana, the Pacers would have had to agree to pay Hayward in the neighborhood of what the Hornets offered.

If the Pacers would have packaged Turner ($18 million) and Warren ($12 million), and the Celtics then signed Hayward to a four-year package at $30 million annually, the trade would have fit perfectly. The Pacers did not agree to such a deal.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
21,364
So I stand corrected Wade, $4.6MM for a 2nd probably isn't out of the question
$4.6M is a lot. GSW bought ATL's #41 pick in 2019 for $1.3M and a 2024 2nd round pick. https://www.goldenstateofmind.com/2019/6/20/18692879/2019-nba-draft-warriors-hawks-second-round-pick

Lakers reportedly sent $2.2M and a 2020 2nd rounder for the 2019 #46 pick. https://www.silverscreenandroll.com/2019/6/22/18713555/lakers-rumors-talen-horton-tucker-2020-second-round-pick-2-million-orlando-magic-2019-nba-draft

So 2nd round pick in the 40s is probably worth north of $2M these days. 2nd found pick in the 30s even higher than that.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
21,364
Pacers didn’t want to match the 4-120 from Charlotte, so the deal fell through.


Funniest two quotes from the article. Other than one hand, Pritchard says:

“Yes, we pursued. It didn’t work out. If you can add a player that materially improves you, you have to take a shot. And we’re not afraid to take a shot. It hurt a little bit more this time because the feedback was that he wanted to be here. We were probably overpaying in the trade, but we were willing to try to get a special player.”
But on the other, he says:
“We’re going to try to improve the roster,” Pritchard said. “But it can’t come at a cost that’s so debilitating that it doesn’t make sense. We felt like we’ve got a lot of very good players on the team and plans to stand pat was a very good plan. There will be a time where there’s turnover. But unless it made us materially better, like a no-brainer trade where were going after an A-list star, we were going to do that. Other than that, it had to be a complete no-brainer.”
So he only wanted to do a "no-brainer" trade where he got an "A-list star" but he was willing to "overpay" for GH because he's a "special player"?
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
24,725
As many as you want.

The TPE is just a cap credit, you can take player into it until you hit the amount of it.

I don't know that there is a massive benefit tax-wise to splitting it. BUT, there is the idea that you probably aren't adding a $28M player long term given the Tatum super-max, Kemba max and Jaylen near max. So there might be an incentive to use part of it this year for an MLE or lower level role player (Bjelica, Rose, etc.) on a 1 year deal, then go into the summer hunting for a $15-20M player you want to add longer-term.
That's one of the two benefits. The other potential one, which I think we don't have total clarity on yet, is whether the short-term adjustment to the luxury tax to address reduced BRI will make lux tax this year cheaper than "normal" tax years. That ties into how they are thinking about repeater tax, etc. as well.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
24,725
Funniest two quotes from the article. Other than one hand, Pritchard says:

“Yes, we pursued. It didn’t work out. If you can add a player that materially improves you, you have to take a shot. And we’re not afraid to take a shot. It hurt a little bit more this time because the feedback was that he wanted to be here. We were probably overpaying in the trade, but we were willing to try to get a special player.”
But on the other, he says:
“We’re going to try to improve the roster,” Pritchard said. “But it can’t come at a cost that’s so debilitating that it doesn’t make sense. We felt like we’ve got a lot of very good players on the team and plans to stand pat was a very good plan. There will be a time where there’s turnover. But unless it made us materially better, like a no-brainer trade where were going after an A-list star, we were going to do that. Other than that, it had to be a complete no-brainer.”
So he only wanted to do a "no-brainer" trade where he got an "A-list star" but he was willing to "overpay" for GH because he's a "special player"?
I understand why Pritchard wouldn't do Warren or Oladipo with Turner for Hayward. I do think it'll be interesting to see what happens with those three guys this year, because I also think it's possible he'll end up worse off. Turner's value is more likely to decline than hold steady given Sabonis, and Oladipo is a total wildcard. Warren's value is IMO at an all-time high, but some may be more believers in his step up.

Then again, I wouldn't want the last year or two of GH's deal either, so while I don't like Pritchard he is not being nuts to make the choices he did here. Basically,Charlotte made it tough
 

djbayko

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
14,611
Waltham, MA
I don't get why CHA does this. Yes, last year, BOS did something similar in signing and trading Rozier. But creating a huge TPE for a championship contender is far different than giving a smaller one to the lowly Hornets
Yes, this could be the move which ends up knocking Charlotte out of the ECF!
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
9,577
I understand why Pritchard wouldn't do Warren or Oladipo with Turner for Hayward. I do think it'll be interesting to see what happens with those three guys this year, because I also think it's possible he'll end up worse off. Turner's value is more likely to decline than hold steady given Sabonis, and Oladipo is a total wildcard. Warren's value is IMO at an all-time high, but some may be more believers in his step up.

Then again, I wouldn't want the last year or two of GH's deal either, so while I don't like Pritchard he is not being nuts to make the choices he did here. Basically,Charlotte made it tough
Turner’s value was already negative given his limited game. He’ll probably log a lot of time this year with the compressed schedule, but the Pacers are still going to have to pay the Knicks to take the contract.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
21,364
I understand why Pritchard wouldn't do Warren or Oladipo with Turner for Hayward. I do think it'll be interesting to see what happens with those three guys this year, because I also think it's possible he'll end up worse off. Turner's value is more likely to decline than hold steady given Sabonis, and Oladipo is a total wildcard. Warren's value is IMO at an all-time high, but some may be more believers in his step up.

Then again, I wouldn't want the last year or two of GH's deal either, so while I don't like Pritchard he is not being nuts to make the choices he did here. Basically,Charlotte made it tough
I'm not saying Pritchard's nuts for not trading for GH - unless he had made some kind of promise to GH's agent, abut that we will never know.

But it would take a 1st to get rid of MT's salary so saying that MT, a #1, and McBuckets is an "overpay" . . . . well, it seems to me that probably should have said, "We wish we could have signed GH, but it didn't work out" and left it at that.

IMO, Pritchard's trying to save face but it's not working from my perspective. After all, at the end of the day, he didn't get the wing he needed, the home-town player he could have used, and he still has the MT/DS problem that likely isn't getting better. And he's probably going to be 1-and-dun in the playoffs, so that's not an improvement there either.

Maybe that's enough to keep his job. Let's see ho long it stays this way.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
42,851
Pacers didn’t want to match the 4-120 from Charlotte, so the deal fell through.


So, based on everything else, I read that not as Ainge "wanted" Turner, but that he'd only take him if we got Warren or Oladipo.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
4,587
We still don't know what Teague signed for, right?

What I've seen most commonly is that this season, the Celtics cannot take more than $22 million in additional salary because of the apron limit. So, they'd have to send out some player(s) if they were going to get someone making $28.5 million (which isn't too much of an obstacle as you'd think anyone in that class of player wouldn't ordinarily just be had for draft picks).
 

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,883
Santa Monica
So, based on everything else, I read that not as Ainge "wanted" Turner, but that he'd only take him if we got Warren or Oladipo.
Ainge (& the rest of the NBA) clearly didn't "want" Turner.

For some reason, Pritchard thinks it's Danny's responsibility to take his inefficient 2nd string center at $54MM and replace him with GH...

If KP thought Turner was all that valuable they could have done Sabonis/Lamb for Hoosier -palooza: Hayward/Langford/Edwards + an autographed picture of CBS
 

JCizzle

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 11, 2006
12,500
I’ve done some googling and am intrigued. Can you tell me everything I need to know about Janos? Aside from “is Janos”?
Janos is a legend in "Celtics Twitter". Apparently it's not really Danny because there are message board references going back almost a decade I think, but that's the most popular rumor. Whoever they are, I find them hilarious and they generally tweet during and after big games or events. Their favorite things in the world, other than the Celtics, are whiskey, soup, and Rondo.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
35,074
Aldridge huh? What sort of upgrade does a 35 year old plodding big represent over Theis, Thompson or even Granite. The numbers don't support it. What am I missing?