Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

by **bobheckler** Wed Jul 24, 2019 10:55 am

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/report-celtics-quickly-shot-down-232310425.html

Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Justin Leger, NBC Sports Boston

14 hours ago

As Gordon Hayward struggled to return to form last season following his catastrophic ankle injury, some wondered whether the Celtics could look to move him and dump salary.

Hayward was supposed to star alongside Kyrie Irving after the C's signed him to a max contract in 2017, but obviously, things didn't go as planned. Irving apparently mulled his exit from Boston in December of last year and when it became evident he was on his way out, teams checked in about Hayward's potential availability in a deal.

But even amid what was a letdown season for Hayward and the C's, Boston was unwilling to part ways with the 29-year-old, according to one opposing NBA executive.

"After it was clear Kyrie [Irving] was leaving, I told our owner that we could maybe grab Hayward for nothing if Boston tore it down," the executive told Keith Smith of SB Nation's Celtics Blog. "He's owed a lot of money, but only a couple of years left. We made a call, but it got shut down quickly. I think Danny [Ainge] and Brad [Stevens] know what they have in Hayward for this year and going forward. He's going to be really good again."

It's clear the Celtics weren't discouraged by Irving's departure and the chemistry issues that lingered throughout the 2018-19 campaign. Smith included quotes from other opposing NBA executives, who called the C's asking price for Jayson Tatum "insane" and said Boston shot down an offer for Jaylen Brown as well. President of Basketball Operations Danny Ainge obviously believes in the core he put in place and has Hayward, Tatum, and Brown each at the center of the plan going forward.

With the rocky season behind them, the Celtics will have Kemba Walker and Enes Kanter in addition to that core as they look to add some much-needed positivity to the equation.

bob
MY NOTE: What this tells me is that Danny is not in rebuild mode. It doesn't necessarily mean that Hayward will be back to his old form, although we all hope he is, but it does mean that Danny wasn't going to just do a salary dump so he could start fresh. That's a good thing. A big year for Jayson, a big year for Jaylen and a big year for Gordon. In a wing-oriented league if those 3 players can deliver we could be pretty good even without taking Kemba and Enes into account.

.

by **mrkleen09** Wed Jul 24, 2019 11:21 am

bobheckler wrote:[b]MY NOTE: What this tells me is that Danny is not in rebuild mode.

Exactly.

by **dboss** Wed Jul 24, 2019 11:37 am

Bob

When 5 of your top 9 players leave the team including 3 starters and you replace them that is in fact a rebuild. Think of it as rebuilding an engine.

The Celtics still have high hopes for GH because he is a perfect fit on offense. He struggled to overcome the mental challenges of his 2017 injury. He was not, in my opinion, 100% recovered physically. We saw some games where he was nimble and quick but we saw a lot of games where he was stiff and slow. I think that reflected the physical challenge of playing 3 to 4 times per week and being able to maintain a high level of productivity. As he stated, getting to the rim opened up his game offensively and when he was unable to get to and finish at the rim he was less effective on offense. I thought his defense was pretty damn good.

The key for Hayward to become something closer to the allstar of 2016-17 will be his physical profile. I do not expect him to return to a 22 PPG guy. There are so many players on this team that need their fair share of opportunities. We just need him to make the most of his opportunities and facilitate for his teammates. He may be the most unselfish player on this team. We do not expect him to be everything. Gordon has NEVER been a high volume shooter. As a matter of fact the most FGA's he has taken in any one season was 15.8. Get him 14 FGA per game and he will get you at least 18 points. If he can get to the rim (and to the line) we will have a very productive scorer.

by **mrkleen09** Wed Jul 24, 2019 12:00 pm

dboss wrote:Bob

When 5 of your top 9 players leave the team including 3 starters and you replace them that is in fact a rebuild. Think of it as rebuilding an engine.

You act like players leaving was the end of the story. You conveniently left out all the players added, who were in fact likely an upgrade.

It is nothing like an rebuilding an engine, in that example the act of taking apart an engine - even if you are improving the engine, is defined as a rebuild. In the context of sport - rebuilding means you are taking a step back and restarting the process of building a team set to compete.

Are the Lakers in a rebuild? They dumped most of their team to get their hands on Anthony Davis. Are the Clippers in a rebuild?

Poor analogy - set to support your narrative. Clearly Danny Ainge disagrees with you and he would know best.

by **Shamrock1000** Wed Jul 24, 2019 12:15 pm

Also, I am sure any team willing to take on Gordon's contract would be asking for picks/talent to justify taking on that salary. Danny did the right thing - unless he is getting a star back, he should hold onto his assets. And of course, maybe the organization knows GH is closer to his old self.....

by **RosalieTCeltics** Wed Jul 24, 2019 1:13 pm

Here I go.....It is only July....but I will predict Gordon Hayward will become one of the most important players on this team, if not the most important. He ability to do so many things that are vital to the growth of this team. He will become a lead facilitator, a rebounder, and a shooter.
He will be what these young guys needed last year, a steadying force. He may not be loud, over bearing but he will be a guiding force. With the loss (?) I use that lightly, of Kyrie Irving who was supposed to be the leader of this team, it became apparent to me that he was no more a leader than that kid on the playground who always wanted the ball and told everyone to watch him.
Some may disagree with me on my theory, but I believe we are all going to be pleasantly surprised and I WILL BE THRILLED!!! Letting him go to another team would be a big mistake. Let's hope I am right.

by **dbrown4** Wed Jul 24, 2019 1:22 pm

I want what Rosalie is having!! I have been informed my League Pass is already renewing!! My beautiful wife asked me if I wanted to renew!

db

by **gyso** Wed Jul 24, 2019 2:51 pm

In today's NBA, there is a good amount of roster change from season to season. That's what I see here.

A rebuild is when veteran rotational players are dumped for draft picks. A team may also take on high salary players for these veterans, as long as there are also draft picks coming in.

I don't see any of this. This is more of a retool than a rebuild, IMO.

gyso

by **dboss** Wed Jul 24, 2019 4:20 pm

gyso wrote:In today's NBA, there is a good amount of roster change from season to season. That's what I see here.

A rebuild is when veteran rotational players are dumped for draft picks. A team may also take on high salary players for these veterans, as long as there are also draft picks coming in.

I don't see any of this. This is more of a retool than a rebuild, IMO.

gyso

gyso and Kleen

I used the term rebuild and you guys can agree or disagree with that characterization. I understand why referring the latest round of roster changes may not be considered a rebuild because the Celtics have maintained their young core and they are very talented.

I see an attempt to define more specifically what a rebuild is. Gyso I do not agree with your definition of rebuild as you only focus on veteran rotation players. I believe rebuilding is a more singular concept but the process to rebuild has more layers to it. Trades, draft picks and free agency are the only ways a team can build or rebuild. All 3 of those components remains at the center of what this team is today. Danny Ainge has in fact used all three of these tools to rebuild the team to its' current state.

This last move by Danny looks something less than a complete rebuild but a lot more than simply retooling the team. The most changes we have seen to the starting unit was 2017-18 (4 changes) The year before that there was one change (Al Horford) And the year before that 2 changes and the year before that 2 changes.

Kleen, I think both the Lakers and the Clippers have rebuilt their teams. Both of those teams have been rebuilding for a few years.

When I think of a (complete) rebuild I think of a team that is really bad with major deficiencies up and down their roster and that team embarks on a journey to replace the roster with better quality talent. We know that process takes many years to complete. I thought going into the 2017 season that the team was rebuilt and required only minor additions. I felt the same way going into 2018. Going into 2019 I think the team will be better because it has addressed a few major weaknesses but there are still a lot of unknowns. In many respects, a team has to rebuild their roster to some extent every single year or as gyso points out "a good amount of roster change from season to season"

by **kdp59** Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:58 am

dboss ,

I agree with you that we are really talking about semantics here. Some see the word "rebuild" and think of a teardown of a team, while others may see the word as any major changes to a givens team roster.

I am with you that the word I use is rebuild, I think of it a rebuild on the fly.

but honestly Ainge stayed BELOW the tax line this year for a reason. Some here refuse to admit I think, but any NBA team that is below the tax line does NOT see themselves as a team ready to compete for a title.

what I see is the opposite any team that competes for a title WILL be a tax paying team.

Losing Horford, Irving , Morris, Baynes and Rozier and replacing them with Walker, Kanter, Poitier, Langford and Grant W. by any balanced accounting is an over all loss of quality players (on paper at least). Now we all HOPE that in time the moves can and will work out. But to not see the losses for what they are seems wishful thinking at best, IMO.

so I agree 100% that this is an obvious rebuild on the fly by Ainge.

by **dboss** Thu Jul 25, 2019 11:24 am

kdp59 wrote:dboss ,

I agree with you that we are really talking about semantics here. Some see the word "rebuild" and think of a teardown of a team, while others may see the word as any major changes to a givens team roster.

I am with you that the word I use is rebuild, I think of it a rebuild on the fly.

but honestly Ainge stayed BELOW the tax line this year for a reason. Some here refuse to admit I think, but any NBA team that is below the tax line does NOT see themselves as a team ready to compete for a title.

what I see is the opposite any team that competes for a title WILL be a tax paying team.

Losing Horford, Irving , Morris, Baynes and Rozier and replacing them with Walker, Kanter, Poitier, Langford and Grant W. by any balanced accounting is an over all loss of quality players (on paper at least). Now we all HOPE that in time the moves can and will work out. But to not see the losses for what they are seems wishful thinking at best, IMO.

so I agree 100% that this is an obvious rebuild on the fly by Ainge.

KDP59

I think the owners were not willing to pay the tax for a team that in many respects is in transition. Just think if they had given Horford what he wanted and Kyrie decided to stay. They would have 3 really big contracts sucking up most of the CAP. Sometimes things happen for a reason. I do not see how they could have kept 3 max players and then pay Brown and then Tatum down the road.

Danny has an affinity for high scoring PG's (IT, KI and now KW)

The new look Boston Celtics do in fact look very different on paper especially the frontcourt.

The two biggest challenges and unknowns for me as a fan, centers around the guy in the middle as well as the entire center rotation. The impact of this group on both offense and defense may very well determine how successful this team is. In many respects this team may look like and play like a more traditional team that relies on a post offense. The wings will continue to spread the floor and there are more than enough players to use some small ball strategies.

My expectations are tempered by the uncertainty associated with major changes to the roster.

Last year a top finish seemed possible but this coming season a top 4 seed in the East would be great.

by **Matty** Thu Jul 25, 2019 11:36 am

On this whole rebuild debate\discussion.. I'm with you fellers.

by **mrkleen09** Thu Jul 25, 2019 12:18 pm

kdp59 wrote:dboss ,

I agree with you that we are really talking about semantics here. Some see the word "rebuild" and think of a teardown of a team, while others may see the word as any major changes to a givens team roster.

I am with you that the word I use is rebuild, I think of it a rebuild on the fly.

but honestly Ainge stayed BELOW the tax line this year for a reason. Some here refuse to admit I think, but any NBA team that is below the tax line does NOT see themselves as a team ready to compete for a title.

what I see is the opposite any team that competes for a title WILL be a tax paying team.

Losing Horford, Irving , Morris, Baynes and Rozier and replacing them with Walker, Kanter, Poitier, Langford and Grant W. by any balanced accounting is an over all loss of quality players (on paper at least). Now we all HOPE that in time the moves can and will work out. But to not see the losses for what they are seems wishful thinking at best, IMO.

so I agree 100% that this is an obvious rebuild on the fly by Ainge.

Moving The Goal Post Again

Now you want to walk back the Celtics are clearly in a rebuilding phase and call it a "rebuild on the fly" Cool

By that weak definition, nearly every team that doesnt win the title (and some that do) are in a rebuild every summer.

Given the state of the NBA in any given year, there are only a few legit title contenders. This year, with all the movement - there are more than usual. But to suggest you are either a title contender or rebuilding, shows a very simplistic view of the field. Any team that is competing for home court in the playoffs in their conference is not rebuilding.

Using luxury tax as a measure of a team's intent is so flawed as to be laughable. With salary cap rules - the only way for a team to go into the luxury tax is when paying (or overpaying as the case may be) for THEIR OWN players. So when you somewhat unexpectedly lose two stars - you have no opportunity to go into the luxury tax when replacing those guys.

The only way for the Celtics to get into the luxury tax this year - would be to resign Jaylen Brown and Jayson Tatum early, which would be foolish.

In the case of the 2019-20 Celtics - not exceeding the luxury tax means nothing to them considering themselves contenders, it is simple math.

In addition - by falling beneath the Luxury Tax this year, the Celtics avoid the repeater tax - which is the greater concern.

by **NYCelt** Thu Jul 25, 2019 12:39 pm

Matty wrote:On this whole rebuild debate\discussion.. I'm with you fellers.

Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward Thumbs16

by **dboss** Thu Jul 25, 2019 1:18 pm

Kleen

"The only way for the Celtics to get into the luxury tax this year - would be to resign Jaylen Brown and Jayson Tatum early, which would be foolish. "

Kleen The Celtics could ink a new contract for Brown but it would NOT impact the tax this year. The new contract would not kick in until the 2020-21 season.

I think rebuild on the fly is actually a good description of what has transpired.

The Celtics had interest in keeping the team in place.

I think AH left because he got a better offer from Philly and Danny moved Rozier. I think Boston had a certain figure in their mind and did not want to go much higher. They still liked Morris. They signed Baynes...and then he was traded to open up CAP space. I also think Danny would have resigned Kyrie if Kyrie wanted to stay.

The tax definitely played a part in all of this. Why pay a tax for a team that is still not a top 4 ball club. I do not think this was planned but once things started, Boston took full advantage of a opportunity to stay below the tax line.

Overall Danny did a great job rebuilding his roster and used all tools available to make that happen (Draft, trades and free agency signings)

by **Shamrock1000** Thu Jul 25, 2019 1:31 pm

Both Kleen and Dboss make good points, and seem to be arguing more about the definition of the word "rebuild". I would argue that Ainge put together a multi-layered rebuild. On one level, it would certainly seem it was initially intended to be centered on Al, Kyrie, and Gordon. Obviously, that layer has been stripped away. Fortunately, there was another layer to the rebuild, centered around the youth, both as tangible players and as assets. Given the defections of Kyrie and Al, Danny had no choice to but to ditch the GH-KI-AH dream and pivot in a new direction. Thanks to the team he had built and the state of the finances, he was able to replace KI and AH with Kemba and Enes. To me, this actually seems like a good thing. I don't think we were winning a title with GH-KI-AH as the core. The chemistry was just not there, AH is on the decline, and it is not clear how close GH will get to his previous peak. Presumably Danny would have signed KI if he could have, brought back Al, and ran it back again, but maybe it is better to have moved on from that core.

by **NYCelt** Thu Jul 25, 2019 4:15 pm

Shamrock1000 wrote:Both Kleen and Dboss make good points, and seem to be arguing more about the definition of the word "rebuild".

Exactly.

by **dboss** Thu Jul 25, 2019 6:01 pm

Shamrock1000 wrote:Both Kleen and Dboss make good points, and seem to be arguing more about the definition of the word "rebuild". I would argue that Ainge put together a multi-layered rebuild. On one level, it would certainly seem it was initially intended to be centered on Al, Kyrie, and Gordon. Obviously, that layer has been stripped away. Fortunately, there was another layer to the rebuild, centered around the youth, both as tangible players and as assets. Given the defections of Kyrie and Al, Danny had no choice to but to ditch the GH-KI-AH dream and pivot in a new direction. Thanks to the team he had built and the state of the finances, he was able to replace KI and AH with Kemba and Enes. To me, this actually seems like a good thing. I don't think we were winning a title with GH-KI-AH as the core. The chemistry was just not there, AH is on the decline, and it is not clear how close GH will get to his previous peak. Presumably Danny would have signed KI if he could have, brought back Al, and ran it back again, but maybe it is better to have moved on from that core.

Rock you got it

I agree 100% with you.

I give Danny high marks for having the ability to quickly execute alternative plans for the roster. The underlying ability to make this happen definitely includes all the draft picks that he had.

The Celtics lost 5 top rotation guys including 3 starters but the NBA has them still ranked as a top 8 team. Next year Boston will be armed with 3 first rounders.

The Celtics have completed a nice makeover. The guys that are still here want to be here. The young studs (J + J) do not have to look over their shoulders or try to justify their existence. A happy team wins games.

Celtics fans will need to be patient because Brad has a lot of new pieces to calibrate into the team. I wish that Brad would let the team vote on a captain and my choice is Marcus Smart, the longest tenured player on the team.

Notice how I substituted makeover for rebuild.

A lot has to happen for this team to be a major player and that begins on the defensive side of the ball.

by **cowens/oldschool** Sun Jul 28, 2019 10:12 am

kdp59 wrote:dboss ,

I agree with you that we are really talking about semantics here. Some see the word "rebuild" and think of a teardown of a team, while others may see the word as any major changes to a givens team roster.

I am with you that the word I use is rebuild, I think of it a rebuild on the fly.

but honestly Ainge stayed BELOW the tax line this year for a reason. Some here refuse to admit I think, but any NBA team that is below the tax line does NOT see themselves as a team ready to compete for a title.

what I see is the opposite any team that competes for a title WILL be a tax paying team.

Losing Horford, Irving , Morris, Baynes and Rozier and replacing them with Walker, Kanter, Poitier, Langford and Grant W. by any balanced accounting is an over all loss of quality players (on paper at least). Now we all HOPE that in time the moves can and will work out. But to not see the losses for what they are seems wishful thinking at best, IMO.

so I agree 100% that this is an obvious rebuild on the fly by Ainge.

I just found this thread and disagree that by any balanced accounting this is an overall loss of quality players, Horford is on the downside, he’s only going to be a future part time player, Rozier turned to garbage, I couldn’t wait for Morris to leave town, loved Baynes toughness, but at 33 he also was injury prone. Everything I’m reading about Poirer, tells me he’s athletic and can rebound and bang, Kantor for 5 mill is a steal and I love this draft class. Just like we improved in 18 with a whole new cast of players, I like this new cast better, Walker has never played with this kind of talent, I have faith Romeo can play, Edwards can light it up, going to enjoy growth of RW, 2 J’s. This is gonna be a much better, deeper team that can run and board, if Bucks falter at all, we will be right there.

by **kdp59** Sun Jul 28, 2019 10:42 am

cowens/oldschool wrote:
kdp59 wrote:dboss ,

I agree with you that we are really talking about semantics here. Some see the word "rebuild" and think of a teardown of a team, while others may see the word as any major changes to a givens team roster.

I am with you that the word I use is rebuild, I think of it a rebuild on the fly.

but honestly Ainge stayed BELOW the tax line this year for a reason. Some here refuse to admit I think, but any NBA team that is below the tax line does NOT see themselves as a team ready to compete for a title.

what I see is the opposite any team that competes for a title WILL be a tax paying team.

Losing Horford, Irving , Morris, Baynes and Rozier and replacing them with Walker, Kanter, Poitier, Langford and Grant W. by any balanced accounting is an over all loss of quality players (on paper at least). Now we all HOPE that in time the moves can and will work out. But to not see the losses for what they are seems wishful thinking at best, IMO.

so I agree 100% that this is an obvious rebuild on the fly by Ainge.
I just found this thread and disagree that by any balanced accounting this is an overall loss of quality players, Horford is on the downside, he’s only going to be a future part time player, Rozier turned to garbage, I couldn’t wait for Morris to leave town, loved Baynes toughness, but at 33 he also was injury prone. Everything I’m reading about Poirer, tells me he’s athletic and can rebound and bang, Kantor for 5 mill is a steal and I love this draft class. Just like we improved in 18 with a whole new cast of players, I like this new cast better, Walker has never played with this kind of talent, I have faith Romeo can play, Edwards can light it up, going to enjoy growth of RW, 2 J’s. This is gonna be a much better, deeper team that can run and board, if Bucks falter at all, we will be right there.

lots of wishful thinking and hope there to me. Again I am talking about this next season and not future years. In five years from now maybe all the new players will be lights out better than each one than left. But I will try to breakdown why I feel that for NOW, it is obvious that our talent level is less than what we had at this time last year.

Irving to Walker- Irving has more talent we can all admit that I hope, Walker is also two years older. But Walker should be a much better fit with our younger players on this team so I will give this an overall PLUS for us.

Horford to Kanter- NO comparison at all, Horford has been a much better player than Kanter so far. Maybe Horford is done and will be nothing more than a back up now and maybe Kanter will learn to play defense at age 27. I 'm not buying that Kanter is an upgrade over over Horford , sorry. Overall MINUS for us.

Morris to Grant Williams- Morris is an eight year NBA vet who has started 292 NBA games over his career. 26.5min, 11.5 pt, 4.6 reb ,1.5 assist on 36% career 3 pt shooting. Call me when the #22 pick starts his FIRST NBA game please. Overall MINUS for us (with the hope it will be a wash in later years)

Baynes to Poirtier- Baynes again is a 7 year NBA backup who's averaged 15 min per game over his NBA career. Poirtier is a 6 year European pro player, who has never been drafted or had an NBA contract before. He also signed here for VET MINIMUM, hardly a deal for someone who is expected to be a key NBA player. sorry, this too is a MINUS for us this year.

Rozier to Langford and Edwards- While I don't hate Rozier like most here do, I do think there is a real possibility that Edwards may be able to replace Rozier enough to make it a WASH this year. Langford may become a better player in time then either one, though I really expect this year to be a wasted/learning one similar to Avery Bradley's first year here.

so, that said I see three positions that we downgraded this year, one that we upgraded and one that may be a wash.

to me that is a less talented team as we sit right now.

by **cowens/oldschool** Sun Jul 28, 2019 10:55 am

Al was I believe at 13 and 7 last year, I see Kantor as a 15-10 guy, normal numbers that he can put up, good point 27 - 33 age difference, you made my point. Did you want to give Al 100 mill for 4 years? Morris is a tweener, he can score, but at a contending level, is not there defensively at all. I would much rather go with a committee of Theis, RW and G Will. Poirer is an X factor, he could be that physical big we are looking for, again at 33 how much durability does Baynes have left and I love Baynes game? But we had to make a move with a younger physical piece. I would take potential of Romeo and Edwards over Rozier in a heartbeat.

by **cowens/oldschool** Sun Jul 28, 2019 11:01 am

Will be nice to have an old school big like Kantor that can score in the paint and rebound, 2 things Al was not particularly good at....

by **kdp59** Sun Jul 28, 2019 11:03 am

cowens/oldschool wrote:Al was I believe at 13 and 7 last year, I see Kantor as a 15-10 guy, normal numbers that he can put up, good point 27 - 33 age difference, you made my point. Did you want to give Al 100 mill for 4 years? Morris is a tweener, he can score, but at a contending level, is not there defensively at all. I would much rather go with a committee of Theis, RW and G Will. Poirer is an X factor, he could be that physical big we are looking for, again at 33 how much durability does Baynes have left and I love Baynes game? But we had to make a move with a younger physical piece. I would take potential of Romeo and Edwards over Rozier in a heartbeat.

the age issue may well play out sooner than I expect for sure , Kanter could become a marginal NBA all-star lever player (as Horford has been for us in the past), Poirtier may be the first pro big man from Europe who went undrafted in the past 10-15 years to become a key NBA player perhaps those things happen.

obviously by looking at the predicted wins thread here I am well in the minority on this and I do understand that, just showing another perspective here that is not the norm, perhaps.

by **cowens/oldschool** Sun Jul 28, 2019 11:04 am

You know Belichek would agree with these moves....

by **cowens/oldschool** Sun Jul 28, 2019 11:06 am

Healthy discussion kdp59, I’m enjoying it.

by Sponsored content

Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Re: Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Re: Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Re: Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Re: Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Re: Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Re: Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Re: Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Re: Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Re: Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Re: Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Re: Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Re: Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Re: Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Re: Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Re: Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Re: Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Re: Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Re: Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Re: Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Re: Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Re: Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Re: Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Re: Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Re: Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

Re: Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward