Interesting how the use of the pick changes things. This would be about Hayward as much as the assets Boston might send back. But I wonder why the draft changed things.
Knicksfan wrote:Interesting how the use of the pick changes things. This would be about Hayward as much as the assets Boston might send back. But I wonder why the draft changed things.
It's the other way around. Boston is looking to receive assets.
I’m interested if we can also get someone else like VanVleet too, don’t want us to only add Hayward.
We’ll have a better idea at 5pm, as he has to decide whether to opt in or out. Either way I think Boston has to deal him.
Guessing time is running out for him to pick up his player option or become a FA. I thought the idea of the sign and trade is for him to go to a team of his choice that does not have the cap space. Why would the Knicks give up assets unless they are trying to move Randle and have cap for a second FA.
Hayward is good. I mean at some point we need to get some better players
Rookie wrote:Guessing time is running out for him to pick up his player option or become a FA. I thought the idea of the sign and trade is for him to go to a team of his choice that does not have the cap space. Why would the Knicks give up assets unless they are trying to move Randle and have cap for a second FA.
Why opt out of 34 mill.
Im sure they held on to see if they could have used him in a trade to move up. The knicks are definitely not using 34 mil on one player, so it would have to be a Randle trade, and does Randle fit with Tatum....maybe.
knicks1248 wrote:Rookie wrote:Guessing time is running out for him to pick up his player option or become a FA. I thought the idea of the sign and trade is for him to go to a team of his choice that does not have the cap space. Why would the Knicks give up assets unless they are trying to move Randle and have cap for a second FA.
Why opt out of 34 mill.
Im sure they held on to see if they could have used him in a trade to move up. The knicks are definitely not using 34 mil on one player, so it would have to be a Randle trade, and does Randle fit with Tatum....maybe.
He's kind of pissed at Ainge. He wants out and will take less money over multiple years.
knicks1248 wrote:Rookie wrote:Guessing time is running out for him to pick up his player option or become a FA. I thought the idea of the sign and trade is for him to go to a team of his choice that does not have the cap space. Why would the Knicks give up assets unless they are trying to move Randle and have cap for a second FA.
Why opt out of 34 mill.
Im sure they held on to see if they could have used him in a trade to move up. The knicks are definitely not using 34 mil on one player, so it would have to be a Randle trade, and does Randle fit with Tatum....maybe.
He wants a multi year deal. So basically opting out of 34m for multi yearn 120m plus/minus. 30 y.o. Coming off an injury for a rebuilding team seems wrong direction to me but I do like his game and he would make us a better team
knicks1248 wrote:Rookie wrote:Guessing time is running out for him to pick up his player option or become a FA. I thought the idea of the sign and trade is for him to go to a team of his choice that does not have the cap space. Why would the Knicks give up assets unless they are trying to move Randle and have cap for a second FA.
Why opt out of 34 mill.
Im sure they held on to see if they could have used him in a trade to move up. The knicks are definitely not using 34 mil on one player, so it would have to be a Randle trade, and does Randle fit with Tatum....maybe.
I read he might feel a bit snake bit about his time in Boston, plus wasn’t happy he’d been relegated to the 4th option on offense. Maybe just wants a fresh start and more prominent role
Hayward at SF, with Knox coming off the bench. Would be a good situation.
BOOM! Celtics might lose him for nothing, not even a trae exemption (unless he wants to go to a contender and needs a sign and trade)
smackeddog wrote:knicks1248 wrote:Rookie wrote:Guessing time is running out for him to pick up his player option or become a FA. I thought the idea of the sign and trade is for him to go to a team of his choice that does not have the cap space. Why would the Knicks give up assets unless they are trying to move Randle and have cap for a second FA.
Why opt out of 34 mill.
Im sure they held on to see if they could have used him in a trade to move up. The knicks are definitely not using 34 mil on one player, so it would have to be a Randle trade, and does Randle fit with Tatum....maybe.
I read he might feel a bit snake bit about his time in Boston, plus wasn’t happy he’d been relegated to the 4th option on offense. Maybe just wants a fresh start and more prominent role
Also heard he's all in feelings because, surprise, Ainge has been shopping him around. I don't know much about him, but he might be more high maintenance than we assumed.
BigDaddyG wrote:Knicksfan wrote:Interesting how the use of the pick changes things. This would be about Hayward as much as the assets Boston might send back. But I wonder why the draft changed things.
It's the other way around. Boston is looking to receive assets.
They don't need to be included. If he opts out he would be an unrestricted free agent correct?
smackeddog wrote:BOOM! Celtics might lose him for nothing, not even a trae exemption (unless he wants to go to a contender and needs a sign and trade)
Coincidence that it happens after we clear out all that cap space?
newyorknewyork wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:Knicksfan wrote:Interesting how the use of the pick changes things. This would be about Hayward as much as the assets Boston might send back. But I wonder why the draft changed things.
It's the other way around. Boston is looking to receive assets.
They don't need to be included. If he opts out he would be an unrestricted free agent correct?
Yeah, but Boston is about to enter cap he'll. Trading Gordon was a way to fill out the roster.
smackeddog wrote:BOOM! Celtics might lose him for nothing, not even a trae exemption (unless he wants to go to a contender and needs a sign and trade)
Fair deal would be 3 years 20-24mil per imo. Hawks are also interested though but will they pay while also needing to pay Collins.
newyorknewyork wrote:smackeddog wrote:BOOM! Celtics might lose him for nothing, not even a trae exemption (unless he wants to go to a contender and needs a sign and trade)
Fair deal would be 3 years 20-24mil per imo. Hawks are also interested though but will they pay while also needing to pay Collins.
I've heard all sorts of things regarding Collins. One day I hear they're shopping him, the next day I hear he's part of their core.
BigDaddyG wrote:newyorknewyork wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:Knicksfan wrote:Interesting how the use of the pick changes things. This would be about Hayward as much as the assets Boston might send back. But I wonder why the draft changed things.
It's the other way around. Boston is looking to receive assets.
They don't need to be included. If he opts out he would be an unrestricted free agent correct?
Yeah, but Boston is about to enter cap he'll. Trading Gordon was a way to fill out the roster.
Yep, that’s the problem for the Celtics, they will be capped out so can’t replace him or his salary- if they’d traded him (or if they manage a sign and trade then at bleats they can get a trade exemption to use)
I can’t believe he turned that money down.
