Hornets looking to move Hayward attached with a first round pick

[kht]

I’d be all over this in a heart beat, TBH. Cant be worst than the RJ and Carolle signings.

[BackHome]

Would you do Jakob for Charlotte 14th and 15th pick for Hayward? He got a two year contract 30 million a year.............:

[BatManu20]

Hayward is 32 and due $61.5M over the next 2 seasons…

[Mr. Body]

That's two pick territory or eat up some of your own bad salary in return. Which we don't have any.

[Rubberducky]

Would you do Jakob for Charlotte 14th and 15th pick for Hayward? He got a two year contract 30 million a year.............:

It's the 13th and 15th picks but maybe. Hornets are the team after the Spurs that want in on Duren. There's a decent chance he gets passed 10-12. If the Spurs selected someone else and Duren is still there at 13 then I'd consider pulling the trigger. Otherwise no, Not having Jakob or Duren after the dust settles would bring out the pitchforks.

[Mr. Body]

I doubt the Hornets trade both 13 and 15 in this draft. They'd have to cough up one and then probably draft capital down the road.

[Chinook]

Hayward is a PF and potentially worth the gamble, but I would want the Spurs to be able to complete the trade using contracts to preserve their cap space. That could happen if Poeltl, Richardson and some non-min contract are outgoing. OR if the Spurs can get the Hornets to take McDermott, they can just combine him and Jakob to match the salary. However, this assumes Hayward waives his trade-kicker, which he might not do. If he doesn't, you can add $9 Million or so on top of his salary over the two years. That would make acquiring him less desirable. In all, it would be a base-hit kind of move, even if the Spurs got Lavine. If they instead got Sexton, it would probably be a net-neutral off-season given that the Spurs would have to replace/develop a new center. Unlike many scenarios, I don't see a trade that would change this, even with the team having four or five firsts to move.

[Ditty]

I would swap Hayward and 15 for McDermott.

[Mr. Body]

Hayward is a PF and potentially worth the gamble, but I would want the Spurs to be able to complete the trade using contracts to preserve their cap space. That could happen if Poeltl, Richardson and some non-min contract are outgoing. OR if the Spurs can get the Hornets to take McDermott, they can just combine him and Jakob to match the salary. However, this assumes Hayward waives his trade-kicker, which he might not do. If he doesn't, you can add $9 Million or so on top of his salary over the two years. That would make acquiring him less desirable. In all, it would be a base-hit kind of move, even if the Spurs got Lavine. If they instead got Sexton, it would probably be a net-neutral off-season given that the Spurs would have to replace/develop a new center. Unlike many scenarios, I don't see a trade that would change this, even with the team having four or five firsts to move.

Hayward is absolutely not a PF. He's a small forward. Might bump to 4 in some sets, but he's a small forward.

[keithington1]

Hayward made the Spurs look like children in 1 game this year.

[slick'81]

Jesus ,now haywards a pf:lol

[benefactor]

Jesus ,now haywards a pf:lol
:lol never change, ST

[benefactor]

Gordon Fucking Hayward. Sixty fucking million over two seasons. Jesus fuck listen to all of you.

[scott]

The ultimate manifestation of renting out cap space for picks? What else are we gonna do with the cap space?

[Mr. Body]

The ultimate manifestation of renting out cap space for picks? What else are we gonna do with the cap space?

Probably rent out the cap space for picks.

[Degoat]

I wouldnt be completely against this idea it the spurs would have a lot of work to do with all those damn picks lol Spurs love a good reclamation project tbh

[scott]

Hypothetically if you could pull of Jak + Doug for Hayward + 13 + 15... how far up from 9 do you think you can move up assuming we'll only want to keep two 1st rounders this year. Can 9 + 15 + 25 get you to #5 or #6? Can 13 + 20 get you back into the top 10? Is there a handy "draft value points chart" for the NBA like the NFL has?

[Robz4000]

Gordon Fucking Hayward. Sixty fucking million over two seasons. Jesus fuck listen to all of you.

Hayward and his contract are god awful, but it's not like they're gonna do anything with their capspace anyway. Might as well get a pick or two and see if you can combine them with 9/20/25 to move into the top 4.

[kht]

Hypothetically if you could pull of Jak + Doug for Hayward + 13 + 15... how far up from 9 do you think you can move up assuming we'll only want to keep two 1st rounders this year. Can 9 + 15 + 25 get you to #5 or #6? Can 13 + 20 get you back into the top 10? Is there a handy "draft value points chart" for the NBA like the NFL has?

jak is valuable. Why would we do that. He might be our starting C long term.

[scott]

jak is valuable. Why would we do that. He might be our starting C long term.

Surely this isn’t the first time you've heard the idea of trading Jak. It’s been discussed at length on these boards and there is no reason to hash it out again.

[slick'81]

If keldon can play the 4 who cares at this point

[slick'81]

Spurs talk desperate for anything at this point

[MultiTroll]

Hypothetically if you could pull of Jak + Doug for Hayward + 13 + 15... how far up from 9 do you think you can move up assuming we'll only want to keep two 1st rounders this year. Can 9 + 15 + 25 get you to #5 or #6? Can 13 + 20 get you back into the top 10? Is there a handy "draft value points chart" for the NBA like the NFL has?
Good Q.
I'm gonna say No. Neither team Pistons at 5 or Pacers 6 is gonna trade for 13+20 this draft.

Pacers especially not after the Kwa Leornard trade. :lol

[John B]

Hayward, 13 and 15 for Poeltl and McD.

I think Poeltl is worth 1FRP pick 13. And unloading Hayward is another FRP pick 15.

I’d pick Davis at 9. Sochan at 13. Swap 15, 20 and 25 to get to Duren or Williams.

DJ, Davis, Hayward, Sochan, Duren/Williams

[BatManu20]

Hornets aren’t trading both 13 & 15… It’d be one or the other, and they’d prob fight like hell for it to be 15.

[TimmehC]

Hornets aren’t trading both 13 & 15… It’d be one or the other, and they’d prob fight like hell for it to be 15.

If we're doing Jak + non-guaranteed salary filler(i.e. Langford) to take on Hayward's deal, they might swap both of their picks for 20 + 25. But they definitely won't do it without getting picks in return.

[Chinook]

Hayward is absolutely not a PF. He's a small forward. Might bump to 4 in some sets, but he's a small forward.

No. He's a PF and Zach Collins is a C. We aren't going back to 2010 no matter how much you try to will it into existence. Constantly having to flounder to explain how the Spurs are only playing Johnson there out of desperation despite all the PFs the team has cut or traded over the years has to be exhausting. It's the kind of thinking that makes one want to trade two firsts for Taurean Prince or Stanley Johnson.

If the Spurs are going to get a power-forward, there's an extremely good chance it'll be someone who can play SF on defense to compliment Johnson. That means they're more likely to grab a guy who's 6-7 rather than 6-10.

Apparently I'm obsessed with John Collins or whatever, so me saying that isn't what I want. But even the PFs folks want to draft are like 6-8 and under.

[John B]

Hornets aren’t trading both 13 & 15… It’d be one or the other, and they’d prob fight like hell for it to be 15.

I don’t know how deep Jordan’s pocket is. But he might not have a lot to say if he wants Bridges back. It’s not like they won’t get Poeltl who they covet. Plus McD is a good target for Melo. Tbh it’s a win/win and CHA unloaded Hayward contract.

[JPB]

No. He's a PF and Zach Collins is a C. We aren't going back to 2010 no matter how much you try to will it into existence. Constantly having to flounder to explain how the Spurs are only playing Johnson there out of desperation despite all the PFs the team has cut or traded over the years has to be exhausting. It's the kind of thinking that makes one want to trade two firsts for Taurean Prince or Stanley Johnson.

If the Spurs are going to get a power-forward, there's an extremely good chance it'll be someone who can play SF on defense to compliment Johnson. That means they're more likely to grab a guy who's 6-7 rather than 6-10.

Apparently I'm obsessed with John Collins or whatever, so me saying that isn't what I want. But even the PFs folks want to draft are like 6-8 and under.

Hayward is listed as SF in all the main stats websites, startning by ESPN, who can eventually play PF , which he is. Not cos he can play PF than he is. Put a real PF on him when you're on defense and you're fucked.

[scott]

Or maybe instead of all this mess, we just make an offer to Miles Bridges that CHA can't match because they have Hayward on their books :lol

[hoopdreams11]

Haywood has a 15% trade kicker

[RC_Drunkford]

Hayward for 15 and McDermott sounds like a good deal to me. Spurs would have to make additional moves though. Also there‘s no way I‘m including Poeltl in that deal. The question is do they have other trades in the works? Do they want to make a run at Ayton? Can they move up? What will they do with the 20 and 25 pick? They better be making some trades on draft night with all the options that are out there.

[CGD]

Haywood has a 15% trade kicker

Ouch, thats the deal breaker right there...

[RLT]

Hayward is a PF
What. 😬

[exstatic]

What. ��

Advance your clocks from 2015.

[Dejounte]

Man, you can really tell who has watched a single NBA game recently from the takes in this thread.

[Mr. Body]

You could play a giant koala bear in the 4 slot and that wouldn't make them a PF. LMAO Gordon ain't a PF. He's a SF through and through... when he plays.

[Ice009]

Did Gordon used to play SG in Utah? If so, you could slot him up one to SF, but I don't think he's ever been a PF. If he's a PF, Tim Duncan would be average 40ppg if that is the type of player he was going up against.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

Did Gordon used to play SG in Utah? If so, you could slot him up one to SF, but I don't think he's ever been a PF. If he's a PF, Tim Duncan would be average 40ppg if that is the type of player he was going up against.

I don’t know if you’ve watched the Hornets at all recently but their starting forwards were Hayward and Bridges - both 6’6 and both interchanged at 4 a lot.

It’s useless comparing to TD because the game is very different now. Besides, TD was a C for most of his career regardless of what they’d list him as.

[CGD]

Not sure who says no here, but something like this appeals:

CHA: Doug + Derrick White Haul (Richardson + Romeo + 25)
SAS: Hayward + 25 + 2023 FRP

Hornets realize 6M in savings by dumping Romeo immediately plus the difference in Haywards 2022 and 2023 salaries (probably ~10M combined right there). They also get a pick so they don't come away empty handed after having 2 picks this cycle. Spurs in turn (a) keep most of their cap flexibility for this summer; (b) basically turn White into 13th pick; and (c) get a future pick for renting space next summer to eat about ~19M of Hayward's deal.

[RC_Drunkford]

Chinook has also said Keldon is PF when we all know he isn‘t. Nothing new here :lol

[The Truth #6]

Expectations versus weird reality.

[DPG21920]

CHA only does this trade to shed salary. At best it would be McDermott for Hayward and pick 13. If Sa does not have plans for cap space paying Hayward 17M extra than McDermott for the 2 years is the real cost to obtain pick 13.

It needs to be considered if they don’t think they can land a big fish via FA or Trade. Not sure Sa could rehab Hayward enough to dump him but that’s the real cost.

Spurs are paying Doug regardless - so it’s just what Hayward makes above that. If you can dump
Doug for a late first then that’s better. If Doug has negative value this is attractive

[John B]

Whether is just for pick 15 for Hayward or both CHA picks to include Poeltl, Spurs should be all-over this. They can swap 13/15 plus 20/25 to get another lottery pick to pair with Davis, maybe Keegan, Sochan or Duren however crafty they are. And Intrust Spurs conditioning coaches to get the most of Hayward.

[KingKev]

I’d consider 13 and Hayward for McDougal if PATFO felt they have limited other options for our cap spce, which probably is the case. They would have to take McDuckets atleast to soften the cap hit and no if we have to pony up the trade kicker. If Jak was included I need 13 and 15.

Hayward is still a pretty solid player if healthy. Big IF, I know but couple that with vet leadership and he could slide right into the 3 spot in day one. Prefer his minutes at the 4 were limited however.

He also becomes a potential trade chip at the 2024 deadline.

[DPG21920]

Hayward for 15 and McDermott sounds like a good deal to me. Spurs would have to make additional moves though. Also there‘s no way I‘m including Poeltl in that deal. The question is do they have other trades in the works? Do they want to make a run at Ayton? Can they move up? What will they do with the 20 and 25 pick? They better be making some trades on draft night with all the options that are out there.

Zero chance SA takes Hayward and gives Jakob.

[Ice009]

I don’t know if you’ve watched the Hornets at all recently but their starting forwards were Hayward and Bridges - both 6’6 and both interchanged at 4 a lot.

It’s useless comparing to TD because the game is very different now. Besides, TD was a C for most of his career regardless of what they’d list him as.

No, I haven't actually. I am quite surprised if they've been playing him at the PF slot. I just can't picture him there even if he's switching between positions with Bridges. To me, he's a SF at best.

[Chinook]

Did Gordon used to play SG in Utah? If so, you could slot him up one to SF, but I don't think he's ever been a PF. If he's a PF, Tim Duncan would be average 40ppg if that is the type of player he was going up against.

He played SF for Utah, and he was a four almost exclusively in Boston. Folks being weirded out by this is sort of concerning.

[Chinook]

Chinook has also said Keldon is PF when we all know he isn‘t. Nothing new here :lol

Johnson is a PF, but that's not because he's good there. A guy being limited defensively doesn't mean he's playing out of position. Dude's the same height as DeJuan Blair, and before you go off talking about how Blair was heavier, Johnson is around average weight for NBA PFs. Being a short PF doesn't mean you're an SF

[slick'81]

Charlotte was terrible on the defensive glass so hayward would be a perfect fit here

[RC_Drunkford]

Johnson is a PF, but that's not because he's good there. A guy being limited defensively doesn't mean he's playing out of position. Dude's the same height as DeJuan Blair, and before you go off talking about how Blair was heavier, Johnson is around average weight for NBA PFs. Being a short PF doesn't mean you're an SF

yeah right :lmao

[rjv]

Hayward is 32 and due $61.5M over the next 2 seasons…

and always injured

[poopbox]

If keldon can play the 4 who cares at this point

He can't. We get destroyed on defense when he is at the 4 :rollin

"Keldon at the 4" is the second biggest problem with this team :rollin

Only willing to do Hayward if we sending out McDermott and Poeltl AND we draft a big or sign a big like Ayton or Bamba to replace him.:rollin

Haywood will be on the bench half the season anyway

[Chinook]

yeah right :lmao

Great argument, man. You can keep believing he's not a PF despite him playing there for years. That's the logical stance.

[poopbox]

He played SF for Utah, and he was a four almost exclusively in Boston. Folks being weirded out by this is sort of concerning.

What's concerning is you not understanding that when Gordon was playing as a SF in Utah, your words not mine, he was good enough to make an all star team, and when he played pf "almost exclusively in Boston", your words not mine, they eventually moved on from him cause you know, they have a way better power forward on the team in Jaylen Brown.

It's also concerning that you don't seem to understand the only reason this thread exist is because ANOTHER team has decided they would rather have someone else play the 4, Miles Bridges, than have Gordon play it.

So how many times does Gordon Hayward have to go to a team to play power forward, only for the team to move on from him cause they have a better power forward, before you realize he isn't actually a power forward? Obviously the answer is more than 2.

I'd rather have Collins play power forward than Hayward. Hayward at the 4 would be every bit as disastrous as Keldon and McBuckets.

Do you even know what a power forward is, or even is supposed to do, on a basketball court, on offense and defense? It doesn't look like it if you think Gordon fucking Hayward is going to be a power forward, on the account of every team he went to play power forward for ended up wanting someone else to play power forward instead of him

Both teams he went to play power forward for...played their best basketball when he wasn't playing power forward.

[The Truth #6]

As for Keldon, to me the issue isn’t whether or not he objectively is a PF, but should he be our starting PF? Right now he is our PF. His defense and rebounding aren’t good so as a starting PF it’s a mixed bag but he’s becoming a better and better offensive option. Personally, I’d like to see a better rebounder playing alongside him, be it Sochan or Eason, but definitely not Haywood.

[KobesAchilles]

Yes please. I’ve wanted this guy on our team forever. He solves a lot of issues

[Chinook]

What's concerning is you not understanding that when Gordon was playing as a SF in Utah, your words not mine, he was good enough to make an all star team, and when he played pf "almost exclusively in Boston", your words not mine, they eventually moved on from him cause you know, they have a way better power forward on the team in Jaylen Brown.

Brown isn't their PF, but if he was, he's shorter than Hayward. Hayward is 6-8 in shoes. I clarify that because people will list guys barefoot but still compare them with shoed archetypes. If your classical concept of a PF is 6-9 or 6-10, then your modern concept is 6-8 or 6-9. Same player, but he'll just be listed shorted than he was previously.


It's also concerning that you don't seem to understand the only reason this thread exist is because ANOTHER team has decided they would rather have someone else play the 4, Miles Bridges, than have Gordon play it.

Yeah, you're talking about the Miles Bridges that is a half-inch taller than Keldon and an inch-and-a-half shorter than Hayward.


So how many times does Gordon Hayward have to go to a team to play power forward, only for the team to move on from him cause they have a better power forward, before you realize he isn't actually a power forward? Obviously the answer is more than 2.

We're talking about the Spurs salvaging on-court value for the salary dump proposed in the OP. We all know he's damaged goods. That you think teams wouldn't think to move him to a different position if that was the main reason for his decline (as opposed to age and injury), is just odd. We know teams had better wings than him and thus weren't willing to pay him. That's why my initial post suggested it wasn't a good move to get him.


I'd rather have Collins play power forward than Hayward. Hayward at the 4 would be every bit as disastrous as Keldon and McBuckets.

I'd rather have neither, but that's besides the point.


Do you even know what a power forward is, or even is supposed to do, on a basketball court, on offense and defense? It doesn't look like it if you think Gordon fucking Hayward is going to be a power forward, on the account of every team he went to play power forward for ended up wanting someone else to play power forward instead of him

This reeks of boomer talk. I doubt you actually want to get into the basketball theory of what PFs do on both sides of the court. I'm more imagining you're talking about size and rebounding more than sets and schemes. I don't particularly disagree with you wanting more from the spot. Pretty sure I've been talking about getting a bigger defensive forward for a while now. But that's not the same thing as saying Hayward and Johnson don't play the position -- because they do.


Both teams he went to play power forward for...played their best basketball when he wasn't playing power forward.

And neither team just moved him to SF which would apparently have solved the problem.

[SAGirl]

I like a few trades suggested here but I don't see how its realistic for the Spurs to pick up more.... more 1st round picks in the same draft. some other trades would have to happen.

[RC_Drunkford]

Great argument, man. You can keep believing he's not a PF despite him playing there for years. That's the logical stance.

he‘s playing PF cause we don’t have one. Even you should know that. Your argument is incredibly stupid. Just cause he plays out of position doesn‘t mean that that‘s his natural position. As a matter of fact, when teams play smallball the PF plays Center and has to somewhat protect the rim. Have you ever seen Hayward or Keldon Johnson play smallball 5?

According to your logic Derrick White is an SG and Nic Batum is a C.

[SAGirl]

As for Keldon, to me the issue isn’t whether or not he objectively is a PF, but should he be our starting PF? Right now he is our PF. His defense and rebounding aren’t good so as a starting PF it’s a mixed bag but he’s becoming a better and better offensive option. Personally, I’d like to see a better rebounder playing alongside him, be it Sochan or Eason, but definitely not Haywood.

I think the answer to that question will be provided by the Spurs this summer. If they make a move to acquire a PF through a trade, or through the draft, then we will know that they are looking for alternatives.

If they do everything but add a credible PF to the team this summer, then yea, I'd have to say they like Keldon right where he is thank you very much.

An option that you mention as well as one that Chinook talked about elsewhere is drafting someone like Sochan specially, but could be Eason, someone that could cross match with him on defense. I don't know what will work there, but whatever happens this summer we will know the Spurs answer, beyond what we can debate in a forum it.

[Chinook]

he‘s playing PF cause we don’t have one. Even you should know that.

The Spurs have had god knows how many PFs come and go. It's pure delusion to believe the Spurs don't want to play Johnson there. The Spurs want to play small. I don't actually agree with them, at least not to this extent. But it's clearly something Pop prefers.


As a matter of fact, when teams play smallball the PF plays Center and has to somewhat protect the rim. Have you ever seen Hayward or Keldon Johnson play smallball 5?

Ugh, so you WERE the person who made that shitty argument. I was just thinking about how ridiculous that conversation was. No, there are multiple ways to play small-ball. Some include the center being swapped out. Some include other positions. You can easily describe the Spurs as playing small right now. Moreover, a player not being able to play up a position doesn't mean they're already playing up a position. What kind of shit is that? Forbes is a two-guard. He can't play SF. That doesn't mean he's actually a point-guard. That's basic shit.

Also, Johnson has played center for the Spurs before. He actually played there a few days after you made the argument the first time. It was for a short stretch when the other team also played super small. But I got a big chuckle out of it when it happened. Hayward has apparently played center too, according to BBallRef.

[Dex]

Yes please. I’ve wanted this guy on our team forever. He solves a lot of issues

Yes, like "how do the Spurs get a top 3 pick in the draft"?

[RC_Drunkford]

The Spurs have had god knows how many PFs come and go. It's pure delusion to believe the Spurs don't want to play Johnson there. The Spurs want to play small. I don't actually agree with them, at least not to this extent. But it's clearly something Pop prefers.



Ugh, so you WERE the person who made that shitty argument. I was just thinking about how ridiculous that conversation was. No, there are multiple ways to play small-ball. Some include the center being swapped out. Some include other positions. You can easily describe the Spurs as playing small right now. Moreover, a player not being able to play up a position doesn't mean they're already playing up a position. What kind of shit is that? Forbes is a two-guard. He can't play SF. That doesn't mean he's actually a point-guard. That's basic shit.

Also, Johnson has played center for the Spurs before. He actually played there a few days after you made the argument the first time. It was for a short stretch when the other team also played super small. But I got a big chuckle out of it when it happened. Hayward has apparently played center too, according to BBallRef.

but according to you bballref is wrong because Hayward is listed as an SF there as is Keldon Johnson :lmao

you really shouldn‘t be the one talking about people making shitty arguments when you are defending one that you made yourself

[chunticakes]

Just because the Spurs play Johnson out of position doesn't mean he's a true power forward. :lol

[The Truth #6]

I think the answer to that question will be provided by the Spurs this summer. If they make a move to acquire a PF through a trade, or through the draft, then we will know that they are looking for alternatives.

If they do everything but add a credible PF to the team this summer, then yea, I'd have to say they like Keldon right where he is thank you very much.

An option that you mention as well as one that Chinook talked about elsewhere is drafting someone like Sochan specially, but could be Eason, someone that could cross match with him on defense. I don't know what will work there, but whatever happens this summer we will know the Spurs answer, beyond what we can debate in a forum it.


You’re articulating my point better than me. Yes, assuming we aren’t trading KJ, then one of those 3.5s would possibly be a good fit. But knowing Pop, he would much prefer Sochan to Eason because KJ + Eason is likely too chaotic/disorganized for his taste. But neither one is likely to start right away knowing how we roll, so yeah, lots of options.

[Chinook]

but according to you bballref is wrong because Hayward is listed as an SF there as is Keldon Johnson :lmao

you really shouldn‘t be the one talking about people making shitty arguments when you are defending one that you made yourself

I like the attempt to shift the goal posts, but the laughing emoji is making you look silly. BBRef isn't making a judgement from on high about a guy's "natural position". It was to counter your point that Johnson not playing center means he can't be a power-forward. That's the point that's ridiculous. The Spurs do not distinguish in their lineups, so BBRef isn't going by anything other than his draft position. 82games.com does have Johnson as having played at center last year, though he played way more at PF.

It's getting boring, man. You just keep repeating your point like it's obvious with nothing to back it up besides saying it again and laughing. The Spurs had all the cap in the world to bring in a PF. They brought in two and cut/traded them. They cut one they drafted. They traded for one and then traded him away. That's the reality. The fiction is trying to believe the Spurs are playing Johnson there out of desperation and that they pairing forward they've had with him has just happened to be another combo-forward or even a wing like Vassell, McDermott or DeRozan. It's sad that I have to keep saying this, because I don't want the Spurs to ride with Keldon there. But there's such a disconnect with reality shown by some posters. There's very little chance that if the Spurs traded for Hayward that he wouldn't be the other starting forward for the team. I guess at that point, folks will pretend that someone is twisting Pop's arm.

[poopbox]

Brown isn't their PF, but if he was, he's shorter than Hayward. Hayward is 6-8 in shoes. I clarify that because people will list guys barefoot but still compare them with shoed archetypes. If your classical concept of a PF is 6-9 or 6-10, then your modern concept is 6-8 or 6-9. Same player, but he'll just be listed shorted than he was previously.



Yeah, you're talking about the Miles Bridges that is a half-inch taller than Keldon and an inch-and-a-half shorter than Hayward.



We're talking about the Spurs salvaging on-court value for the salary dump proposed in the OP. We all know he's damaged goods. That you think teams wouldn't think to move him to a different position if that was the main reason for his decline (as opposed to age and injury), is just odd. We know teams had better wings than him and thus weren't willing to pay him. That's why my initial post suggested it wasn't a good move to get him.



I'd rather have neither, but that's besides the point.



This reeks of boomer talk. I doubt you actually want to get into the basketball theory of what PFs do on both sides of the court. I'm more imagining you're talking about size and rebounding more than sets and schemes. I don't particularly disagree with you wanting more from the spot. Pretty sure I've been talking about getting a bigger defensive forward for a while now. But that's not the same thing as saying Hayward and Johnson don't play the position -- because they do.



And neither team just moved him to SF which would apparently have solved the problem.


Boston had Tatum at the 3 so no they were not going to play him there either.

Brown was absolutely the power forward when Hayward was there. His minutes suffered the most. Unless you going to tell me how you said Hayward played the 4 exclusively, and brown minutes got jerked around the most, but that somehow means brown WASNT the 4?

It's not Keldon's height that is the issue. It's his inability to rebound at a high level or offer any type of rim protection whatsoever WHILE also not being good enough offensively to make up for that, like Demar was when was playing the 4 his last year here. McDermott has the same problem, also not a 4. Hayward has had the same problem in boston and charlotte, both teams were a sieve defensively when he was at the four. This team is going nowhere until we get a for with at least semi traditional wingspan and if not then athleticism to make up for it. I'd be fine with Collins who I think is more a natural 4 than a 5 anyway. We were better defensively with him and Poeltl on the floor than with Poeltl and anyone else that wasn't him at the 4.

What exactly in basketball terms makes you think Heyward is actually a 4? What exactly in basketball terms does Heyward do at the 4 that would make you say yeah that is beneficial to my team?

You've been talking about getting a bigger defensive forward while somehow thinking a guy who has had to leave 2 teams because they had better power forwards than him?

[Chinook]

Boston had Tatum at the 3 so no they were not going to play him there either.

Tatum has definitely played more power-forward than Brown. I thought you'd just gotten then confused and made a tongue-in-cheek remark, but I see you were serious ... and seriously wrong.


Brown was absolutely the power forward when Hayward was there. His minutes suffered the most. Unless you going to tell me how you said Hayward played the 4 exclusively, and brown minutes got jerked around the most, but that somehow means brown WASNT the 4?

Brown wasn't, isn't and has never been the power-forward for Boston. Are you confusing him with someone else? Horford and Grant Williams play PF for the Celtics nowadays.


It's not Keldon's height that is the issue. It's his inability to rebound at a high level or offer any type of rim protection whatsoever WHILE also not being good enough offensively to make up for that, like Demar was when was playing the 4 his last year here. McDermott has the same problem, also not a 4. Hayward has had the same problem in boston and charlotte, both teams were a sieve defensively when he was at the four. This team is going nowhere until we get a for with at least semi traditional wingspan and if not then athleticism to make up for it. I'd be fine with Collins who I think is more a natural 4 than a 5 anyway. We were better defensively with him and Poeltl on the floor than with Poeltl and anyone else that wasn't him at the 4.

Collins and Poeltl barely played together (someone said less than a minute the whole season). Are you sure you aren't talking about Landale? Collins did play some PF and had success according to 82G, but it was a tiny fraction of his minutes. His top-20 lineups by minutes have at C except the one with Landale, and I'm not sure SOB was actually the center of that unit.


What exactly in basketball terms makes you think Heyward is actually a 4? What exactly in basketball terms does Heyward do at the 4 that would make you say yeah that is beneficial to my team?

I think he can guard most PFs better than Johnson can and can give much-needed offensive versatility there. The Spurs need play-making, and Hayward can do that with enough size to cause mismatches. Whether you want to call him or Johnson the PF is irrelevant. But the two would fit together. Not ideally, but you're talking about the team getting a lotto pick for taking him. I'm willing to let them try to figure that out.


You've been talking about getting a bigger defensive forward while somehow thinking a guy who has had to leave 2 teams because they had better power forwards than him?

Yes. I can talk about multiple scenarios at once. In the same way I can talk about signing Lavine, trading for Collins, drafting guys at every position at 9 or 20, etc. There are multiple ways the team can go this off-season. My ideal outcome and how I'd want the Spurs to behave under certain conditions can differ dramatically. If this were a team that was a power-forward away from contending, I'd be much more exact in how I'd want them to proceed. But this is a win-later salvage trade, and looking at it with those eyes, it could be beneficial.

[spurraider21]

used to be a big mormon hayward fan... but thats a hefty contract to take on. if they take mcdermott back this could be appealing though

[TDomination]

good for hornets.
but for us, no thank you

[DPG21920]

used to be a big mormon hayward fan... but thats a hefty contract to take on. if they take mcdermott back this could be appealing though

Would only be if Sa can’t use the cap space for anything meaningful anyways

[TD 21]

I wouldn't be opposed to taking on Hayward depending on how much they'd be willing to attach. If it's just 15 for McDermott, forget it.

Since nobody asked, I'll answer a few of these questions . . .

- When Tatum and Brown have been the 3-4, the latter would typically defend the 4 if they had a post up game because of his superior strength.

- Like Johnson to McDermott, Bridges is more so the nominal 4 to Hayward, but they're really both 3.5's so who guards who is mostly matchup dependent.

[jjspur]

Heyward is getting older and slower plus he gets injured a lot, and for 30 million plus a trade kicker ? Not only no but hell no. He's no more a PF than Keldon yet he gets paid twice as much as Keldon will get with his next contract. As Nancy Reagan used to say "Just say No"

[RC_Drunkford]

I like the attempt to shift the goal posts, but the laughing emoji is making you look silly. BBRef isn't making a judgement from on high about a guy's "natural position". It was to counter your point that Johnson not playing center means he can't be a power-forward. That's the point that's ridiculous. The Spurs do not distinguish in their lineups, so BBRef isn't going by anything other than his draft position. 82games.com does have Johnson as having played at center last year, though he played way more at PF.

It's getting boring, man. You just keep repeating your point like it's obvious with nothing to back it up besides saying it again and laughing. The Spurs had all the cap in the world to bring in a PF. They brought in two and cut/traded them. They cut one they drafted. They traded for one and then traded him away. That's the reality. The fiction is trying to believe the Spurs are playing Johnson there out of desperation and that they pairing forward they've had with him has just happened to be another combo-forward or even a wing like Vassell, McDermott or DeRozan. It's sad that I have to keep saying this, because I don't want the Spurs to ride with Keldon there. But there's such a disconnect with reality shown by some posters. There's very little chance that if the Spurs traded for Hayward that he wouldn't be the other starting forward for the team. I guess at that point, folks will pretend that someone is twisting Pop's arm.

I just find it funny when you defend those takes that nobody in the world agrees with, but of course you must be right. Like when you said Gasol was better than Poeltl when Poeltl became a starter that season while Pau Gasol was almost out of the league. And you still think you were right to this day :lol

[KobesAchilles]

Yes, like "how do the Spurs get a top 3 pick in the draft"?
Hypothetically he is the perfect guy to put around DJ. He moves well off the ball. He is a secondary creator on offense that we don’t have. He has a high IQ and knows how to play. He is a very good 3 point shooter averaging close to 40% from deep on high volume. And when DJ is struggling we have someone who can score in a variety of ways. I would prefer him to be our 3rd best player instead of our second but beggars and choosers and all

Only problem is that he might be a little tiny smidge bit injury prone :lol

[Dex]

Hypothetically he is the perfect guy to put around DJ. He moves well off the ball. He is a secondary creator on offense that we don’t have. He has a high IQ and knows how to play. He is a very good 3 point shooter averaging close to 40% from deep on high volume. And when DJ is struggling we have someone who can score in a variety of ways. I would prefer him to be our 3rd best player instead of our second but beggars and choosers and all

Only problem is that he might be a little tiny smidge bit injury prone :lol

Also due $61.5M guaranteed over the next two years.

Even the young, healthy version of Hayward wasn't worth that :lol Definitely not for the old and busted version

[exstatic]

Hypothetically he is the perfect guy to put around DJ. He moves well off the ball. He is a secondary creator on offense that we don’t have. He has a high IQ and knows how to play. He is a very good 3 point shooter averaging close to 40% from deep on high volume. And when DJ is struggling we have someone who can score in a variety of ways. I would prefer him to be our 3rd best player instead of our second but beggars and choosers and all

Only problem is that he might be a little tiny smidge bit injury prone :lol

Just a bit. He's played 145 games in the last 3 seasons. One was the bubble, 70-ish games, one was 72 games, one was 82, so 220-ish games. Not a great track record. He's really never been the same since that horrible leg fracture his first game with Boston. He played 72/82 games the next year, but then fell off a cliff, health-wise.

[exstatic]

Also due $61.5M guaranteed over the next two years.

Even the young, healthy version of Hayward wasn't worth that :lol Definitely not for the old and busted version

In today's NBA economy? And healthy? I'd absolutely pay him that. He isn't even close to a healthy, durable player, though. I'd probably count on 100-110 games played over the two seasons.

[R. DeMurre]

Prime healthy Gordon Hayward was a very good player. In 2017, he averaged 21.9 ppg, 5.4 rpg, and 3.5 apg while shooting 40% from three, led his team in impact stats, and helped Utah beat CP3's Clippers in the playoffs. He was never quite the same after that brutal injury in his first game as a Celtic.

[slick'81]

In today's NBA economy? And healthy? I'd absolutely pay him that. He isn't even close to a healthy, durable player, though. I'd probably count on 100-110 games played over the two seasons.

a healthy hayward is a stud but does that even exist anymore

[mo7888]

If we like Brogdon there might be a 3 team deal to be had with indy getting Hayward (doesn't it feel like he should be there), us getting Brogdon and Charlotte getting Turner... #15 to Spurs, #13 and #20 to Indy, Doug to Charlotte... maybe not exactly that but some iteration..

Spurs draft-

9 Duren
15 Dieng/Eason
25 Porcida

Trade 38 to the Lakers for future 1st..

[Dex]

In today's NBA economy? And healthy? I'd absolutely pay him that. He isn't even close to a healthy, durable player, though. I'd probably count on 100-110 games played over the two seasons.

Gotta agree to disagree here. There are guys out there like Lillard, Paul, Butler, Davis, Embiid, etc. who aren't even making $31M a year (or are darn close).

Even at his best, I don't think Hayward was a player who could single-handedly propel a team deep into the playoffs.

If I'm a GM signing off on paying someone $30M+ per, they better be one of those guys... I wouldn't give it to someone who was (at best) a 2nd piece in his prime.

[Chinook]

Pretty sure everyone but Paul is making that much money. It's below the lowest max.

[mo7888]

Gotta agree to disagree here. There are guys out there like Lillard, Paul, Butler, Davis, Embiid, etc. who aren't even making $31M a year (or are darn close).

Even at his best, I don't think Hayward was a player who could single-handedly propel a team deep into the playoffs.

If I'm a GM signing off on paying someone $30M+ per, they better be one of those guys... I wouldn't give it to someone who was (at best) a 2nd piece in his prime.

Don't all of those guys make over $30M...some of them over $40M?

[poopbox]

Tatum has definitely played more power-forward than Brown. I thought you'd just gotten then confused and made a tongue-in-cheek remark, but I see you were serious ... and seriously wrong.



Brown wasn't, isn't and has never been the power-forward for Boston. Are you confusing him with someone else? Horford and Grant Williams play PF for the Celtics nowadays.



Collins and Poeltl barely played together (someone said less than a minute the whole season). Are you sure you aren't talking about Landale? Collins did play some PF and had success according to 82G, but it was a tiny fraction of his minutes. His top-20 lineups by minutes have at C except the one with Landale, and I'm not sure SOB was actually the center of that unit.



I think he can guard most PFs better than Johnson can and can give much-needed offensive versatility there. The Spurs need play-making, and Hayward can do that with enough size to cause mismatches. Whether you want to call him or Johnson the PF is irrelevant. But the two would fit together. Not ideally, but you're talking about the team getting a lotto pick for taking him. I'm willing to let them try to figure that out.



Yes. I can talk about multiple scenarios at once. In the same way I can talk about signing Lavine, trading for Collins, drafting guys at every position at 9 or 20, etc. There are multiple ways the team can go this off-season. My ideal outcome and how I'd want the Spurs to behave under certain conditions can differ dramatically. If this were a team that was a power-forward away from contending, I'd be much more exact in how I'd want them to proceed. But this is a win-later salvage trade, and looking at it with those eyes, it could be beneficial.

Grant Williams wasn't in Boston when Heyward was on the team :lol Al Horford was the center then. You know we are talking about Gordon Heyward when he was in Boston right :lol. That was years ago. Not 5 minutes ago.

Hayward can guard better at the PF than Keldon but that is because Keldon might be worst in the league at it. We shouldn't be sucking up a roster spot for a person who is a little better than arguably the worst in the league at defending power fowards. I don't think a lottery pick is worth that.

I don't think Keldon and Hayward fit together at all. On offense sure but on defense they would be every bit the disaster that Keldon and Doug are. Spurs are top 10 in scoring so points is not the problem, our defensive is, specifically with Keldon at the 4 or Keldon and Mcdermott on the floor together.

I am pretty sure that Collins played more than 1 minute with Poeltl the whole season. I know he played with Landale in one of the houston games. The point is that he offers what we should be looking for at the 4 position. Length, physical play around the rim on defense, willing to pick and roll and pick and pop. If we did nothing but let Collins start at power forward the upcoming season, I would be fine with that. We should be pursuing better alternatives, but I think we would be a better team with Collins at the 4 and Keldon at the 3 and McBuckets gone or coming off the bench for Keldon, than we were with McDermott and Keldon playing together.

[poopbox]

If we like Brogdon there might be a 3 team deal to be had with indy getting Hayward (doesn't it feel like he should be there), us getting Brogdon and Charlotte getting Turner... #15 to Spurs, #13 and #20 to Indy, Doug to Charlotte... maybe not exactly that but some iteration..

Spurs draft-

9 Duren
15 Dieng/Eason
25 Porcida

Trade 38 to the Lakers for future 1st..

Would have been all over Brogdon in the past but I want Devin to get as many minutes as possible cause I think he is going to have a break out season. I think Dejounte and Brogdon would be great for the 48 games Brogdon would play.

[Dex]

Don't all of those guys make over $30M...some of them over $40M?

Per https://hoopshype.com/lists/highest-paid-nba-players-2022-endorsements/:

Lillard: Salary: $35.4M

Paul: Salary: $27.8M

Butler: Salary: $32.5M

Davis: Salary: $31.8M

Booker: Salary: $28.5M

Embiid: Salary: $28.5M

Yes, those are 2022 numbers and yes, some are just over the $31M mark of Hayward.

Those are also all guys who have carried their teams to playoff runs, not guys who played 52 or less games through the last three seasons.

Maybe it's an exaggeration to say a healthy Hayward isn't worth that, but it's a moot point because Hayward will probably never be healthy again.

[KingKev]

Per https://hoopshype.com/lists/highest-paid-nba-players-2022-endorsements/:

Lillard: Salary: $35.4M

Paul: Salary: $27.8M

Butler: Salary: $32.5M

Davis: Salary: $31.8M

Booker: Salary: $28.5M

Embiid: Salary: $28.5M

Yes, those are 2022 numbers and yes, some are just over the $31M mark of Hayward.

Those are also all guys who have carried their teams to playoff runs, not guys who played 52 or less games through the last three seasons.

Maybe it's an exaggeration to say a healthy Hayward isn't worth that, but it's a moot point because Hayward will probably never be healthy again.

your numbers are WAYYYY off

[mo7888]

Per https://hoopshype.com/lists/highest-paid-nba-players-2022-endorsements/:

Lillard: Salary: $35.4M

Paul: Salary: $27.8M

Butler: Salary: $32.5M

Davis: Salary: $31.8M

Booker: Salary: $28.5M

Embiid: Salary: $28.5M

Yes, those are 2022 numbers and yes, some are just over the $31M mark of Hayward.

Those are also all guys who have carried their teams to playoff runs, not guys who played 52 or less games through the last three seasons.

Maybe it's an exaggeration to say a healthy Hayward isn't worth that, but it's a moot point because Hayward will probably never be healthy again.

Not close...Lillard is at $42 next season for instance..

[KingKev]

Don't all of those guys make over $30M...some of them over $40M?

Yes. Dex’s numbers are wrong.

[Dex]

OK I'M WRONG I GET IT LEAVE ME ALONE!!! :cry

[exstatic]

Gotta agree to disagree here. There are guys out there like Lillard, Paul, Butler, Davis, Embiid, etc. who aren't even making $31M a year (or are darn close).

Even at his best, I don't think Hayward was a player who could single-handedly propel a team deep into the playoffs.

If I'm a GM signing off on paying someone $30M+ per, they better be one of those guys... I wouldn't give it to someone who was (at best) a 2nd piece in his prime.

Damien Lillard is making $42Mnext year. CP3 made$41M last year, but took a pay cut to keep the Suns together. Jimmy Butler will make $37M next year. Anthony Davis will make $37Mnext year. Ebiodwill make $33M next year, but he following year his extension kicks in, and he will make $43M.

Are you really just not keeping up with NBA salaries? $30M is like what $10M was a decade ago.

[Dex]

Damien Lillard is making $42Mnext year. CP3 made$41M last year, but took a pay cut to keep the Suns together. Jimmy Butler will make $37M next year. Anthony Davis will make $37Mnext year. Ebiodwill make $33M next year, but he following year his extension kicks in, and he will make $43M.

Are you really just not keeping up with NBA salaries? $30M is like what $10M was a decade ago.

I literally was just pulling from that link I posted, so that's my bad for trusting HoopsHype and not doing my homework

Move along. Nothing to see here. These are not the droids you are looking for :lol

[Seventyniner]

Those are also all guys who have carried their teams to playoff runs, not guys who played 52 or less games through the last three seasons.

Maybe it's an exaggeration to say a healthy Hayward isn't worth that, but it's a moot point because Hayward will probably never be healthy again.

That's why Charlotte will have to attach assets to unload Hayward's contract. All those other guys would either never be traded or would require a significant haul in return.

OC has been collecting bad contracts in return for picks for a while. It's a viable medium-term strategy, though one I don't expect the Spurs to fully embrace given that Hayward still has 2 years left on the books.

[scott]

Who cares what position Hayward plays. If we aren't going to do anything with our cap space, might as well collect some more FRPs that can be useful to rebuild the team. I'd do Jak + Doug for Hayward + 13 + 15 if they'd do it. Five FRPs should give us the ammo we need to move up or trade for useful players.

If no one is going to sign here, this is the only way to make it happen.

[Chinook]

Grant Williams wasn't in Boston when Heyward was on the team :lol Al Horford was the center then. You know we are talking about Gordon Heyward when he was in Boston right :lol. That was years ago. Not 5 minutes ago.

Hayward can guard better at the PF than Keldon but that is because Keldon might be worst in the league at it. We shouldn't be sucking up a roster spot for a person who is a little better than arguably the worst in the league at defending power fowards. I don't think a lottery pick is worth that.

I don't think Keldon and Hayward fit together at all. On offense sure but on defense they would be every bit the disaster that Keldon and Doug are. Spurs are top 10 in scoring so points is not the problem, our defensive is, specifically with Keldon at the 4 or Keldon and Mcdermott on the floor together.

I am pretty sure that Collins played more than 1 minute with Poeltl the whole season. I know he played with Landale in one of the houston games. The point is that he offers what we should be looking for at the 4 position. Length, physical play around the rim on defense, willing to pick and roll and pick and pop. If we did nothing but let Collins start at power forward the upcoming season, I would be fine with that. We should be pursuing better alternatives, but I think we would be a better team with Collins at the 4 and Keldon at the 3 and McBuckets gone or coming off the bench for Keldon, than we were with McDermott and Keldon playing together.

Williams and Hayward did play together, and Brown wasn't the PF ever. He's like Danny Green's size. Tatum has played a ton of PF and will continue to do so. Brown never replaced Hayward. Grant Williams and Horford did. Brown and Tatum always started.

Hayward is better than McDermott and way better than Collins at PF. He didn't play a lot of minutes there, and when he "technically" did, it was in cases like with Landale where he was the de facto center. He doesn't have PF mobility or a perimeter game. He's a bit more modern but worse overall center than Poeltl. Thinking that teams play two centers is just not keeping with the times. Some teams try it for a stretch if they can get the shooting and mobility down, but modern PFs are wings. Protecting the rim is part of defense, but perimeter defense is also part, and the Spurs would be really bad with Keldon and Zach as forwards and Murray and Vassell as point-of-attack defenders.

[RC_Drunkford]

If we like Brogdon there might be a 3 team deal to be had with indy getting Hayward (doesn't it feel like he should be there), us getting Brogdon and Charlotte getting Turner... #15 to Spurs, #13 and #20 to Indy, Doug to Charlotte... maybe not exactly that but some iteration..

Spurs draft-

9 Duren
15 Dieng/Eason
25 Porcida

Trade 38 to the Lakers for future 1st..

If the Spurs trade for Brogdon, re-route him to the Hawks for John Collins. The Hawks are looking for exactly that type of player.

[exstatic]

Who cares what position Hayward plays. If we aren't going to do anything with our cap space, might as well collect some more FRPs that can be useful to rebuild the team. I'd do Jak + Doug for Hayward + 13 + 15 if they'd do it. Five FRPs should give us the ammo we need to move up or trade for useful players.

If no one is going to sign here, this is the only way to make it happen.

The thing is, you have to do a Hayward trade during the draft, and that slams the door shut on even a small or a couple of small FA signings. Door shut.

[tmtcsc]

Hayward made the Spurs look like children in 1 game this year.

Yeah he did. Had 40 something by the 3rd quarter I think. Sat for most of the 4th in a laugher.

[JR3]

Hard pass on Hayward. Unless we just want to tank and we need to pay somebody…

[XDT76]

he‘s playing PF cause we don’t have one. Even you should know that. Your argument is incredibly stupid. Just cause he plays out of position doesn‘t mean that that‘s his natural position. As a matter of fact, when teams play smallball the PF plays Center and has to somewhat protect the rim. Have you ever seen Hayward or Keldon Johnson play smallball 5?

According to your logic Derrick White is an SG and Nic Batum is a C.

KJ did that once this year and I nearly vomitted blood.