What's new
By:
Filters

Would You Trade Hayward for Parsons?

Would you do this trade?

  • Yes

    Votes: 11 31.4%

  • No

    Votes: 23 65.7%

  • Yes but we would have to include Trey

    Votes: 1 2.9%
  • Total voters
    35
Twin Towers

Twin Towers

Well-Known Member
I don't normally post Trade Ideas here. But here we go.
Both are free agents. So it would need to be a sign and trade.

Jazz get - Parsons

Rockets get - Rondo

Celtics get - Hayward

Rockets already claimed that they have a trade in place to get rid of Lin if they have the opportunity to get Melo or Lebron. This doesn't effect anything with that. This also balances the starting lineup out for them. Helps rockets try to build their superstar team.

Jazz get a legit SF in Parsons who has a better outside shot then Hayward and has more size.

Celtics get to match up Hayward and his Butler coach.
I was thinking we need to send Trey also so he could be with his buddy Sullinger, but I think that is too much for Parsons.

BUT Celtics might want more then Hayward for Rondo.

Would we need to include Trey? If we include Trey....... what do we need to get make to make it fair?

I just don't like Hayward at the 3 position. And I like Burks more then Hayward at the 2.
 
I would.

Exum and Rodney Hood are both plus ball handlers, Trey did show he takes care of the ball.

Paying a premium for Haywards ability to create for others isn't as appealing to me, Parsons is more of an off the ball player, a floor spacer. Id take Parsons tbh. I presume he will be asking for less $$ too.
 
We can't trade restricted free agents, but if we could, I would trade Hayward for Parsons in a heart beat.
 
Too late.

Jazz control Hayward only in the sense they can match an offer.

Seems Hayward maybe getting paid in the 12-14 range.

I am not a fan of DL.

Remember the Favors press conference when he complimented Favors for wanting to keep the core together, stating they think they will.
What happens..they shop Favors this DRAFT. Nice.

As for Hayward ... he is NOT a #1 option on any team .. at all.

He is a #3 option on a playoff team and a 2 option on a 7-8 seed team. He will get paid.

If the Jazz really wanted Hayward they should have paid the 4/50.

It's all a business.
 
^^
You seem to contradict yourself ijazz. If Hayward is only a 3rd option on a playoff team and a 2nd option on a 7-8 seed, then how will he "get paid?" This analysis seems to support why he and Utah could never agree on an amount. 4/$50M was only speculated; it was never confirmed. Hayward could have asked for Paul George money; we just don't know.

As for Favors, yes, they were going to include him in a deal for the #1. Hey, if the Jazz could get a projected star, I'd trade my father to Cleveland! And it can be spun back on the Cavs, really. If I were DL, I'd admit to Derrick that I had talked to the CAVS about the #1 pick. Favors is so highly-regarded he would have been a requirement to get the deal done. It fell apart because the Jazz felt they were asking too much.

Give him the old, "sometimes the best trades are the ones that aren't done" line. Then tell him he should be able to thrive with another quality guard like Exum aboard and a shooter in Hood who can space the floor.
 
ijazz said:
Too late.

Jazz control Hayward only in the sense they can match an offer.

Seems Hayward maybe getting paid in the 12-14 range.

I am not a fan of DL.

Remember the Favors press conference when he complimented Favors for wanting to keep the core together, stating they think they will.
What happens..they shop Favors this DRAFT. Nice.

As for Hayward ... he is NOT a #1 option on any team .. at all.

He is a #3 option on a playoff team and a 2 option on a 7-8 seed team. He will get paid.

If the Jazz really wanted Hayward they should have paid the 4/50.

It's all a business.
Click to expand...

They can still do a sign and trade. We have a lot of leverage so if we did sign and trade hayward we could get a good haul. I might do this deal depending on the numbers.
 
Twin Towers said:
Rockets already claimed that they have a trade in place to get rid of Lin if they have the opportunity to get Melo or Lebron. This doesn't effect anything with that. This also balances the starting lineup out for them. Helps rockets try to build their superstar team.

Jazz get a legit SF in Parsons who has a better outside shot then Hayward and has more size.

Celtics get to match up Hayward and his Butler coach.
I was thinking we need to send Trey also so he could be with his buddy Sullinger, but I think that is too much for Parsons.

BUT Celtics might want more then Hayward for Rondo.

Would we need to include Trey? If we include Trey....... what do we need to get make to make it fair?

I just don't like Hayward at the 3 position. And I like Burks more then Hayward at the 2.
Click to expand...

....I think you want to rid our team of white guys! I'm tempted to report this as a racist post! ;)
 
GP GS MIN FGM-A FG% 3PM-A 3P% FTM-A FT% OR DR REB AST BLK STL PF TO PTS
Parsons
Career 213 207 34.5 5.5-11.6 .473 1.6-4.3 .370 1.5-2.1 .705 1.1 4.1 5.2 3.3 0.4 1.1 2.2 1.7 14.1
Hayward
Career 287 179 28.3 4.1-9.4 .436 1.0-2.6 .365 2.8-3.5 .813 0.7 2.7 3.4 3.1 0.5 0.9 1.7 1.8 12.0

Parsons is slightly better at most things but it is close. I would rather just stick with the guy who has chemistry with the team.

Parsons has also played with better talent around him especially last year. I think if you trade parsons for hayward last year it makes no difference to either team.
 
Hantlers said:
Parsons is going to get paid just as much, if not more, than Hayward. I don't do the deal.
Click to expand...

They are similar talents and I think Parsons could play the 3 better than Hayward. I need to know what the plan is with Burks... we starting him? Is Hayward our new 3? Off the bench again?

Parsons seems to show more team leadership/personality. I think it'd be a lateral move, but might fit a need better. It's close which means it might be a viable deal.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
I think Parsons could play the 3 better than Hayward.
Click to expand...

Yup, thats the dealbreaker for me.

even if they are equal talent and equal $$ I also lean towards Parsons, just to shake things up from a losing team last year.

Trey, Alec, Dante and Hood get the ball in their hands more because of this which i'd like to see. Someone will be forced to step up or we are in the lottery next year still with plenty of flexibility.

I dont mind that. (Imagine Exum steps up and is amazing next year :cool:)
 
PointGod_AlecBurks said:
Yup, thats the dealbreaker for me.

even if they are equal talent and equal $$ I also lean towards Parsons, just to shake things up from a losing team last year.

Trey, Alec, Dante and Hood get the ball in their hands more because of this which i'd like to see. Someone will be forced to step up or we are in the lottery next year still with plenty of flexibility.

I dont mind that. (Imagine Exum steps up and is amazing next year :cool:)
Click to expand...

We have to get these guys NBA reps... I think we stunted Favs and Kanter a bit. We don't want the young guys to get bad habits, but the need game time to get comfortable and develop. This would clear a little more PT for Exum, Burke, and Burks at the one and two.
 
Ya I like Hayward still. But I do think its a lateral move in terms of talent.

But in terms of it being a better fit......I like Parsons as he can play the 3 full time and even play a little 4 when we need to go small/quick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top