Writer Panel: Jazz Nation Prepares for a Reunion With Hayward

Hayward (right) prepares to take on his former teammates. (Melissa Majchrzak via utahjazz.com)

Gordon Hayward arrived in Utah in 2010 a promising, wiry 20-year-old and grew into an NBA All-Star by the time he left the team as a free agent in 2017. On Friday, he will play his first game ever against the team that drafted and developed him. Our writer panel weighs in on the environment they expect in Friday’s nationally televised Jazz-Celtics matchup, how the game will go, and how fans will react to Jazzman-turned-Celtic.

Emotions are still high following Hayward’s 2017 departure from the Jazz. What type of reaction do you think he’ll get from fans in Utah on Friday night?

Thatcher Olson: There are going to be boos, and a lot of them. The reaction won’t be as strong as it would have been last year, but fans are dying to get emotion out, and it will not be a warm reception for Gordon.

Laura Thompson: I expect a few cheers, but mostly booing. While Hayward’s choice to leave for Boston made a lot of logical sense at the time, the cowardly way in which he and his team handled it will make this situation sting and stay volatile longer than it would’ve been otherwise. My dream reaction would be silence — indifference, even.

Steve Godfrey: If you live in Utah, you categorize Jazz fans as eccentric, passionate, and loyal. Outside of Utah, the words become vicious, mean, and bitter. Either way you look at it, that’s coming out Friday night. I’m sure there will be a few people in attendance who will cheer to thank Hayward for his time in Utah, but the vast majority will be hell-bent on making their feelings known: that introduction will be a boo-fest.

Jonathan Turnbow: There is no doubt that a strong dislike burned within the majority of Jazz fans’ hearts when he ruined everyone’s July 4th barbecue over a year ago. However, Mitchell instantly numbed the pain for the state. Gobert numbed the pain with his confidence that their goals hadn’t changed. The TEAM cured the hurt with their performance last year. But because of Hayward’s injury, Jazz fans haven’t yet had the chance to boo him, yell in his face, make fun of his Boston haircut. I expect boos.

Dane Coles: Boos will rain down every single time Hayward touches the ball. Sadly, I think it will get pretty ugly. Personally, I wish that everyone went completely silent, as if not even aware who he is. Yes, it was pretty bad the way he left the franchise, but not having Hayward allowed the Jazz to play a certain rookie named Donovan Mitchell more than if Hayward was still around. Jazz fans should just be happy about the future.

David J. Smith: The emotions will run high tonight, but not as high as they would have been if Hayward had not had his unfortunate injury last year. The booing will be loud and the signs creative, I’m sure. But I do think it won’t be as pronounced as it could have been a year ago.

Where do you stand generally on the question of whether fans should boo players? Or Hayward specifically?

Thatcher: I’m conflicted when it comes to booing former players. Get the boos our the first time, then let it go. Jazz fans have held onto booing some former players (Enes Kanter, Derek Fisher, etc.) for too long. Let the emotion out the first time they come back to Utah (if it’s warranted), then forget it and focus on supporting your team.

Laura: I’m not a fan of booing, no matter the situation—booing should only be directed at refs! Silence is much more powerful. While Jazz fans can agree that the way in which he left is the bigger issue here, the sting is still there. But is booing the classiest way to handle it? I don’t think so. Either appreciate the time and effort he gave while in Utah and clap, or be silent. Booing reflects really poorly on Jazz fans and I think that gets noticed by players around the league. Utah’s already at a disadvantage as a free-agent destination—no need to make it worse!

Steve: As a fan, there are times when I’ve taken booed out of frustration, but usually for basketball reasons, not personal decisions. When Draymond Green seems to be getting away with something, I’m frustrated. When Hayward left in free agency, I was hurt but it’s his call and I don’t need to boo him for that. Having a successful season without him helped, but I think I would have moved on regardless.

Jonathan: Without sadness there is no happiness. As long as it does not get carried away, I think it is good for the game. Friday night is not just “any other game.” It means a lot to get a win at home against him. It means a lot to Crowder who Boston essentially tossed aside to get Hayward. It means a lot to Joe Ingles, who used to have game nights and double dates with the Haywards. It means a lot to the rest of the guys who grew up together on this team, struggled through the rough years until finally reaching a point where they knew they had the pieces and then to have Hayward walk out and not even say goodbye. It means a lot for Ricky Rubio who finally got out of his situation in Minnesota only to have the star player of his new team leave. Everyone is emotionally involved in this — not just the fans.

Dane: Fans have every right to boo and many times it is absolutely warranted. When a passionate fanbase loses a star in an ugly way, they’re going to feel burned. In Hayward’s case, they should. His departure would not have been nearly as hurtful had he not denied the rumors of his move to Boston. I don’t mind booing as long as it doesn’t get too out of hand but I do think Hayward deserves to hear it.

David: Personally I don’t have a problem with booing, especially when someone has had a rough departure or tenure with the Jazz. That said, I do not like it when the booing continues on years after the fact, like it did for Deron Williams. In Hayward’s case, I assume the Jazz fans will let him know how they feel, for his departure was mishandled in many ways by his camp, his agent and by Hayward himself.

By letting Hayward get to free agency, Utah got nothing in direct exchange for losing him. Should they have traded him earlier, or are you okay with them holding onto hope and using his full contract to build their case for him to stay?

Thatcher: The Jazz know had more intel than any of us ever did. If they thought they had a really good shot to retain him, then they did the right thing. If they had reason to believe he was set on Boston, then they should have traded him or worked harder for a sign-and-trade. However this is Boston we’re dealing with, and Danny Ainge may not have given the Jazz anything worth trading Hayward for if they knew he was going to Boston regardless.

Laura: With hindsight, it’s easy to say, “They should’ve traded him!” But, at the time, it made sense. Dennis Lindsey and his team felt they had the data, ties and positioning to make a compelling pitch — and they did. Hayward just wanted bigger lights on a bigger stage, and Boston was the perfect place to do it. It’s a delicate balance between showing a player loyalty and offering extensions or max contracts as soon as possible, or letting the player determine the market in order to keep him, or trading him before he can hold the organization hostage. In the case of Deron Williams, it was a brilliant move to trade him when they did. Hoping for Hayward to sign backfired here and could’ve been crippling for years.

Steve: I’m OK with them holding out hope and showing Hayward their commitment. Utah had a 50/50 chance (c’mon, Miami wasn’t ever a real option) and a strong argument. As a small-market team you do all you can to draft, develop, and then retain players like Hayward. You almost have to put your chips all-in and then just pray. It didn’t pan out liked Jazz fans hoped, but taking our chances was a gamble the franchise needed to make.

Jonathan: Crowder was the talent I wanted to get in return for Hayward at the time, and they wound up getting him anyway. Looking back, I think Utah’s front office may have known the chances were slim, but knew they had to go all in. Based on the narrative around the league, they had to take a shot at keeping their first All-Star after a long rebuild.

Dane: It’s tough to scrutinize Lindsey, one of the best general managers in the league. Obviously getting something in return would have been nice. But imagine a trio of Rudy Gobert, Hayward and Mitchell. Hayward was so efficient in his final year with the Jazz, it would have allowed for Mitchell to be more ball dominant. Also, when the Jazz organization met with Hayward, they presented a plan on how to beat Golden State. Since then, they are 3-5 against the Warriors. Clearly the plan is working and moving forward, but it is interesting to wonder if he had stayed.

David: Lindsey, the Miller family and Quin Snyder did the right thing. There had to have been some feeling that there was a solid chance of him staying. After expending as much time and effort helping him develop into an excellent All-Star player, it is hard to just give up. The last few years, it is difficult for me to see how the Jazz could done things better. They made him the center of the offense. Snyder and Johnnie Bryant worked tirelessly with him. The front office brought in complementary pieces to help him (George Hill, Joe Johnson, Boris Diaw, etc). They made a pretty convincing argument for him to stay.

Obviously the Jazz are in great shape now despite Hayward being a Celtic. Are there positive developments that might not have happened (or happened differently) had he stayed?

Thatcher: I could go Doctor Strange on this scenario and envision every possible timeline and outcome of Hayward staying, but I’ll just name one. Jae Crowder. While Jae is no healthy Hayward, he has found his place here in Utah, he’s a very valuable rotation piece, and he’s been one of the early-season surprises. If Hayward had stayed, it’s unlikely the Jazz would have landed their successful small-ball four in Crowder.

Laura: Donovan Mitchell’s explosion likely wouldn’t have happened without a big gaping hole as the #1 guy on the team, so that’s a net positive. Also, without that big gaping hole for the #1 guy, Rodney Hood may have not felt as much pressure to perform at such a high level — was it the pressure that caused him to fold? He’s really a complementary as opposed to a high-level starter, and the situation on the team last year exposed that, which was a blessing for the Jazz. But the thought of Hayward and Mitchell playing together on the team has me salivating… what could have been!

Steve: For every game so far in which their five best players have all played, Hayward started as the power forward for Boston. If Utah had retained Hayward and employed that positional decision, imagine a 2018-19 lineup with Ricky Rubio, Mitchell, Joe Ingles, Hayward, and Rudy Gobert on the floor. That’s nice. Would Donovan have exploded into 20+ ppg scorer? Would Utah have traded for Crowder and seen his vital contributions? There are multiple scenarios on what might have happened to change the dynamic of the team but it’s safe to say that both squads are in a good place now which isn’t always the case.

Jonathan: Absolutely. Utah wouldn’t have Crowder if Haywood had stayed, and while I believe Mitchell would have developed regardless, it would have taken more time. It is a lot easier to score the ball when it is in your hands and not rolling off G-Time’s leg out of bounds.

Dane: The most logical difference would be with Mitchell. If Hayward stays and remains the star, Mitchell is left to develop in limited minutes and through off-court training while Quin Snyder leaned on Hayward and Ingles and tried to rehabilitate Rodney Hood’s negative net rating. We now know that Mitchell is all about learning from the moment. Being thrown into the fire was clearly the best option for Mitchell to prove himself in the NBA.

David: Mitchell may not have ascended as quickly as he did, but I do think he would have been a very impactful player who would have seen his role increase as the season went on. With Johnson’s decline and Hood’s inconsistency, Hayward and Mitchell would have been a great 1-2 punch. Ingles did take a jump, but either way, I think he would have played a very prominent role. It’s financially where I think the Jazz are in a better place. Hindsight is 20-20, but not paying that huge money for Hayward gives them flexibility moving forward.

OK, now the actual basketball game: how do you think Friday’s Jazz-Cs game will play out?

Thatcher: I don’t expect Hayward to have a remarkable game. He has struggled to start the season (which is expected), and he isn’t playing huge minutes. This is a back to back for Boston, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see Hayward have a solid but unremarkable game while playing about 20 minutes. I think the game as a whole will be very competitive, but that the Jazz will use the emotion and crowd frenzy to pull out a victory.

Laura: It takes a while to make it back to 100% from an injury like Hayward’s, and we’re seeing that so far this season. I really hope he doesn’t go off and have his break-out game against the Jazz — that would be too painful and put more salt in a still-healing wound. The game is going to be incredibly intense and charged, and that might contribute to nerves all around. I don’t wish ill on him, but I hope he has sort of an average meh game: 10 points, a few rebounds, a few assists.

Steve: Six Celtics average over 10 points per contest, including Hayward at 10.1. While he is recovering from his injury, he doesn’t scare me when it comes to the game plan. Even without Kyrie Irving (who will sit out against Utah), the Celtics are stacked: Al Horford is excellent on both ends and Jaylen Brown does a little bit of everything.

And then there’s Jayson Tatum. Despite his rocky start (averaging 12 points on 36% shooting in the last five games), you know he can play ball. When he and Mitchell faced each other in the Rocky Mountain Revue as rookies, it was a fun back-and-forth with some emotion and intensity for a summer league game. The rookie years progressed and both rookies evolved into stars. Forget Hayward, that’s the individual battle I want to see Friday night.

Jonathan: The Jazz will win by 15 or more. There will be a kerfuffle on the court at some point. Hayward will have a hard time getting a bucket. He is the fourth or fifth option on that team right now, and you can only expect so much from that role.

Dane: First of all, I’m not buying the Jazz’s line that this is “just another game.” They will prepare as they always do for the team at hand, but once Hayward is on the court and the crowd starts booing relentlessly, the atmosphere will be down right scary! Gobert has the biggest beef as he thought he and Hayward were in this battle together only to see Hayward bolt. And Mitchell will aim to show he is Utah’s new leader. As for Hayward, I’ve been saying for years that I don’t believe in his mental strength. It took seven seasons to see the Hayward we were all waiting for. Once he was injured I said that he would never be the same. This season it looks like his shot has changed, he’s hesitant at the rim and his efficiency is way down. Granted all these things will change as he gets in better shape and gets back into playing again. But I expect the crowd to get to Hayward and he will have little to no impact in this game.

David: The Celtics and the Jazz are two of the top six or seven teams in the NBA. It would have been a hard fought contest even sans the extra drama. Hayward’s former Jazz teammates are saying it’s just another game. So are Hayward’s current Boston pals. But inside, there has to be a bit more to it than what appearances are saying. Add to the fact a national television platform and you have the makings a great early season tilt.