I would. It's simple really - although there is not that much inflation over the last few years, he could take a near max contract making more than Kobe ever made in a season. If he takes the absolute most we can offer (which is a few million more per year than any other team), he knows he jeopardizes all that cute stuff he says in his blog about "being happy about the future of the team" and "I want to lead this team". Well, the team won't stay together if he takes the max. If you were to make 25% more than your coworkers and some of your coworkers would lose their jobs, you would probably think twice about taking the absolute most.
So what I'm saying is this - looking at probable salary levels next year, lets say we can offer up to 5 years and $160 (average of $32 per year). If Hayward were to leave us for a max contract elsewhere, it would be less years and money than what we can offer. So leaving to go elsewhere, Hayward could only sign for 4 years and about $115 (less than $29 per year). My suggestion is that Hayward takes $150 over 5 years instead of $160 over 5 years. He does this to send a message that he took a little less than max ($2 million less per year but he's still making $30 per year and more money per year than he could get on the open market). He also does this hoping that the franchise could keep more players on the roster. $2 million isn't a ton, but since he's the leader, if he does that, maybe others do it too. If Favors, Hood, Hayward and Gobert all sacrificed $1-2 million per year, that's $4-8 million for another solid role player or the difference in keeping a guy like Hill around.
