Would the Celtics be better sitting Kyrie and Hayward?

[Vino24]

They just don

[Vino24]

Yes

[Doranku]

I don't understand why they signed Hayward. They pay the dude $30 mil a year and literally don't run a single play for him all game.

[Ben Simmons 25]

Kyrie yes.

Hayward no.

[Smoke117]

I don't understand why they signed Hayward. They pay the dude $30 mil a year and literally don't run a single play for him all game.

Exactly. People who want to get on Hayward are clearly not watching the Celtics. The rest of the Celtics basically just ignore him 80% of the time. It's hard to do anything if you aren't being involved in the offense.

[Wally450]

I don't understand why they signed Hayward. They pay the dude $30 mil a year and literally don't run a single play for him all game.

That was before the injury. I guarantee if the injury never occurred, he'd be better. He'll never be the same player he was pre injury, we'll just see it in glimpses.

[Derka]

I don't understand why they signed Hayward. They pay the dude $30 mil a year and literally don't run a single play for him all game.
There was a plan. Then Hayward destroyed his ankle and has been a shell of himself with glimpses of mediocrity ever since. Sucks but they

[SpaceJam2]

Didnt they beat the Bucks in 5 last year?

What changed

[FreezingTsmoove]

Didnt they beat the Bucks in 5 last year?

What changed

Dude you troll a basketball forum to the tune of 75 posts a day and you have the balls to think the Celtics won in 5 last year? :facepalm

[superduper]

Dude you troll a basketball forum to the tune of 75 posts a day and you have the balls to think the Celtics won in 5 last year? :facepalm

Pathetic :lol