Simons to Boston. Trade idea

[Moranis]

I see this as a clear downgrade. 

1. Simons two biggest strengths as a player are his scoring (career 19 points per 36) and three point shooting (career 39% 3PT).  Brogdon who also has career averages of 18.9 points per 36 and 39% 3PT which is dead even with Simons - meaning the biggest strength Simons offers still gives us zero benefit over Brogdon.

2.  Simons is a terrible defensive player and is also a pretty terrible passer/playmaker by PG standards, averaging 3.7 Assists Per 36 and 1.85 AST/TO.  Brogdon is a significantly better defender (he's at least passable) and is a massively better playmaker (5.1 Assists Per 36, 2.6 AST/TO).

3.  Brogdon has demonstrated that he's OK with coming off the bench if that's what it takes to help the team win, and he's clearly demonstrated that he's capable of producing at a high level in that role - he won 6MOTY this past season and was instrumental to Boston having the league's best record for most of the season.  We have no idea if Simons would be happy to come off the bench or how effective he would be in that role. 

4.  Health for Brogdon is a definite concern, as he's played only 69% of possibly games over his 7 year career and has played over 65 gamers only twice in his 7 year career.   Sadly though Anfernee Simons doesn't solve this problem for us.  He's played only 66% of possible games over his 5 year career and has played over 65 games only one time - he's really no less a risk then Brogdon health wise.

5.  Brogdon has 6x more NBA experience (1,200 vs 200 minutes) - something that is absolutely crucial for the Celtics now that they are firmly in "Win now" mode.

Honestly. I'm struggling to see any tangible advantage in having Simons over Brogdon outside of the fact that Simons is younger only 24 vs 30).  And given the Celtics current aspiration, Brogdon's age (and the experience that comes with it) may actually be more valuable then Simon's youth.

Personally, I don't have much interest in moving Brogdon at all unless it's part of a deal that brings us back a seriously game-changing piece.  For example if we come somehow move Brown and Brogdon in return for Giannis and Jrue Holiday (highly unlikely) then I'd do that in a heartbeat.

Beyond that I really don't have a lot of interest in moving Brogdon.  Yes, there is some risk around him health-wise.  But he did play a pretty respectable 67 games last season (at a solid 26 MPG) and in the games he played his impact was felt in a huge way.  Brogdon and Tatum were the only two Celtics players who ranked top 4 on the team in BPM, WS/48 and VORP.

3 of the past 4 seasons were less than 82 games (with the 2019-20 season having different numbers of games for different teams). Simons has played in 273 out of 382 games, which is good for 71.5% (~59 games in an 82 game season). Brogdon has played in 400 out of 545, which is 73.4% (~60 games in an 82 game season). Brogdon still comes out ahead, but Simons' average is brought down significantly by his 20 game rookie season. Ignore that season and he's averaged the equivalent of 69 games per season, while if you take out Brogdon's worst he still only averages the equivalent of 63.

As for the "65 games" threshold, that's equivalent to 57 games in a 72 game season. When you account for that, it becomes 3/5 for Simon's vs. 2/7 for Brogdon. I don't think Simons has the track record to say that he's healthier than Brogdon, but I know he doesn't have the track record to say he's more injury prone. I agree that the trade would be a mistake, though, the difference in impact (if there even is any) definitely isn't enough to justify 2 first no matter what Simons' injury risk is.

Simons wasn't hurt as a rookie either, he just wasn't very good.  Even got sent to the G-League.  So it isn't like he missed the games because he was injured.

He also got shut down at the end of the last 2 seasons.  He did get banged up and missed time, but he was supposedly healthy enough to come back, the Blazers were just eliminated from playoff contention already so took extra precautions with him and benched him (to also help draft position).

He obviously isn't a picture of health, but he has definitely been healthier than Brogdon the last few seasons.

[KG Living Legend]

I see this as a clear downgrade. 

1. Simons two biggest strengths as a player are his scoring (career 19 points per 36) and three point shooting (career 39% 3PT).  Brogdon who also has career averages of 18.9 points per 36 and 39% 3PT which is dead even with Simons - meaning the biggest strength Simons offers still gives us zero benefit over Brogdon.

2.  Simons is a terrible defensive player and is also a pretty terrible passer/playmaker by PG standards, averaging 3.7 Assists Per 36 and 1.85 AST/TO.  Brogdon is a significantly better defender (he's at least passable) and is a massively better playmaker (5.1 Assists Per 36, 2.6 AST/TO).

3.  Brogdon has demonstrated that he's OK with coming off the bench if that's what it takes to help the team win, and he's clearly demonstrated that he's capable of producing at a high level in that role - he won 6MOTY this past season and was instrumental to Boston having the league's best record for most of the season.  We have no idea if Simons would be happy to come off the bench or how effective he would be in that role. 

4.  Health for Brogdon is a definite concern, as he's played only 69% of possibly games over his 7 year career and has played over 65 gamers only twice in his 7 year career.   Sadly though Anfernee Simons doesn't solve this problem for us.  He's played only 66% of possible games over his 5 year career and has played over 65 games only one time - he's really no less a risk then Brogdon health wise.

5.  Brogdon has 6x more NBA experience (1,200 vs 200 minutes) - something that is absolutely crucial for the Celtics now that they are firmly in "Win now" mode.

Honestly. I'm struggling to see any tangible advantage in having Simons over Brogdon outside of the fact that Simons is younger only 24 vs 30).  And given the Celtics current aspiration, Brogdon's age (and the experience that comes with it) may actually be more valuable then Simon's youth.

Personally, I don't have much interest in moving Brogdon at all unless it's part of a deal that brings us back a seriously game-changing piece.  For example if we come somehow move Brown and Brogdon in return for Giannis and Jrue Holiday (highly unlikely) then I'd do that in a heartbeat.

Beyond that I really don't have a lot of interest in moving Brogdon.  Yes, there is some risk around him health-wise.  But he did play a pretty respectable 67 games last season (at a solid 26 MPG) and in the games he played his impact was felt in a huge way.  Brogdon and Tatum were the only two Celtics players who ranked top 4 on the team in BPM, WS/48 and VORP.

 Well at least my idea is somewhat realistic. U wanna trade Brogdon and Brownn For Giannis and Holliday. Good luck with that lol.

[Celtics4ever]

I don't see any way Portland does this as he is already rising star for them and the future cornerstone of their franchise.  That I think makes all this trade talk moot

Would you trade for an oft injured guard and two unproven firsts for a rising established star?   I would not, I bet they won't either.

This young man was mentioned in past trades for Brown, who is  a way bigger star than Brogdon.    Sure they're a franchise in flux but they aren't insane.

[KG Living Legend]

I don't see any way Portland does this as he is already rising star for them and the future cornerstone of their franchise.  That I think makes all this trade talk moot

Would you trade for an oft injured guard and two unproven firsts for a rising established star?   I would not, I bet they won't either.

This young man was mentioned in past trades for Brown, who is  a way bigger star than Brogdon.    Sure they're a franchise in flux but they aren't insane.

 Funny because if you read this whole thread, most will tell you Brogdon is better than Simons, and Simons is a terrible defender who can't pass.

[Vermont Green]

I don't see any way Portland does this as he is already rising star for them and the future cornerstone of their franchise.  That I think makes all this trade talk moot

Would you trade for an oft injured guard and two unproven firsts for a rising established star?   I would not, I bet they won't either.

This young man was mentioned in past trades for Brown, who is  a way bigger star than Brogdon.    Sure they're a franchise in flux but they aren't insane.

Funny because if you read this whole thread, most will tell you Brogdon is better than Simons, and Simons is a terrible defender who can't pass.

What I got from the thread is that people see Brogdon as a good fit for the Celtics right now and that Simons is a good fit for POR relative to where they are going.  I think there is a good chance that Brodgon will be better for the Celtics the next season or 2 than Simons would be.  Celtics are win now.

And the trade you suggested was Brogdon + Pritchard + 2 or 3 firsts, for a player who may have more good years ahead of him than Brogdon but who may not help win a title the next couple season than Brogdon can.  Plus Simons has a bigger contract.  The Celtics are going to have problems enough paying Tatum, Brown, and Porzingis, they don't want another big'ish contract in place of 2 contracts.

[Celtics4ever]

Funny because if you read this whole thread, most will tell you Brogdon is better than Simons, and Simons is a terrible defender who can't pass.

Simons has a brighter future than Brogdon is what I meant.    Also,  a bad defender is still a better defender than a guy on the injured list who is not playing.

[hwangjini_1]

I see this as a clear downgrade. 

1. Simons two biggest strengths as a player are his scoring (career 19 points per 36) and three point shooting (career 39% 3PT).  Brogdon who also has career averages of 18.9 points per 36 and 39% 3PT which is dead even with Simons - meaning the biggest strength Simons offers still gives us zero benefit over Brogdon.

2.  Simons is a terrible defensive player and is also a pretty terrible passer/playmaker by PG standards, averaging 3.7 Assists Per 36 and 1.85 AST/TO.  Brogdon is a significantly better defender (he's at least passable) and is a massively better playmaker (5.1 Assists Per 36, 2.6 AST/TO).

3.  Brogdon has demonstrated that he's OK with coming off the bench if that's what it takes to help the team win, and he's clearly demonstrated that he's capable of producing at a high level in that role - he won 6MOTY this past season and was instrumental to Boston having the league's best record for most of the season.  We have no idea if Simons would be happy to come off the bench or how effective he would be in that role. 

4.  Health for Brogdon is a definite concern, as he's played only 69% of possibly games over his 7 year career and has played over 65 gamers only twice in his 7 year career.   Sadly though Anfernee Simons doesn't solve this problem for us.  He's played only 66% of possible games over his 5 year career and has played over 65 games only one time - he's really no less a risk then Brogdon health wise.

5.  Brogdon has 6x more NBA experience (1,200 vs 200 minutes) - something that is absolutely crucial for the Celtics now that they are firmly in "Win now" mode.

Honestly. I'm struggling to see any tangible advantage in having Simons over Brogdon outside of the fact that Simons is younger only 24 vs 30).  And given the Celtics current aspiration, Brogdon's age (and the experience that comes with it) may actually be more valuable then Simon's youth.

Personally, I don't have much interest in moving Brogdon at all unless it's part of a deal that brings us back a seriously game-changing piece.  For example if we come somehow move Brown and Brogdon in return for Giannis and Jrue Holiday (highly unlikely) then I'd do that in a heartbeat.

Beyond that I really don't have a lot of interest in moving Brogdon.  Yes, there is some risk around him health-wise.  But he did play a pretty respectable 67 games last season (at a solid 26 MPG) and in the games he played his impact was felt in a huge way.  Brogdon and Tatum were the only two Celtics players who ranked top 4 on the team in BPM, WS/48 and VORP.

this is a really well done and well researched post. thanks and a tp for all the good work.

[Moranis]

This year, I think as a backup Brogdon is better, but as a starter I think Simons is better as he is far more capable of getting hot and making a greater impact.  The age difference is also a major factor in the analysis, as perhapsnas early as later this year,  Simons will ivertake Brogdon even as a back up.  I'd do the trade for the long term implications as I don't think it affects much this year (unless White or Brown goes down and then I'd rather have Simons). 

Also, Pritchard isn't necessary unless the purpose of including him is to drop salary this year and give Boston more wiggle room under the 2nd apron.  Or maybe you bring back Keon Johnson to keep the depth up. So Simons, Johnson for Brogdon, Pritchard, and the 2 1st's this year.

Seems like a fair enough trade.

[JBcat]

I don't see any way Portland does this as he is already rising star for them and the future cornerstone of their franchise.  That I think makes all this trade talk moot

Would you trade for an oft injured guard and two unproven firsts for a rising established star?   I would not, I bet they won't either.

This young man was mentioned in past trades for Brown, who is  a way bigger star than Brogdon.    Sure they're a franchise in flux but they aren't insane.

 Funny because if you read this whole thread, most will tell you Brogdon is better than Simons, and Simons is a terrible defender who can't pass.

I think context about Simons’ defense and playmaking matters in this case. Simons is billed as a combo guard, but is really more of a point guard. In the 25 games or so without Lilliard he put up monster numbers about 27 points in 6 assists. At the point guard position he is an adequate passer and passable defensively. At shooting guard he gets eaten up defensively, so it wasn’t ideal playing next to Lilliard. I think in the Celtics system playing alongside strong defensive players I think I would definitely make this move, considering Simons might have another level to his game at his age.

[Surferdad]

I don't see any way Portland does this as he is already rising star for them and the future cornerstone of their franchise.  That I think makes all this trade talk moot

Would you trade for an oft injured guard and two unproven firsts for a rising established star?   I would not, I bet they won't either.

This young man was mentioned in past trades for Brown, who is  a way bigger star than Brogdon.    Sure they're a franchise in flux but they aren't insane.

 Funny because if you read this whole thread, most will tell you Brogdon is better than Simons, and Simons is a terrible defender who can't pass.

I think context about Simons’ defense and playmaking matters in this case. Simons is billed as a combo guard, but is really more of a point guard. In the 25 games or so without Lilliard he put up monster numbers about 27 points in 6 assists. At the point guard position he is an adequate passer and passable defensively. At shooting guard he gets eaten up defensively, so it wasn’t ideal playing next to Lilliard. I think in the Celtics system playing alongside strong defensive players I think I would definitely make this move, considering Simons might have another level to his game at his age.

Okay, then what? Trade Lillard or not? Just want to know your GM mindset.

[KG Living Legend]

I see this as a clear downgrade. 

1. Simons two biggest strengths as a player are his scoring (career 19 points per 36) and three point shooting (career 39% 3PT).  Brogdon who also has career averages of 18.9 points per 36 and 39% 3PT which is dead even with Simons - meaning the biggest strength Simons offers still gives us zero benefit over Brogdon.

2.  Simons is a terrible defensive player and is also a pretty terrible passer/playmaker by PG standards, averaging 3.7 Assists Per 36 and 1.85 AST/TO.  Brogdon is a significantly better defender (he's at least passable) and is a massively better playmaker (5.1 Assists Per 36, 2.6 AST/TO).

3.  Brogdon has demonstrated that he's OK with coming off the bench if that's what it takes to help the team win, and he's clearly demonstrated that he's capable of producing at a high level in that role - he won 6MOTY this past season and was instrumental to Boston having the league's best record for most of the season.  We have no idea if Simons would be happy to come off the bench or how effective he would be in that role. 

4.  Health for Brogdon is a definite concern, as he's played only 69% of possibly games over his 7 year career and has played over 65 gamers only twice in his 7 year career.   Sadly though Anfernee Simons doesn't solve this problem for us.  He's played only 66% of possible games over his 5 year career and has played over 65 games only one time - he's really no less a risk then Brogdon health wise.

5.  Brogdon has 6x more NBA experience (1,200 vs 200 minutes) - something that is absolutely crucial for the Celtics now that they are firmly in "Win now" mode.

Honestly. I'm struggling to see any tangible advantage in having Simons over Brogdon outside of the fact that Simons is younger only 24 vs 30).  And given the Celtics current aspiration, Brogdon's age (and the experience that comes with it) may actually be more valuable then Simon's youth.

Personally, I don't have much interest in moving Brogdon at all unless it's part of a deal that brings us back a seriously game-changing piece.  For example if we come somehow move Brown and Brogdon in return for Giannis and Jrue Holiday (highly unlikely) then I'd do that in a heartbeat.

Beyond that I really don't have a lot of interest in moving Brogdon.  Yes, there is some risk around him health-wise.  But he did play a pretty respectable 67 games last season (at a solid 26 MPG) and in the games he played his impact was felt in a huge way.  Brogdon and Tatum were the only two Celtics players who ranked top 4 on the team in BPM, WS/48 and VORP.

this is a really well done and well researched post. thanks and a tp for all the good work.

 Hehe is something that wasn't mentioned in this well 'researched post. Brogdon came into the league at 24 years old avg 10ppg. Brogdon didn't avg over 20ppg until he was 28 years old.

 Simons avg 20 ppg last year and us currently 24 years young.  Kind of ridiculous to put the numbers you posted without mentioning age.

 Simons has another two levels of potential he can hit, for those that don't know he's a fantastic athlete.  Jumps out of the gym, extremely quick and fast. Also really skilled.

 Simons value around the league is also much higher than Brogdons. For A Reason.

[JBcat]

I don't see any way Portland does this as he is already rising star for them and the future cornerstone of their franchise.  That I think makes all this trade talk moot

Would you trade for an oft injured guard and two unproven firsts for a rising established star?   I would not, I bet they won't either.

This young man was mentioned in past trades for Brown, who is  a way bigger star than Brogdon.    Sure they're a franchise in flux but they aren't insane.

 Funny because if you read this whole thread, most will tell you Brogdon is better than Simons, and Simons is a terrible defender who can't pass.

I think context about Simons’ defense and playmaking matters in this case. Simons is billed as a combo guard, but is really more of a point guard. In the 25 games or so without Lilliard he put up monster numbers about 27 points in 6 assists. At the point guard position he is an adequate passer and passable defensively. At shooting guard he gets eaten up defensively, so it wasn’t ideal playing next to Lilliard. I think in the Celtics system playing alongside strong defensive players I think I would definitely make this move, considering Simons might have another level to his game at his age.

Okay, then what? Trade Lillard or not? Just want to know your GM mindset.

I believe even if Portland trades Lilliard they are still going to have a dilemma with Sharpe, Simons, and Henderson long term. Simons is probably better at the 1 but can play the 2, Sharpe is probably better at the 2 but can play the 3, and Henderson a 1. They would still have the same problem of being small at the guard/wings playing all 3 at once. So I could see Portland ultimately trading Simons at some point as well as Lilliard.

For the Celtics Lilliard is going to cost you more and is better right now and the near future. Simons should cost you less, and will give you a much longer runway. I can see the argument for either option for the Celtics.

[Muzzy66]

I see this as a clear downgrade. 

1. Simons two biggest strengths as a player are his scoring (career 19 points per 36) and three point shooting (career 39% 3PT).  Brogdon who also has career averages of 18.9 points per 36 and 39% 3PT which is dead even with Simons - meaning the biggest strength Simons offers still gives us zero benefit over Brogdon.

2.  Simons is a terrible defensive player and is also a pretty terrible passer/playmaker by PG standards, averaging 3.7 Assists Per 36 and 1.85 AST/TO.  Brogdon is a significantly better defender (he's at least passable) and is a massively better playmaker (5.1 Assists Per 36, 2.6 AST/TO).

3.  Brogdon has demonstrated that he's OK with coming off the bench if that's what it takes to help the team win, and he's clearly demonstrated that he's capable of producing at a high level in that role - he won 6MOTY this past season and was instrumental to Boston having the league's best record for most of the season.  We have no idea if Simons would be happy to come off the bench or how effective he would be in that role. 

4.  Health for Brogdon is a definite concern, as he's played only 69% of possibly games over his 7 year career and has played over 65 gamers only twice in his 7 year career.   Sadly though Anfernee Simons doesn't solve this problem for us.  He's played only 66% of possible games over his 5 year career and has played over 65 games only one time - he's really no less a risk then Brogdon health wise.

5.  Brogdon has 6x more NBA experience (1,200 vs 200 minutes) - something that is absolutely crucial for the Celtics now that they are firmly in "Win now" mode.

Honestly. I'm struggling to see any tangible advantage in having Simons over Brogdon outside of the fact that Simons is younger only 24 vs 30).  And given the Celtics current aspiration, Brogdon's age (and the experience that comes with it) may actually be more valuable then Simon's youth.

Personally, I don't have much interest in moving Brogdon at all unless it's part of a deal that brings us back a seriously game-changing piece.  For example if we come somehow move Brown and Brogdon in return for Giannis and Jrue Holiday (highly unlikely) then I'd do that in a heartbeat.

Beyond that I really don't have a lot of interest in moving Brogdon.  Yes, there is some risk around him health-wise.  But he did play a pretty respectable 67 games last season (at a solid 26 MPG) and in the games he played his impact was felt in a huge way.  Brogdon and Tatum were the only two Celtics players who ranked top 4 on the team in BPM, WS/48 and VORP.

 Well at least my idea is somewhat realistic. U wanna trade Brogdon and Brownn For Giannis and Holliday. Good luck with that lol.

Just because a trade idea is realistic, doesn't mean it makes the team better.

Obviously there is close to zero chance of being able to trade Brown and Brogdon for Giannis and Holiday.  That's why I specifically said that the deal would be highly unlikely.  I'm not suggesting that such a deal would be doable, I'm only saying that a highly unlikely huge deal like that would be about the only scenario that I would seriously consider moving Brogdon, given how good he is and how critical he was to our team last year.

I don't see any point at all in moving him for a significantly worse player - maybe I could have seen the logic in that type of move 2 years ago, but right now as our stars are moving into their prime we really don't want to be trading away peak talent for future upside. 

[Muzzy66]

I don't see any way Portland does this as he is already rising star for them and the future cornerstone of their franchise.  That I think makes all this trade talk moot

Would you trade for an oft injured guard and two unproven firsts for a rising established star?   I would not, I bet they won't either.

This young man was mentioned in past trades for Brown, who is  a way bigger star than Brogdon.    Sure they're a franchise in flux but they aren't insane.

 Funny because if you read this whole thread, most will tell you Brogdon is better than Simons, and Simons is a terrible defender who can't pass.

I think context about Simons’ defense and playmaking matters in this case. Simons is billed as a combo guard, but is really more of a point guard. In the 25 games or so without Lilliard he put up monster numbers about 27 points in 6 assists. At the point guard position he is an adequate passer and passable defensively. At shooting guard he gets eaten up defensively, so it wasn’t ideal playing next to Lilliard. I think in the Celtics system playing alongside strong defensive players I think I would definitely make this move, considering Simons might have another level to his game at his age.

Over the past three seasons he has averaged 4.1 assists per 36, 1.9 Assists/Turnover and an assist rate of 18.2%.

Brogdon over his past three seasons has averaged 5.8 assists per 36, 2.8 Assists/Turnover and an assist rate of 24.5%
Derrick White over the last 3 seasons averaged 5.2 assists per 36, 3.0 assists/turnover and a 20.4% assist rate
Smart over the last 3 seasons averagted 6.6 assists per 36, 2.6 Assists/Turnover and a 25.4% assist rate

Celtics fans have been complaining for years about our desperate lack of a proper pure PG, and yet all three of the guys we used at PG last year were MUCH, MUCH better playmakers statistically then Simons - who's playmaking numbers are roughly on par with Payton Pritchard (who barely even played for us last year).

[Muzzy66]

I see this as a clear downgrade. 

1. Simons two biggest strengths as a player are his scoring (career 19 points per 36) and three point shooting (career 39% 3PT).  Brogdon who also has career averages of 18.9 points per 36 and 39% 3PT which is dead even with Simons - meaning the biggest strength Simons offers still gives us zero benefit over Brogdon.

2.  Simons is a terrible defensive player and is also a pretty terrible passer/playmaker by PG standards, averaging 3.7 Assists Per 36 and 1.85 AST/TO.  Brogdon is a significantly better defender (he's at least passable) and is a massively better playmaker (5.1 Assists Per 36, 2.6 AST/TO).

3.  Brogdon has demonstrated that he's OK with coming off the bench if that's what it takes to help the team win, and he's clearly demonstrated that he's capable of producing at a high level in that role - he won 6MOTY this past season and was instrumental to Boston having the league's best record for most of the season.  We have no idea if Simons would be happy to come off the bench or how effective he would be in that role. 

4.  Health for Brogdon is a definite concern, as he's played only 69% of possibly games over his 7 year career and has played over 65 gamers only twice in his 7 year career.   Sadly though Anfernee Simons doesn't solve this problem for us.  He's played only 66% of possible games over his 5 year career and has played over 65 games only one time - he's really no less a risk then Brogdon health wise.

5.  Brogdon has 6x more NBA experience (1,200 vs 200 minutes) - something that is absolutely crucial for the Celtics now that they are firmly in "Win now" mode.

Honestly. I'm struggling to see any tangible advantage in having Simons over Brogdon outside of the fact that Simons is younger only 24 vs 30).  And given the Celtics current aspiration, Brogdon's age (and the experience that comes with it) may actually be more valuable then Simon's youth.

Personally, I don't have much interest in moving Brogdon at all unless it's part of a deal that brings us back a seriously game-changing piece.  For example if we come somehow move Brown and Brogdon in return for Giannis and Jrue Holiday (highly unlikely) then I'd do that in a heartbeat.

Beyond that I really don't have a lot of interest in moving Brogdon.  Yes, there is some risk around him health-wise.  But he did play a pretty respectable 67 games last season (at a solid 26 MPG) and in the games he played his impact was felt in a huge way.  Brogdon and Tatum were the only two Celtics players who ranked top 4 on the team in BPM, WS/48 and VORP.

this is a really well done and well researched post. thanks and a tp for all the good work.

 Hehe is something that wasn't mentioned in this well 'researched post. Brogdon came into the league at 24 years old avg 10ppg. Brogdon didn't avg over 20ppg until he was 28 years old.

 Simons avg 20 ppg last year and us currently 24 years young.  Kind of ridiculous to put the numbers you posted without mentioning age.

 Simons has another two levels of potential he can hit, for those that don't know he's a fantastic athlete.  Jumps out of the gym, extremely quick and fast. Also really skilled.

 Simons value around the league is also much higher than Brogdons. For A Reason.

No it isn't rediculous at all.  Age is 100% irrelevant when the Celtics are in WIN NOW mode, and hence the only thing that matters is what those players are able to contribute RIGHT NOW.  Age only maters when considering future upside, and future upside isn't a factor when you your championship window is right here, right now.   

Also Brogdon has averaged 20 points per 36 every year since his 3rd - 5 straight seasons now.  His health may be somewhat of a risk, but at least he has proven his ability to produce consistently - and when he IS healthy you know exactly what he's going to give you. 

Speaking of knowing what you're going to get - Brogdon was also the Celtics' 3rd most consistent offensive player after Tatum and Brown.  Last season Brogdon scored double figures in 50/67 (75%) of his regular season games.  This compared to 67% for Marcus Smart, 59% for Derrick White and only 46% for Al Horford.  This is despite the fact that Brogdon played the lowest number of minutes of all those players AND did not start a single game.

For years the Celtics have desperately needed that CONSISTENT third scoring option to take pressure off Tatum and Brown, and a consistent scoring threat off the bench to lead the second unit - Brogdon was the answer to both of those issues for the Celtics, which is a big part of why the team was so dominant for most the season.  Then there is the versatilty - at 6'5" with a strong body, Brogdon can play and guard 3 positions pretty comfortably.  That's important for a team with the Celtic's play style.