This doesn’t make any sense to me. Boston is the only team that can offer a Super, everyone else just the max. By this very constraint you are paying above market price for his production. What the Super offers is better control over assets, but that comes with a financial penalty.
Because the market is controlled. Even if he became a free agent, it is not just about offering the most money. A max contract becomes a vehicle to trade for another max contract. Especially with the new CBA, where it is going to be almost impossible to trade three dimes for a quarter.
But again.... that's a max contract, it doesn't really flow to say that a Supermax is better than a regular max, especially when the new CBA only makes it impossible to trade 3 dimes for a quarter if you exceed limitations that are much easier to exceed if you have multiple supermax, than if you have multiple maxes. You are laying out the reasons you want to not let Jaylen walk much more than the argument that a supermax is good. A Supermax has one advantage.... it makes it harder for a guy to say no to it, that's the only advantage to it, after that it's really limiting you on the margins in terms of staying under the second apron more than anything else.
Horford and Smart all got badly outplayed by their Miami counterparts and are both in decline, and TL is obviously no longer his prime self. Sounds like Gorman is on point.
Thinking Rob is a 4 and Marcus is a backup.
He's so far from the point that you can barely see it from where he is.
The Supermax for a 7-9 year player aligns with a max contract for 10+ year player (not all max contracts are equal). The designated player rule (SuperMax) basically bumps you up a year group. Up to 6 Super Max is equal to 7-9 Max contract and 7-9 SuperMax is equal to a 10+ year Max.
I get it, the point was... paying more for a guy than you could is almost never particularly good, it certainly isn't some great benefit. The Supermax is fine, but it isn't a particular positive, it's a trade of a role player for a bit more control.
Wait, why do you think Jaylen would take any less than a dime of the supermax? If he walks the Celtics are completely screwed so they would be forced to trade him for pennies on the dollar. Either way, they aren't top four team on the East have no real realistic path back. He has the leverage. Also there is not a huge amount of advantage saving the 6.5 million between a max deal and super max for a team over the luxury tax.
This is sort of an odd, artificially bargained negotiation the Celtics and Jaylen are dropped into... But there are certainly reasons Jaylen would sign for the most $ he can even if that's not also the most the Celtics can theoretically spend.
The advantage of the supermax with Jaylen is that because of the old rules on extensions, as a non-max guy his extension amount was limited to a number (120% of current salary) that was just an instant no go. This means they can offer him more (even if not the full $290 over 5) than anyone else, and also they'll know where they are a year out so they have little chance of him walking for nothing (where otherwise they'd either have to trade him now or take the chance he pulls a Kyrie).
1. I really doubt it would be pennies on the dollar, past guys in the supermax type tier have gotten good returns. I think there is little reason to think a Jaylen deal (and the sattelite deals that likely come from it) drop the Celtics out of the top 4 in the East. They were the best team in the league on net, 2nd best on record, and Jaylen's impact on that wasn't nothing, but he's not even close to Tatum in terms of impact, the return for him would likely be enough to make them still a top 4 seed easily. As to why Jaylen would take it... does he want to make more money with BOS or less elsewhere, some guys it's about principle, others it's about making the most money they can, others have other desires (winning, being the guy, where they want to live, who they want to play with), if the Celtics offer him $260 or 265M (so 31.5-31.8% year 1 with 8% raises) he's making $20M+ more over 4 years than in FA, plus has a $60M 5th year option (obviously you give him the option in return for shaving percent off the base).
Yes the owners caused this because so many were so bad at running their teams for so long. The created a system that caps the market for top 50 players in the league. It is the very reason trying to say a player may not be worth ~7 milllion AAV which you wouldn't never be able to use to sign a free agent is silly. This is all procedural not a free market evaluation of his talent. Do you want to make sure you keep a salary slot for a top 40 player or do you want to roll the dice and see if you put together a good enough team to keep Tatum here? You can be as pissed as you want at Brown but this is the basketball equivalent of saying you want to get rid of all police.
Do you remember the playoff series against the Nets without Jaylen? What trade for Jaylen do you see? You can't trade him straight for Dame, Beal, Zion, or any other veteran on a max. I guess you can add Pritchard and some picks to get Julius Randle, Kyle Lowry, or RJ Barrett. That should square you for a solid 45-48 win season and Tatum biting his arm off to get the hell out in two years.
I mean... yes I don't think they should cut Jaylen and not replace him with other players... no shit.
You can't trade Gallo to start.
TOR are mostly has been mulled as the team that wants picks, and would shift their vets for picks that the Celtics get from moving Brown. And obviously a team wants to talk to Jaylen about how interested he is in re-signing there before they make a deal. It has never stopped teams before, but it is a consideration.
Can Brad pay Jaylen more than the Super MAX?
This is almost certain nonstarter unless you plan to do the same thing with Tatum (dish him for futures). I think there is a decent chance (though it is by no means assured) that the team could sell Tatum on a vision of the team that does not involve Brown. I think the chance of selling Tatum on a step back/rebuilding year (during his absolute prime) is miniscule. And if you move on this without buy in from Tatum, he's going to want out.
My numbers are these: 1) 8 turnovers in game 7 and 2) 5/$295 headed into a much more restrictive cap environment. I think Brown benefits from Tatum's presence and the defensive attention he draws. I don't think he contributes in all phases of the game the way Tatum does, either, and I question whether a Celtic team built around Tatum and Brown will have (and choose to invest) the resources needed to build a championship team. We have 2 years of evidence that the two together cannot do it on their own.
I've seen some twitter talk about Charlotte potentially drafting Scoot Henderson and maybe be willing to move LaMelo Ball, not sure it's a roster fit though unless you move Smart or White and then there's discussion on the Tatum/Brown/Ball hierarchy...
Sure what is it? There is a very limited amount of salary and talent that line up with an expiring Brown. This is not like counting grains of sand, here.
There are tons of trade permutations. Especially 3 team options. A lot of NBA teams (with CAP space) would offer everything not nailed down to land an All-NBA player. The new CBA was designed to have lottery teams be able to land Super MAX players and they would line up around the corner. POINTZ pay/fill the stands, and that's exactly what Jaylen Brown is, a classic All-Star NBA scorer extraordinaire. If he was a #1, he'd probably average 30ppg. That's exciting and fun to watch.
No, it isn't. It doesn't make sense for Toronto to trade Siakam for Brown. If they are going to step away from Siakam it would mean they are rebuilding so there is no reason they would want a Jaylen Brown rental. There is zero reason Brown would want to stay on a rebuilding Toronto. There are way better There really isn't a rosy option to trade Brown now.
I think the issue is why would a team trade for Jaylen now when he could become a free agent and there's no reason for him to stay with the team that trades for him? You would have to trade him to a team that knows he wants to stay there and that depresses the market.
But we also have multiple years of evidence that both Tatum and Brown continue to improve, and while Brown is likely closer to his peak than Tatum, I still think both will be better players next year. Regarding the surrounding talent, my honest question is how much luck is involved? To use just one example, did 27 year old Caleb Martin dramatically improve this year, or did he get insanely hot at the right time? By just about any metric I can find Martin was a decidedly better player LAST season than he was this season.
Spot on. Brown has been put in position to fail. He’s insanely vulnerable to traps and shouldn’t ever be facilitating.
A lot of this depends on what Jaylen wants, he's played 7 years here and should have a say on where he plays the next 4-5 seasons. The reality is he may be tired of playing 2nd fiddle to Tatum, he may not love Boston for his brand/business, he may be pissed about the IME situation, he may not enjoy playing in a sports-crazed town, he may not like the pressure of being under the Celtic microscope, he may want to play closer to home or play in Washington DC where he could talk to politicians and try to enact change. Jaylen is a complex guy and hard to read, he's not your typical pro athlete. I'm just throwing darts. It might not even be about the $$$?
Whatever silly fake trades I or others conjure up is just fun fan speculation.
and the Celtics will do better than that buffoon.
read what you just quoted...... it very specifically notes that TOR would not be the team getting Brown.
And what did their year-to-year improvement, combined with an improved supporting cast, get them? It got them a worse performance in the playoffs.
very different players, but Grant is likely better.
I am not convinced Tatum/Brown will ever get it done either, because winning a title is exceptionally hard and you need more than talent, you need to get lucky at various points. But I'm also not convinced splitting them up will make the path to a title easier, which seems to be where we disagree. Which I totally understand, by the way...I don't think there can be a right answer here given we are trying to predict future outcomes.
Yet there are other "as knowledgeable" NBA guys that have said just the opposite. Lowe and MacMahon both said there would be teams lined up and many that would make substantial offers.
A lot of people are still operating under the assumptions of the old CBA. A team acquiring JB has less worry about him bolting for a superteam due to cap smoothing and JB on a 30% deal makes teaming him with his buddy Mitchell a possibility. So in the real world Lowe, et al, are right, teams with cap space are going to be more willing than ever to make that gamble (Houston, for example, seems made for it with their lack of long term payroll and surplus of picks to keep building around a theoretical Brown/Mitchell alignment).
Clearly he isn't invested enough to listen to the geniuses on the radio. Check out the big brain on Brad.
Yes, that's what's going to happen. Because once Brown is extended it opens up a lot more options for them going forward.
After the KD mess last year they really can't shop (or even actively listen to offers for) Brown unless they are prepared to move him for whatever offer they get. I think he's too sensitive to go through that again and then subsequently stay in Boston long term. Maybe there's a way to manage that through communication between him and Brad, but I doubt it. So they are kind of stuck. It's hard to gauge the market in this scenario. For the record, I'd like to see him back long term. And maybe working on his handle...
I agree with the bolded. It would be concerning to anyone associated with the team to find out that it was being run by reactionary morons.
This is not necessarily true.
