What about a trade exception? That would not have hurt Celtics in anyway.
For People Who Think Hayward's Decision was Predetermined
- Thread starter Saint Cy of JFC
- Start date
I mean, any team would have taken IT's salary on. It was only 8 million dollars.
The Bulls gave up the 16th pick in 2017 and Jimmy Butler to get Zach LaVine, Lauri Markkanen and Kris Dunn ffs. You can't tell me the Cleveland pick isnt better than Zach LaVine, Lauri Markkanen and Kriss Dunn.
Last edited:
I mean, with hindsight it's now clear Ainge saw a 3 wing starting lineup of Hayward/Tatum/Brown, so they really didnt need another wing and he wanted to take an elite shotcreator/ball-handling lead guard in Kyrie. It now makes a lot more sense why they went Irving, but in my mind Butler or George are both better players than Irving and went for less. Also Kyrie has his own health issues it appears.
Handlogten's Heros
Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
2025 Prediction Contest Winner
I think it hard caps them... not that they would have gone over the apron.
Assets are exchanged, not given away for free. Jazz got TPE from Bulls in exchange for a 2nd round pick with the Boozer deal. It wasn't because Boozer was loyal to the Jazz and exerted influence over the Bulls to get the deal done. No traded player is going to harm his new team by demanding they give something for nothing. Talk about getting off on the wrong foot.
Did DL offer a 2nd for the TPE? Who knows, I've never heard that rumor. But Ainge is not an altruistic guy.
Goodwill has never flowed in the NBA in this manner and never will.
That and the Brad factor
But if they don't give up IT (expendable, expiring), they have to give up someone else (who they want to keep) to match KI's salary, no?
I'm really confused why you keep saying they dont give up IT.
Sorry if I was not clear. If they don't trade IT in the Kyrie deal, do they not then have to trade someone else to match Kyrie's salary?
Why wouldn't they trade IT tho?
Huh? A TPE would be generated from the transaction, Boston wouldn't be giving anything.
If you're talking about Hayward getting a bigger contract, that doesn't have to be part of the stipulation. I know that is asking a lot of Hayward to not sacrifice anything for an organization he despised.
Handlogten's Heros
Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
2025 Prediction Contest Winner
If a team receives a player in a sign and trade they are hard capped for the cap year. So they would have been hardcapped at the apron... which they likely would not have exceeded.
So it would have been a consideration. I think if it was just Boston getting a second rounder they would oblige. If Gordon had pushed for one when signing I think they would have obliged. He probably “tried” as did his agent but if Danny says no are they gonna go okay we are going back to Utah.
Eventually teams will start avoiding Ainge when they can. He is one of the few guys who doesn’t consider the whole... he wants to get everything he can every time.
LifeOnaPlate
Well-Known Member
Remind me what that Boozer deal exception brought us. Is there a website that traces all the trades for Utah?
I disagree. Plenty of GMs have goodwill with each other and look for win wins for each team. Gms deal with each other all the time and look to build good relations when possible especially when it does not effect their own team. Ainge is different than that though. He does not care about burning bridges.
I am certain Jazz would have given up one of their many late 2nds for the TPE and even if not it would have 0 effect on the Celtics to give away the trade exception. Its not harming the team to ask for that. Yes, demanding a player be traded could hurt them so I understand that. It was rumored to be up to Hayward but he definitely was bitter and did not want to help the Jazz and arguably wanted to hurt them.
Nothing but a TPE, but I know the rules were different for sign and trades back then. I dont think what people are saying about Hayward and getting a TPE being nothing for Boston are true anymore. But I really dont know.
Getting Traded
Banned
What I don't get is why Hayward was bitter? Because they allowed him to test the market during the first contract negotiation? His performance up to that point didn't merit a big long-term deal.
If I was Aigne I'm not giving Utah **** though and I dont get why he would. Boston is in the driver's seat with how many assets they have. People have to suck their teat.
I think you are allowed to be bitter if the front office didnt believe in you being a max player or thought they could short-change you in a limited free agency market.
Getting Traded
Banned
Kind of arrogant, considering the bucks these guys makes now.
Where he promptly shot 42% from the field, and 30% from three for a team that won, what, 25 games?
I disagree. He's trying to make money, they're trying to save it. He didn't prove beyond a reasonable doubt he was worth a max on his own merit. If you're a spoiled child, yeah, I guess you could resent that and hold onto it for three years. But he's a conservative, so it's all the more laughable that he's butt hurt that a business made business decisions.