Gordon Hayward 2020: I'm standing here in pieces and you're having delusions of grandeur!

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,784
Kiev, Ukraine
Wrong thread perhaps, but is it overly optimistic to wonder if Langford could grow into such a role when Hayward is not on the floor?
I mean, that's obviously the hope for him given his skill set, but expecting any #14 guy to become an All-Star creator is a huge longshot. Offensively though, Hayward is a pretty close comp for what they'd hope Langford becomes.
 
Last edited:

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
20,378
Wrong thread perhaps, but is it overly optimistic to wonder if Langford could grow into such a role when Hayward is not on the floor?
It's optimistic. Romeo's greatest strength in college was as a PnR scorer, not facilitator. I'm looking forward to some games coming up where Brad lets Romeo run the PnR. (He was really good the one game I saw him in the G League.) Some stats:

If the majority of Langford’s season was underwhelming, the overwhelming part was what he showed in the pick and roll. Per Synergy, it was the most common play type of the season for the freshman with 144 possessions, one of only two play types he had over 100 possession in. And he was elite in that category, finishing in the 90th percentile at 0.993 points per possession.
There’s many areas that make Langford so dangerous in the pick and roll. He was an elite finisher at the rim, hitting 63.6 percent of his shots at the rim, putting him in the 87th percentile on the year. As shown above, he has an ability to weave through traffic and finish around and even through contact. In general on pick and rolls, Langford was in the 96th percentile on taking the ball to the basket at an absurd 1.45 PPP.
He was at his most lethal in high pick and rolls, which was his most common pick and roll location. On 53 possessions off the high pick and roll, he finished in the 93rd percentile. He was in the 98th percentile in taking it to the basket off high pick and rolls.
He’s also an efficient mid-range shooter, something he showcased at times off the pick and roll. On medium range shots, considered between 17’ to the three-point line, Langford shot 51.6 percent on 31 attempts, ranking him in the 91st percentile.
Source.

 

pjheff

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2003
546
I mean, that's obviously the hope for him given his skill set, but expecting any #14 guy to become an All-Star creator is a huge longshot. Offensively though, Hayward is a pretty close comp for what they'd hope Langford becomes.
I was referring more to role than outcome. To date, Langford has spent most of his time parked in the left corner like many rookies have been. Yet there were times yesterday — with Brown out and Tatum/Walker on the bench — where I was wondering how they would generate offense with a lineup of Wanamaker/Smart/Hayward?/Williams/Kanter. Is it too much to hope that Langford could take on more responsibility for shot creation on a reserve unit by season’s end?
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
4,231
He didn't play against Charlotte until the end, right? It's a bit curious how much the usage of guys 8-10 change on the roster. It seems like Semi is a part of the regular rotation for awhile, then it's Romeo, then it's Green, etc. For development purposes, it would seem to make sense to give 10 minutes to Romeo almost every night - unless there is some matchup that just doesn't allow it. I'm not sure how Green would be that different in that sense, and Romeo is much more a part of the team's future.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
17,024
Hayward does not look the same after returning from his sore foot. He conceded that it was likely related to the ankle injury. I think he's having a reckoning of sorts. And its showing up in his recent inconsistency.

Even though he's younger, I'm reminded of late-stage Kevin McHale, who had already re-made his game while dealing with a useless ankle. IIRC, in his last year, he had a bit of a dust-up with Chris Ford over his usage toward the end of the regular season. He came back, and in his apology/interviews said that he had to just say "fuck it, its going to hurt," do the things he could do and play the way he had to play to be successful. Again, IIRC, he was pretty good in the last month and playoffs that year.

I think that's where Hayward is. Maybe the offseason, preseason, and first few weeks had him thinking he'd be pre-ankle again. But the rigors of actual full-bore NBA play may be setting him straight. I think that still leaves him as a really good player, who may only be 80% of what he once was. Problem is, the precise nature of the missing 20% may change from game to game. McHale said something like "its just so frustrating when you know exactly what to do, but one small part of your body wont let you." Hayward has never come close to lashing out like McHale did. (McHale was near the end of the line anyway). But it really has to suck.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
34,371
I saw some game-thread comments, which I understand are made in the heat of moment, about the C's trading Hayward. He has been pretty wildly inconsistent in addition to his injuries however a lot of his game averages including FG%, TS%, eFG%, rebounds and assists are either at or above his best season in Utah. And his 3P% isn't too far off his best season either.

That said, Hayward goes from a very good game like last night to a relatively poor showing this evening and other teams can see the up/down nature of his year. Ainge should absolutely listen on him as the C's get to the deadline but he seems like a difficult player to deal.

Getting equal value back for him will be tough for the aforementioned reasons but also because he has the player option. In short, he makes him a liability to opt out if he plays well, which probably dampens those with long term plans for him and he is a liability to opt in if he plays poorly, making him unattractive for teams looking for expiring deals.

Anything can happen but I don't see him being dealt during the year.
 

Montana Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 18, 2000
8,405
Twin Bridges, Mt.
C’mon Dejesus, you mean that 3 months of Gordon Hayward with a $35,000,000 option isn’t enticing to a trade partner?
I don’t see anyway we aren’t going to have GH for the next 2 seasons. Would love to have the healthy, early season player we saw a few months ago. Love the kid and what he can bring to the team, am just afeared that his health is going to continuously bog him down.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,784
Kiev, Ukraine
I saw some game-thread comments, which I understand are made in the heat of moment, about the C's trading Hayward. He has been pretty wildly inconsistent in addition to his injuries however a lot of his game averages including FG%, TS%, eFG%, rebounds and assists are either at or above his best season in Utah. And his 3P% isn't too far off his best season either.

That said, Hayward goes from a very good game like last night to a relatively poor showing this evening and other teams can see the up/down nature of his year. Ainge should absolutely listen on him as the C's get to the deadline but he seems like a difficult player to deal.

Getting equal value back for him will be tough for the aforementioned reasons but also because he has the player option. In short, he makes him a liability to opt out if he plays well, which probably dampens those with long term plans for him and he is a liability to opt in if he plays poorly, making him unattractive for teams looking for expiring deals.

Anything can happen but I don't see him being dealt during the year.
The issue with him at this point is that while he has good games, if he's not at least competent against teams like Milwaukee, the theory of this team simply doesn't work. The Celtics absolutely needed what Hayward in theory provides--another perimeter creator+shooter who is versatile on defense, and he didn't look close to any of those things. It wasn't just missed shots: he did absolutely nothing as a creator/ball-handler.

Agree it's hard to deal him during the year. I think most likely is that he opts in and then is used as expiring salary ballast for a summer or winter 2020 deal.
 

sezwho

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
528
Brooklyn by way of Orono
The issue with him at this point is that while he has good games, if he's not at least competent against teams like Milwaukee, the theory of this team simply doesn't work. The Celtics absolutely needed what Hayward in theory provides--another perimeter creator+shooter who is versatile on defense, and he didn't look close to any of those things. It wasn't just missed shots: he did absolutely nothing as a creator/ball-handler.

Agree it's hard to deal him during the year. I think most likely is that he opts in and then is used as expiring salary ballast for a summer or winter 2020 deal.
The issue with Gordon Haywouldyoubuzzoff isn’t with Gordon. It’s with yet another stupid roster construction asset collection shit show. Sorry, this is a gamethread worthy rant, but seriously when your best players can’t be on the court and your roster is locked and incoherent you have a structural problem. Again. Really glad they hoarder a metric crap ton of picks though, gimme another Yabu. #endofrant
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
4,231
Should probably post this here, rather than the general thread:

It's a long season, so I imagine we'll feel differently about Hayward 6 times between now and the end of the regular season. Unfortunately, after looking like an All-Star at the start of the year, Hayward has pretty much played his way out of having much trade value (aside from salary ballast - which doesn't make any trades attractive). So, while there wasn't much out there as options, I think the top 7 guys for the Celtics this year are definitely now in stone. Maybe they'll get hot in the playoffs and with the additional rest the bench will be less exposed. But, it's starting to look more like a developmental year and less like a year they really had too much of a shot at going to the Finals. We'll see. If I were Ainge, I think I'd stand pat and not spend any assets to upgrade the team (unless there was an interesting buyout for the bench).

The real questionmark is going to be Hayward for next season. If he continues this level of play (again, which could change 6 times between now and the end of the season) he's in kind of an in-between place. If he opts out, he has the opportunity to sign his last, big contract. That's probably a pretty big incentive. I think any team that signs him to a max is at a high risk of making a really big mistake, but he only needs 1 team to make that mistake. From the Celtics point of view, I don't mind if he exercises the player option for 2020-2021, but I don't think the Celtics should re-sign him at what I think will be his market value this summer. Again, if he plays consistently like he did at the start of the season - would love to have him long-term (versatile wings are huge in today's NBA). But, since the hand injury he just doesn't seem to have that much of an impact on the game.
 

128

Member
SoSH Member
May 4, 2019
1,653
Should probably post this here, rather than the general thread:

It's a long season, so I imagine we'll feel differently about Hayward 6 times between now and the end of the regular season. Unfortunately, after looking like an All-Star at the start of the year, Hayward has pretty much played his way out of having much trade value (aside from salary ballast - which doesn't make any trades attractive). So, while there wasn't much out there as options, I think the top 7 guys for the Celtics this year are definitely now in stone. Maybe they'll get hot in the playoffs and with the additional rest the bench will be less exposed. But, it's starting to look more like a developmental year and less like a year they really had too much of a shot at going to the Finals. We'll see. If I were Ainge, I think I'd stand pat and not spend any assets to upgrade the team (unless there was an interesting buyout for the bench).

The real questionmark is going to be Hayward for next season. If he continues this level of play (again, which could change 6 times between now and the end of the season) he's in kind of an in-between place. If he opts out, he has the opportunity to sign his last, big contract. That's probably a pretty big incentive. I think any team that signs him to a max is at a high risk of making a really big mistake, but he only needs 1 team to make that mistake. From the Celtics point of view, I don't mind if he exercises the player option for 2020-2021, but I don't think the Celtics should re-sign him at what I think will be his market value this summer. Again, if he plays consistently like he did at the start of the season - would love to have him long-term (versatile wings are huge in today's NBA). But, since the hand injury he just doesn't seem to have that much of an impact on the game.
Excellent post.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
14,490
Pittsburgh, PA
Our evaluation of his next 2-3 years, after a week of him playing well:

20% will be a bust
40% worth the max or near-max that he'll command
40% his value will exceed his contract

Our evaluation after a few games of him not playing well:

60% will be a bust
30% worth his contract
10% exceeds his contract in value
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,784
Kiev, Ukraine
The issue with Gordon Haywouldyoubuzzoff isn’t with Gordon. It’s with yet another stupid roster construction asset collection shit show. Sorry, this is a gamethread worthy rant, but seriously when your best players can’t be on the court and your roster is locked and incoherent you have a structural problem. Again. Really glad they hoarder a metric crap ton of picks though, gimme another Yabu. #endofrant
...and may God have mercy on your soul. It's hard to pack that many wrong opinions into one post. People have moved the goalposts for this team a ton since the summer.
 

CoffeeNerdness

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 6, 2012
4,749
How about shuffling the units a bit and bringing Gordon off the bench? To my untrained eye he doesn't seem like a guy who meshes too well as the fourth best offensive option on the starting unit. The second unit desperately needs a scorer, so let Gordon be the alpha dog out there with Kanter, Grant, Wanamaker, etc. For all the talk about "how are teams going to defend all our wings" that shit just hasn't come to fruition due to injury, chemistry issues, consistency, or whatever. JT, JB, and Gordon are all super inconsistent players unfortunately and Brad needs to come up with something to help these guys become more consistent. Does the first unit really need more scoring than the J's and Kemba?
 

Big John

lurker
Dec 9, 2016
2,086
I would have no problem bringing Hayward off the bench, or Brown for that matter. But the sad reality is that, except for a small handful of games, Hayward hasn't performed like a $30M player since his injury, and maybe it is time to seriously consider trading him.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
4,231
Coming out flat seems to be a "consistent" problem lately, if anything over several games can be called "consistent". The second days of back to backs have an obvious fatigue excuse, but that has also been the case when they are "fresh". One can certainly see an argument for moving Smart into the starting lineup, and bringing Hayward and Kanter as the first subs off the bench.

The competing problem, however, is that I think Brad is probably in a situation where he should be giving one of the top guys a game off just about every game. I think they may be starting to wear down, and giving them a game off - while simultaneously providing a longer look at folks like Romeo and Grant (man, I wish TL wasn't so injury prone) would be great.

Having Hayward on the bench doesn't necessarily make that more difficult, but it could if we see the team digging themselves into even bigger holes.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,784
Kiev, Ukraine
Coming out flat seems to be a "consistent" problem lately, if anything over several games can be called "consistent". The second days of back to backs have an obvious fatigue excuse, but that has also been the case when they are "fresh". One can certainly see an argument for moving Smart into the starting lineup, and bringing Hayward and Kanter as the first subs off the bench.

The competing problem, however, is that I think Brad is probably in a situation where he should be giving one of the top guys a game off just about every game. I think they may be starting to wear down, and giving them a game off - while simultaneously providing a longer look at folks like Romeo and Grant (man, I wish TL wasn't so injury prone) would be great.

Having Hayward on the bench doesn't necessarily make that more difficult, but it could if we see the team digging themselves into even bigger holes.
Hmmm, I guess I disagree wrt coming out flat when fresh. It was a bit of a thing to start the year, mostly stopped, and then started again just as the schedule got rough. It feels more like fatigue than 2018-2019 Celtics-itis to me. It's not just b2bs--they're just playing a lot of games with a lot of travel in a compressed period.

It might well get worse before it gets better: things are crappy until the All-Star break.
 

RetractableRoof

tolerates intolerance
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2003
3,252
Quincy, MA
I have a question: Is it reasonable to think that with his injuries that Haywire isn't 100% with his body - and legitimately needs some load management? As mentioned in the game thread, he seems to significantly under perform the second night of back to backs. That sounds to me like HE needed the minor injury night off, not Jaylen. I think when he is on, Haywire is a pretty integral piece for the team, and I know when he isn't shooting well he can impact a game with his other skills - but it feels like the team gets out of balance then. Also, if he would benefit from load management, this stretch with limited games off is probably more taxing on him than anyone else on the team.

I wonder if he starts out hot after the All Star break with the days off.
 

Light-Tower-Power

ask me about My Pillow
SoSH Member
Jun 14, 2013
10,312
Nashua, NH
Interesting that the data doesn't support my eye test that he is driving into the paint way less now than he was at the beginning of the season. He was at 10 drives/game in October and November and 9 drives/game in December and January. I do think the eye test shows that he is not driving with as much purpose now as he was earlier in the season. His FTA/game has gone down since the start of the year to only about 1.5/game in January which is poor. It appears to me that he's back to getting swallowed up in the paint vs. being explosive enough to at least draw contact and get to the line. Maybe it's fatigue, maybe it's his foot, I don't know. I do know that this is a second round exit team with this Hayward playing 30+ minutes a night. I still think this could be a Finals team with October Hayward playing 30+ minutes a night.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
10,619
I would have no problem bringing Hayward off the bench, or Brown for that matter. But the sad reality is that, except for a small handful of games, Hayward hasn't performed like a $30M player since his injury, and maybe it is time to seriously consider trading him.
There are certainly good arguments for trading Hayward from a basketball perspective. Whether such a trade is feasible is another matter, but I'll leave that aside for now.

But what he makes this season is immaterial. Even if he opts in, it really doesn't matter as the team will be over the cap next season regardless.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,784
Kiev, Ukraine
The key thing out of all this is that, barring just a complete turnaround in the playoffs, I imagine the team no longer treats him internally as a key piece going forward. Even if he plays well later this year, I can't imagine Danny being excited about giving him a new deal. It doesn't work in terms of team salary structure, and it's too big a dead-money risk.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
4,231
IF Hayward was playing like he has pre-injury and October of this year, he'd be able to fit in the team's salary structure if they wanted to. Yes, there would be some luxury tax penalties and so forth, but those are pretty small issues (basketball-wise) for the price of having an NBA finals contender for the next few years. The Celtics can go over the cap to keep Hayward, Tatum, Brown, Kemba etc. and all their homegrown players.

The bigger question mark is whether he is worth the investment and risk. We'll know a lot more by the end of the season.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,784
Kiev, Ukraine
IF Hayward was playing like he has pre-injury and October of this year, he'd be able to fit in the team's salary structure if they wanted to. Yes, there would be some luxury tax penalties and so forth, but those are pretty small issues (basketball-wise) for the price of having an NBA finals contender for the next few years. The Celtics can go over the cap to keep Hayward, Tatum, Brown, Kemba etc. and all their homegrown players.

The bigger question mark is whether he is worth the investment and risk. We'll know a lot more by the end of the season.
He would have to be pretty damn awesome towards the end to feel good about that risk. I guess we'll see...
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
4,030
around the way
He would have to be pretty damn awesome towards the end to feel good about that risk. I guess we'll see...
I feel like I have seen enough. If we could arrange a deal around Heywood and Miles Turner as the main pieces, I'd do it. He still has great skills and sometimes is an efficient machine. When he's on, he's an awesome fit. But he's mindblowingly inconsistent. Not sure how much is physical and how much is ennui around what he has been through. Honestly don't care.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
10,619
The risk with Hayward is that he opts in for 20-21, not that he opts out.
Why is that a risk? He can still contribute, and the team doesn't really have any other way to spend the money that he would occupy on next year's payroll. And he would be tradeable as an expiring.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,784
Kiev, Ukraine
Why is that a risk? He can still contribute, and the team doesn't really have any other way to spend the money that he would occupy on next year's payroll. And he would be tradeable as an expiring.
Yeah, the opt-in is the cleanest scenario--they'd almost certainly end up flipping his salary slot into some different parts in that case.

I feel like I have seen enough. If we could arrange a deal around Heywood and Miles Turner as the main pieces, I'd do it. He still has great skills and sometimes is an efficient machine. When he's on, he's an awesome fit. But he's mindblowingly inconsistent. Not sure how much is physical and how much is ennui around what he has been through. Honestly don't care.
We'd all love a Turner deal for him, which is why it's not happening.
 

Big John

lurker
Dec 9, 2016
2,086
He's probably tradeable as an expiring now if you trade him to a lottery team. Sure, he contributes, but not enough in my opinion. But I don't see any deals out there that make sense for the Celtics. I'm not interested in Drummond or Love (whose deal goes on forever), and why would OKC unload Adams or Gallinari now when the team is playing so well?

There's not a single deal I like that I think the other team might actually do.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
34,371
He's probably tradeable as an expiring now if you trade him to a lottery team. Sure, he contributes, but not enough in my opinion. But I don't see any deals out there that make sense for the Celtics. I'm not interested in Drummond or Love (whose deal goes on forever), and why would OKC unload Adams or Gallinari now when the team is playing so well?

There's not a single deal I like that I think the other team might actually do.
You do realize that he is not really an expiring deal for precisely the reasons you want him traded, right?
 

Strike4

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
1,552
Portland, Maine
How about shuffling the units a bit and bringing Gordon off the bench? To my untrained eye he doesn't seem like a guy who meshes too well as the fourth best offensive option on the starting unit. The second unit desperately needs a scorer, so let Gordon be the alpha dog out there with Kanter, Grant, Wanamaker, etc. For all the talk about "how are teams going to defend all our wings" that shit just hasn't come to fruition due to injury, chemistry issues, consistency, or whatever. JT, JB, and Gordon are all super inconsistent players unfortunately and Brad needs to come up with something to help these guys become more consistent. Does the first unit really need more scoring than the J's and Kemba?
I posted something to this effect in the gamethread - you don't lose much on defense and Hayward is a better offensive player than any of the second unit. In theory...because if he can't get to the basket then it becomes stagnateball. It becomes particularly acute if he can't hit open shots.

Has there been anything on lingering injuries? As @Light-Tower-Power mentioned, he does look extremely tentative going to the basket these days, and isn't doing much when he gets there. Wonder if it's a combo coming together at the wrong time (matchups, fatigue, lingering injuries, etc.).
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,784
Kiev, Ukraine
I posted something to this effect in the gamethread - you don't lose much on defense and Hayward is a better offensive player than any of the second unit. In theory...because if he can't get to the basket then it becomes stagnateball. It becomes particularly acute if he can't hit open shots.

Has there been anything on lingering injuries? As @Light-Tower-Power mentioned, he does look extremely tentative going to the basket these days, and isn't doing much when he gets there. Wonder if it's a combo coming together at the wrong time (matchups, fatigue, lingering injuries, etc.).
I’d almost be surprised if we don’t later hear that the nerve has been bothering him.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
34,371
Well, I'm guessing that he's more likely to stay in Boston for an extra year than in Atlanta.
That doesn't make any sense. Regardless of what you think of Travis Schlenk, he probably isn't trading anything of real value for a guy you deem as grossly overpaid just to gamble that said player will make a terrible financial decision in opting out of his above market contract.

Note, this isn't to say that there aren't deals out there for Hayward but as nighthob and several other posters note, his trade value will be a lot more certain after this season. As such, a move away from Hayward is more likely then.

I get that you and others are done with him but getting him gone at any cost, which is the implication of those advocating for him being dealt now, is the kind of move a terrible GM would make.

At least you are consistent in that regard given your view of Ainge.
 
Last edited:

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
17,024
I’d almost be surprised if we don’t later hear that the nerve has been bothering him.
More than that, I wouldnt be surprised if "bothering him" is a more or less permanent state that crops up in varying degrees from time to time.
 

Light-Tower-Power

ask me about My Pillow
SoSH Member
Jun 14, 2013
10,312
Nashua, NH
More than that, I wouldnt be surprised if "bothering him" is a more or less permanent state that crops up in varying degrees from time to time.
I agree. Is there any treatment for that or is it just a management thing he would have to deal with for the rest of his career? Hopefully he isn’t permanently damaged goods and he can get beck to his early season level of play. Barring that I hope Brad can figure out ways to get the most out of him whether it be rest days, playing him off the bench, fewer minutes, etc.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
2,970
I'm ready to move on from Hayward. The idea of having three versatile 20 ppg wings is a great one, but it just hasn't happened with any consistency.

I'd rather have a less talented but more reliable player. There's enough firepower with JT, JB, and Kemba, and there's enough playmaking with Kemba, Smart, and Wanamaker.
 

Imbricus

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 26, 2017
2,387
I think everyone agrees that Ainge is cold-blooded when it comes to making trades. But I still think it's high probability that Hayward stays right here because: (1) the best opportunity to trade him for value was earlier this season, when he was doing well and no one wanted to trade him (2) Brad would lose face, as I'm sure he was part of the sales team to persuade Gordo to come here (3) Ainge would lose face and hurt his chances of attracting future free agents (didn't Anthony Davis' father say there was no way his son was going to play for Boston after what happened to IT?) My money is on Hayward opting in to his fourth year and the Celts standing pat on the trade front.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
34,371
I'm ready to move on from Hayward. The idea of having three versatile 20 ppg wings is a great one, but it just hasn't happened with any consistency.

I'd rather have a less talented but more reliable player. There's enough firepower with JT, JB, and Kemba, and there's enough playmaking with Kemba, Smart, and Wanamaker.
Your view is entirely fair.

I would just add that Hayward's inconsistency on the offensive end is something you see from a lot of players, some of them elite, in the league. If you watched Lou Williams for example (and there is enough posting history in this forum to show that I may be one of his biggest fans here) during the month of December, you might be ready to move on from him too - they guy had several clunker games and ended up shooting 39.1% from the field and 32.7% from three in twelve games which is a small sample but still significant enough to note.

That he has since gone supernova kind of illustrates my point that grading a player whose recent track record is very good on a bad stretch is kind of short-sighted. I also think the frustrations around Hayward are a function of familiarity breeding contempt.

Finally, unlike Lou Will, who is not good defensively - so much so that the Clippers are worried about him being exposed in the playoffs - Hayward is having a very good defensive season - he is right behind Tatum and Smart as the top Celtics defenders in a lot of metrics. Furthermore, his playmaking is still good when he isn't scoring so he helps the team in multiple ways even when he isn't getting buckets.
 
Last edited:

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
12,895
Somewhere
Your view is entirely fair.

I would just add that Hayward's inconsistency on the offensive end is something you see from a lot of players, some of them elite, in the league.
The X factor is that Hayward suffered a catastrophic injury not all that long ago. The concern isn't day-to-day inconsistency, it's that a minor downtrend is a harbinger of career-ending collapse.
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
2,171
Cultural hub of the universe
Worth keeping in mind that Hayward's advanced stats paint a picture of a guy who's played pretty well overall. His On-Off is 2nd only to Tatum among the top 6 minutes guys, his RPM is decent and PIPM has him 3rd among those top 6 players. Might want to hold off on the pitchforks just yet.
 

Lazy vs Crazy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
3,552
Worth keeping in mind that Hayward's advanced stats paint a picture of a guy who's played pretty well overall. His On-Off is 2nd only to Tatum among the top 6 minutes guys, his RPM is decent and PIPM has him 3rd among those top 6 players. Might want to hold off on the pitchforks just yet.
How are those numbers since his foot issue popped up though?
 

sox311

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 30, 2004
1,708
That's what she said.
If he is to opt out and Danny decides to let him walk does he try to do a sign and trade to keep the money on the books to be able to give it to someone, if so, who would the targets possibly be?

I doubt he would opt out and take a discount like we all wanted Al to take this year. He could play out his contract and then do that after next year if he wants. His value can only go up after next year if he improves, if he doesn't then it will be at the same place as it is if he opts out this year.

Someone like Towns or Booker is going to demand out soon enough, and Gordon's salary would be a nice thing to have, but, we won't have anything else worth trading without breaking up the core. Which, Gordon is on the outside looking in at this point. This is where the treasure chest of assets didn't amount to anything besides a few good early picks. Not that there's anything wrong with that...

Is there any doubt that MJ would give him a max? Too bad Cody Zeller is the only corpse from Charlotte who would be a nice addition.
 

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,154
Santa Monica
If he is to opt out and Danny decides to let him walk does he try to do a sign and trade to keep the money on the books to be able to give it to someone, if so, who would the targets possibly be?

I doubt he would opt out and take a discount like we all wanted Al to take this year. He could play out his contract and then do that after next year if he wants. His value can only go up after next year if he improves, if he doesn't then it will be at the same place as it is if he opts out this year.

Someone like Towns or Booker is going to demand out soon enough, and Gordon's salary would be a nice thing to have, but, we won't have anything else worth trading without breaking up the core. Which, Gordon is on the outside looking in at this point. This is where the treasure chest of assets didn't amount to anything besides a few good early picks. Not that there's anything wrong with that...

Is there any doubt that MJ would give him a max? Too bad Cody Zeller is the only corpse from Charlotte who would be a nice addition.
If Hayward plays well the rest of the way and opts out, an interesting hypothetical that's been kicked around is a GSW S&T, 3-team trade this Summer.

D.Lo to a re-building team that has trouble signing FA's (TWolves, Hawks, Knicks, etc). With some pieces back to the Celtics, while retaining that salary slot for a year before Tatum's MAX kicks in. Those pieces could be very interesting since the Celtics have plenty of 2019 rookies/2020 draft picks to add to D.Lo.

It's safe to assume the Celtics/Ainge are in front of all the Hayward permutations (unlike Horford shocking them)
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
9,000
Someone like Towns or Booker is going to demand out soon enough, and Gordon's salary would be a nice thing to have, but, we won't have anything else worth trading without breaking up the core. Which, Gordon is on the outside looking in at this point. This is where the treasure chest of assets didn't amount to anything besides a few good early picks. Not that there's anything wrong with that...
By the time either guy goes on the market Hayward will be long gone, so it isn’t an issue.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
20,378
I think everyone agrees that Ainge is cold-blooded when it comes to making trades. But I still think it's high probability that Hayward stays right here because: (1) the best opportunity to trade him for value was earlier this season, when he was doing well and no one wanted to trade him (2) Brad would lose face, as I'm sure he was part of the sales team to persuade Gordo to come here (3) Ainge would lose face and hurt his chances of attracting future free agents (didn't Anthony Davis' father say there was no way his son was going to play for Boston after what happened to IT?) My money is on Hayward opting in to his fourth year and the Celts standing pat on the trade front.
I agree that GH stays with BOS but that's more because (1) I think both GH one the one hand and BOS/DA/Brad feel loyalty to each other and (2) more importantly, if we can all see that GH is not a max player at this moment, certainly everyone else in the NBA can see that.

Could this change? Sure. If GH regroups and averages 17 ppg on something like 39% 3P shooting and the Cs go on a deep run in the playoffs, the calculus might change but at this point I'd put my money on opt-in if I were forced to bet.
 

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
5,850
By the time either guy goes on the market Hayward will be long gone, so it isn’t an issue.
I think that’s his point, by that time Gordon will be gone and we won’t want to trade any of our remaining max (or near max) players, so executing a sign and trade when Gordon leaves to retain additional salary as ballast would help facilitate a trade for the next unhappy superstar in the next few years after that.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,784
Kiev, Ukraine
I agree that GH stays with BOS but that's more because (1) I think both GH one the one hand and BOS/DA/Brad feel loyalty to each other and (2) more importantly, if we can all see that GH is not a max player at this moment, certainly everyone else in the NBA can see that.

Could this change? Sure. If GH regroups and averages 17 ppg on something like 39% 3P shooting and the Cs go on a deep run in the playoffs, the calculus might change but at this point I'd put my money on opt-in if I were forced to bet.
The only complicating factor is that he has to know that opt-ing basically guarantees that he gets traded to a random destination next season without any say, right?

There’s no way Ainge lets that salary slot go to waste if Hayward isn’t totally killing it on the court. And I don’t think there will be any negative PR fallout: the Celtics have held up their end of the bargain with GH and then some, and the whole league knows it.