Jaylen Brown trade Ideas

[Kernewek]

A very simple one that I've seen is Mitchell for Brown. Makes sense.

I'd do Mitchell+Okoro for Brown+Smart.

Honest question - how does this make the Celtics better?

Mitchell is much more reliable as a shot creator. And though also selfish he's a better passer. To me Mitchell is a much better player. But even if you don't agree. His contract in comparison with Brown will be much cheaper after next year.

I don't have strong feelings either way with regard to Mitchell or Brown, but I would hazard a guess that Mitchell's defensive acumen (or lack thereof) probably evens out with Brown's lack of passing ability, since they score about the same.

The question has more to do with Okoro v. Smart, to be honest, since I'm much higher on Marcus than Jaylen.

Interesting take. To me White is our current best guard who should always start. If we trade for Mitchell that means Smart becomes a bench player which he won't accept. And we could use a wing (Okoro has improved every year) if we trade Brown.

How about a double trade? I think it favours us too much to be realistic.
What do you think?

To Boston: Mitchell, Anunoby
To Cavaliers: Brown
To Toronto: Smart

New starters next season: White/Mitchell/Tatum/Anunoby/Williams (needs more shooting I guess)

That's not too bad - White is great, I've been a fan of his game since he was with San Antonio.

Swapping Smart for Anouby hurts as a fan, but he's definitely younger and a good defender. I've not watched Toronto enough to really see if he's passing at the level I would expect for a Horford replacement, though, which I'd need to know before I said 'yeah I love this'.

Generally, I would say that my default position for next season, given who's under contract for us & the current roster, is that running White/Smart/Brown/Tatum/Williams is probably the best option in general - mostly because I don't think we can replicate the free safety RW3 with Horford playing as he is now over a season.

[Vermont Green]

A very simple one that I've seen is Mitchell for Brown. Makes sense.

I'd do Mitchell+Okoro for Brown+Smart.

This is what CLE just gave up to get Mitchell:

The Cavaliers sent Jazz forward Lauri Markkanen, rookie wing Ochai Agbaji, guard Collin Sexton, three unprotected first-round picks (2025, 2027 and 2029) and two pick swaps (2026 and 2028) for Mitchell.

I know that CLE had a disappointing playoff exit but I don't see them giving up on Mitchell this quickly.  Mitchell and Brown are comparable, both are 2nd team All-NBA (for whatever you take from that), but I think Mitchell has more value in general, even if he may not be a better fit for the Celtics.

I would be happy to get Markkanen, Agbaji, and a couple of picks from Utah for Brown.  I like Mitchell, see him as a top player, but I don't see him as what this Celtics team needs.

[keevsnick]

A very simple one that I've seen is Mitchell for Brown. Makes sense.

I'd do Mitchell+Okoro for Brown+Smart.

Honest question - how does this make the Celtics better?

Mitchell is much more reliable as a shot creator. And though also selfish he's a better passer. To me Mitchell is a much better player. But even if you don't agree. His contract in comparison with Brown will be much cheaper after next year.

I don't have strong feelings either way with regard to Mitchell or Brown, but I would hazard a guess that Mitchell's defensive acumen (or lack thereof) probably evens out with Brown's lack of passing ability, since they score about the same.

The question has more to do with Okoro v. Smart, to be honest, since I'm much higher on Marcus than Jaylen.

Interesting take. To me White is our current best guard who should always start. If we trade for Mitchell that means Smart becomes a bench player which he won't accept. And we could use a wing (Okoro has improved every year) if we trade Brown.

How about a double trade? I think it favours us too much to be realistic.
What do you think?

To Boston: Mitchell, Anunoby
To Cavaliers: Brown
To Toronto: Smart

New starters next season: White/Mitchell/Tatum/Anunoby/Williams (needs more shooting I guess)

That's not too bad - White is great, I've been a fan of his game since he was with San Antonio.

Swapping Smart for Anouby hurts as a fan, but he's definitely younger and a good defender. I've not watched Toronto enough to really see if he's passing at the level I would expect for a Horford replacement, though, which I'd need to know before I said 'yeah I love this'.

Generally, I would say that my default position for next season, given who's under contract for us & the current roster, is that running White/Smart/Brown/Tatum/Williams is probably the best option in general - mostly because I don't think we can replicate the free safety RW3 with Horford playing as he is now over a season.

Brown and Mitchell are probably pretty close in terms of overall talent, depends what you wnat in a player.

But that being the case.... why would Cleveland do this deal? Mitchell has an extra year left on his deal, Cleveland doesn't seem like a market Brown is guaranteed to re-sign in. That team would be good, so that's a point in Cleveland's favor because it makes it more likely Brown re-signs but I don't know this seems like a deal that doesn't change enough for either side to actually happen.

Star for star swaps between good teams.... almost never happen.

[keevsnick]

A very simple one that I've seen is Mitchell for Brown. Makes sense.

I'd do Mitchell+Okoro for Brown+Smart.

This is what CLE just gave up to get Mitchell:

The Cavaliers sent Jazz forward Lauri Markkanen, rookie wing Ochai Agbaji, guard Collin Sexton, three unprotected first-round picks (2025, 2027 and 2029) and two pick swaps (2026 and 2028) for Mitchell.

I know that CLE had a disappointing playoff exit but I don't see them giving up on Mitchell this quickly.  Mitchell and Brown are comparable, both are 2nd team All-NBA (for whatever you take from that), but I think Mitchell has more value in general, even if he may not be a better fit for the Celtics.

I would be happy to get Markkanen, Agbaji, and a couple of picks from Utah for Brown.  I like Mitchell, see him as a top player, but I don't see him as what this Celtics team needs.

To be fair Markkanen was NOWHERE CLOSE to what he is now at the time that deal was made. He was averaging 15 ppg on 45/36/87 splits.

[RodyTur10]

How about Brown + Smart for Siakam + Anunoby?

New starting line-up Boston:  White/Anunoby/Tatum/Siakam/Williams
New starting line-up Toronto: VanVleet/Smart/Brown/Barnes/Poeltl

Would the Celtics do this? Would the Raptors do this?

[boscel33]

From Bleacher Report:

Boston Celtiсs reсeive: Mikаl Bridɡes, Royсe O’Neаle, аnd tһe No. 21 piсk (viа Pһoenix)

My quote was from Heavy.com, not BR.  Same proposal, just want to clarify where it was from.  I put the link into the post.

[Vermont Green]

A very simple one that I've seen is Mitchell for Brown. Makes sense.

I'd do Mitchell+Okoro for Brown+Smart.

This is what CLE just gave up to get Mitchell:

The Cavaliers sent Jazz forward Lauri Markkanen, rookie wing Ochai Agbaji, guard Collin Sexton, three unprotected first-round picks (2025, 2027 and 2029) and two pick swaps (2026 and 2028) for Mitchell.

I know that CLE had a disappointing playoff exit but I don't see them giving up on Mitchell this quickly.  Mitchell and Brown are comparable, both are 2nd team All-NBA (for whatever you take from that), but I think Mitchell has more value in general, even if he may not be a better fit for the Celtics.

I would be happy to get Markkanen, Agbaji, and a couple of picks from Utah for Brown.  I like Mitchell, see him as a top player, but I don't see him as what this Celtics team needs.

To be fair Markkanen was NOWHERE CLOSE to what he is now at the time that deal was made. He was averaging 15 ppg on 45/36/87 splits.

That is a fair conclusion if you only look at stats.  I was always high on Markkanen.  I used to live in Helsinki so I am a little partial to Finns.  On CLE, they had too many bigs and Markkanen was being played as a SF.  He was being misused, played out of position.  In Utah now, it is probably a bit in the other direction.  His stats are a bit bloated due to being on a bad team and needed to score more than he would say on the Celtics or any other contending team.  The real Markkanen is probably somewhere in between.  To me at least, none of this is a surprise.  He is a solid, fringe all star big, and has been for most of his career.

[Moranis]

A very simple one that I've seen is Mitchell for Brown. Makes sense.

I'd do Mitchell+Okoro for Brown+Smart.

Honest question - how does this make the Celtics better?

Mitchell is much more reliable as a shot creator. And though also selfish he's a better passer. To me Mitchell is a much better player. But even if you don't agree. His contract in comparison with Brown will be much cheaper after next year.

I don't have strong feelings either way with regard to Mitchell or Brown, but I would hazard a guess that Mitchell's defensive acumen (or lack thereof) probably evens out with Brown's lack of passing ability, since they score about the same.

The question has more to do with Okoro v. Smart, to be honest, since I'm much higher on Marcus than Jaylen.

Interesting take. To me White is our current best guard who should always start. If we trade for Mitchell that means Smart becomes a bench player which he won't accept. And we could use a wing (Okoro has improved every year) if we trade Brown.

How about a double trade? I think it favours us too much to be realistic.
What do you think?

To Boston: Mitchell, Anunoby
To Cavaliers: Brown
To Toronto: Smart

New starters next season: White/Mitchell/Tatum/Anunoby/Williams (needs more shooting I guess)

That's not too bad - White is great, I've been a fan of his game since he was with San Antonio.

Swapping Smart for Anouby hurts as a fan, but he's definitely younger and a good defender. I've not watched Toronto enough to really see if he's passing at the level I would expect for a Horford replacement, though, which I'd need to know before I said 'yeah I love this'.

Generally, I would say that my default position for next season, given who's under contract for us & the current roster, is that running White/Smart/Brown/Tatum/Williams is probably the best option in general - mostly because I don't think we can replicate the free safety RW3 with Horford playing as he is now over a season.

Brown and Mitchell are probably pretty close in terms of overall talent, depends what you wnat in a player.

But that being the case.... why would Cleveland do this deal? Mitchell has an extra year left on his deal, Cleveland doesn't seem like a market Brown is guaranteed to re-sign in. That team would be good, so that's a point in Cleveland's favor because it makes it more likely Brown re-signs but I don't know this seems like a deal that doesn't change enough for either side to actually happen.

Star for star swaps between good teams.... almost never happen.

Garland and Mitchell are far more redundant than Garland and Brown.  That is why Cleveland would do the deal of they were going to.  Makes much more roster sense.  It is also why it makes a fair amount of sense for Boston given the redundancy in Tatum and Brown.

[keevsnick]

A very simple one that I've seen is Mitchell for Brown. Makes sense.

I'd do Mitchell+Okoro for Brown+Smart.

Honest question - how does this make the Celtics better?

Mitchell is much more reliable as a shot creator. And though also selfish he's a better passer. To me Mitchell is a much better player. But even if you don't agree. His contract in comparison with Brown will be much cheaper after next year.

I don't have strong feelings either way with regard to Mitchell or Brown, but I would hazard a guess that Mitchell's defensive acumen (or lack thereof) probably evens out with Brown's lack of passing ability, since they score about the same.

The question has more to do with Okoro v. Smart, to be honest, since I'm much higher on Marcus than Jaylen.

Interesting take. To me White is our current best guard who should always start. If we trade for Mitchell that means Smart becomes a bench player which he won't accept. And we could use a wing (Okoro has improved every year) if we trade Brown.

How about a double trade? I think it favours us too much to be realistic.
What do you think?

To Boston: Mitchell, Anunoby
To Cavaliers: Brown
To Toronto: Smart

New starters next season: White/Mitchell/Tatum/Anunoby/Williams (needs more shooting I guess)

That's not too bad - White is great, I've been a fan of his game since he was with San Antonio.

Swapping Smart for Anouby hurts as a fan, but he's definitely younger and a good defender. I've not watched Toronto enough to really see if he's passing at the level I would expect for a Horford replacement, though, which I'd need to know before I said 'yeah I love this'.

Generally, I would say that my default position for next season, given who's under contract for us & the current roster, is that running White/Smart/Brown/Tatum/Williams is probably the best option in general - mostly because I don't think we can replicate the free safety RW3 with Horford playing as he is now over a season.

Brown and Mitchell are probably pretty close in terms of overall talent, depends what you wnat in a player.

But that being the case.... why would Cleveland do this deal? Mitchell has an extra year left on his deal, Cleveland doesn't seem like a market Brown is guaranteed to re-sign in. That team would be good, so that's a point in Cleveland's favor because it makes it more likely Brown re-signs but I don't know this seems like a deal that doesn't change enough for either side to actually happen.

Star for star swaps between good teams.... almost never happen.

Garland and Mitchell are far more redundant than Garland and Brown.  That is why Cleveland would do the deal of they were going to.  Makes much more roster sense.  It is also why it makes a fair amount of sense for Boston given the redundancy in Tatum and Brown.

Given that you NEED multiple wings in today's NBA I don't think there's much redundancy in Tatum/Brown, if you trade Brown and you immediately are short a wing, arguably you already are.

That said I can see why it makes some sense basketball wise for each team, but its the type of trade that neither side will do for contract reasons. Cleveland doesn't want to lose a year of control going from Mitchell with two years left to Brown with only one especially because he likely won't extend with them, and Boston probably doesn't want to swap out Brown for Mitchell because they hold the trump card of the Super Max contract offer with Brown but don't hold that same trump card with Mitchell (whom they can't offer a supermax). That makes Mitchell strangely a bigger flight risk than Brown for Boston.

[Moranis]

A very simple one that I've seen is Mitchell for Brown. Makes sense.

I'd do Mitchell+Okoro for Brown+Smart.

Honest question - how does this make the Celtics better?

Mitchell is much more reliable as a shot creator. And though also selfish he's a better passer. To me Mitchell is a much better player. But even if you don't agree. His contract in comparison with Brown will be much cheaper after next year.

I don't have strong feelings either way with regard to Mitchell or Brown, but I would hazard a guess that Mitchell's defensive acumen (or lack thereof) probably evens out with Brown's lack of passing ability, since they score about the same.

The question has more to do with Okoro v. Smart, to be honest, since I'm much higher on Marcus than Jaylen.

Interesting take. To me White is our current best guard who should always start. If we trade for Mitchell that means Smart becomes a bench player which he won't accept. And we could use a wing (Okoro has improved every year) if we trade Brown.

How about a double trade? I think it favours us too much to be realistic.
What do you think?

To Boston: Mitchell, Anunoby
To Cavaliers: Brown
To Toronto: Smart

New starters next season: White/Mitchell/Tatum/Anunoby/Williams (needs more shooting I guess)

That's not too bad - White is great, I've been a fan of his game since he was with San Antonio.

Swapping Smart for Anouby hurts as a fan, but he's definitely younger and a good defender. I've not watched Toronto enough to really see if he's passing at the level I would expect for a Horford replacement, though, which I'd need to know before I said 'yeah I love this'.

Generally, I would say that my default position for next season, given who's under contract for us & the current roster, is that running White/Smart/Brown/Tatum/Williams is probably the best option in general - mostly because I don't think we can replicate the free safety RW3 with Horford playing as he is now over a season.

Brown and Mitchell are probably pretty close in terms of overall talent, depends what you wnat in a player.

But that being the case.... why would Cleveland do this deal? Mitchell has an extra year left on his deal, Cleveland doesn't seem like a market Brown is guaranteed to re-sign in. That team would be good, so that's a point in Cleveland's favor because it makes it more likely Brown re-signs but I don't know this seems like a deal that doesn't change enough for either side to actually happen.

Star for star swaps between good teams.... almost never happen.

Garland and Mitchell are far more redundant than Garland and Brown.  That is why Cleveland would do the deal of they were going to.  Makes much more roster sense.  It is also why it makes a fair amount of sense for Boston given the redundancy in Tatum and Brown.

Given that you NEED multiple wings in today's NBA I don't think there's much redundancy in Tatum/Brown, if you trade Brown and you immediately are short a wing, arguably you already are.

That said I can see why it makes some sense basketball wise for each team, but its the type of trade that neither side will do for contract reasons. Cleveland doesn't want to lose a year of control going from Mitchell with two years left to Brown with only one especially because he likely won't extend with them, and Boston probably doesn't want to swap out Brown for Mitchell because they hold the trump card of the Super Max contract offer with Brown but don't hold that same trump card with Mitchell (whom they can't offer a supermax). That makes Mitchell strangely a bigger flight risk than Brown for Boston.

Do you need multiple wings?  I mean look at the top tier teams and where their wing players are on their team.  Sure you have the Celtics, Suns, and Clippers where their 2 best players are wings, but Gordon is what the 4th best Nugget.  The Heat have Butler and no other really good wings.  The Sixers don't have a good wing and neither do the Cavs.  Middleton is the 3rd best Buck and Barrett is the 3rd best Knick. 

The simple reality is, you just need talent and a team that works and fits well together and I for years have felt Brown isn't the right fit next to Tatum.  I don't think they work well with each other.  They are both very talented and talent gets you a long way, but to have a true multi-year contender, I think the team would be better off with a talented player that compliments Tatum better than Brown does.

[keevsnick]

A very simple one that I've seen is Mitchell for Brown. Makes sense.

I'd do Mitchell+Okoro for Brown+Smart.

Honest question - how does this make the Celtics better?

Mitchell is much more reliable as a shot creator. And though also selfish he's a better passer. To me Mitchell is a much better player. But even if you don't agree. His contract in comparison with Brown will be much cheaper after next year.

I don't have strong feelings either way with regard to Mitchell or Brown, but I would hazard a guess that Mitchell's defensive acumen (or lack thereof) probably evens out with Brown's lack of passing ability, since they score about the same.

The question has more to do with Okoro v. Smart, to be honest, since I'm much higher on Marcus than Jaylen.

Interesting take. To me White is our current best guard who should always start. If we trade for Mitchell that means Smart becomes a bench player which he won't accept. And we could use a wing (Okoro has improved every year) if we trade Brown.

How about a double trade? I think it favours us too much to be realistic.
What do you think?

To Boston: Mitchell, Anunoby
To Cavaliers: Brown
To Toronto: Smart

New starters next season: White/Mitchell/Tatum/Anunoby/Williams (needs more shooting I guess)

That's not too bad - White is great, I've been a fan of his game since he was with San Antonio.

Swapping Smart for Anouby hurts as a fan, but he's definitely younger and a good defender. I've not watched Toronto enough to really see if he's passing at the level I would expect for a Horford replacement, though, which I'd need to know before I said 'yeah I love this'.

Generally, I would say that my default position for next season, given who's under contract for us & the current roster, is that running White/Smart/Brown/Tatum/Williams is probably the best option in general - mostly because I don't think we can replicate the free safety RW3 with Horford playing as he is now over a season.

Brown and Mitchell are probably pretty close in terms of overall talent, depends what you wnat in a player.

But that being the case.... why would Cleveland do this deal? Mitchell has an extra year left on his deal, Cleveland doesn't seem like a market Brown is guaranteed to re-sign in. That team would be good, so that's a point in Cleveland's favor because it makes it more likely Brown re-signs but I don't know this seems like a deal that doesn't change enough for either side to actually happen.

Star for star swaps between good teams.... almost never happen.

Garland and Mitchell are far more redundant than Garland and Brown.  That is why Cleveland would do the deal of they were going to.  Makes much more roster sense.  It is also why it makes a fair amount of sense for Boston given the redundancy in Tatum and Brown.

Given that you NEED multiple wings in today's NBA I don't think there's much redundancy in Tatum/Brown, if you trade Brown and you immediately are short a wing, arguably you already are.

That said I can see why it makes some sense basketball wise for each team, but its the type of trade that neither side will do for contract reasons. Cleveland doesn't want to lose a year of control going from Mitchell with two years left to Brown with only one especially because he likely won't extend with them, and Boston probably doesn't want to swap out Brown for Mitchell because they hold the trump card of the Super Max contract offer with Brown but don't hold that same trump card with Mitchell (whom they can't offer a supermax). That makes Mitchell strangely a bigger flight risk than Brown for Boston.

Do you need multiple wings?  I mean look at the top tier teams and where their wing players are on their team.  Sure you have the Celtics, Suns, and Clippers where their 2 best players are wings, but Gordon is what the 4th best Nugget.  The Heat have Butler and no other really good wings.  The Sixers don't have a good wing and neither do the Cavs.  Middleton is the 3rd best Buck and Barrett is the 3rd best Knick. 

The simple reality is, you just need talent and a team that works and fits well together and I for years have felt Brown isn't the right fit next to Tatum.  I don't think they work well with each other.  They are both very talented and talent gets you a long way, but to have a true multi-year contender, I think the team would be better off with a talented player that compliments Tatum better than Brown does.

I'm sorry, I just don't know why you have this idea that Brown and Tatum can't play together. They have had an awesome run of success playing together.

Net rating of those two in 22-23: 6.3-good, not great
21-22: 14.5-again, awesome
20-21: 2.8- actually good considering their .500 record. Roughly the same net rating as the 47-35 Knicks this year.   
19-20: 9.6- again, awesome
18-19: 4.9- good
17-18: 9.5- awesome

You're saying this with confidence yet the numbers and overall team success dont really back it up.

Its obviously impossible to know situations not explored, ie whether it would be EVEN BETTER with someone else next to Tatum. But the results have been very good with those two on the floor.

The truth is that two players who can shoot and switch across multiple positions actually complement each other very well.

[RodyTur10]

Get a lot younger (15 years) and dive under the tax (don't resign Grant). Garland is one of the new stars who brings necessary playmaking and I think signing Brown on a supermax will make ownership reluctant to keep other key players. Obviously Isaac is a huge gamble, but Okoro (year-by-year improving) is an insurance.

To Boston: Garland, Isaac, Okoro
To Cleveland: Brown, Smart
To Orlando: Brogdon

New rotation:  Garland/White/Tatum/Isaac/Williams (Pritchard/Hauser/Okoro/Muscala/Horford)

[gouki88]

Get a lot younger (15 years) and dive under the tax (don't resign Grant). Garland is one of the new stars who brings necessary playmaking and I think signing Brown on a supermax will make ownership reluctant to keep other key players. Obviously Isaac is a huge gamble, but Okoro (year-by-year improving) is an insurance.

To Boston: Garland, Isaac, Okoro
To Cleveland: Brown, Smart
To Orlando: Brogdon

New rotation:  Garland/White/Tatum/Isaac/Williams (Pritchard/Hauser/Okoro/Muscala/Horford)

I would rather just Brown straight up for Garland. No interest in Isaac or Okoro

[RodyTur10]

Get a lot younger (15 years) and dive under the tax (don't resign Grant). Garland is one of the new stars who brings necessary playmaking and I think signing Brown on a supermax will make ownership reluctant to keep other key players. Obviously Isaac is a huge gamble, but Okoro (year-by-year improving) is an insurance.

To Boston: Garland, Isaac, Okoro
To Cleveland: Brown, Smart
To Orlando: Brogdon

New rotation:  Garland/White/Tatum/Isaac/Williams (Pritchard/Hauser/Okoro/Muscala/Horford)

I would rather just Brown straight up for Garland. No interest in Isaac or Okoro

Some people believe Brown has hardly any trading value now and I disagree but a straight up trade for a younger star seems a bit much. Garland is signed for 5 years and Brown for only 1. I think we need to sweeten it for Cleveland by giving them a replacement starting guard (Smart or Brogdon). On the other hand Mitchell/Smart or Brogdon/Brown/Mobley/Allen looks scary. I'm interested what other people find of this.

The reason why I'd look for trading Smart and Brogdon is because Smart can't be trusted in late game situations and Brogdon is often injured. I'm really rooting for Isaac (love him potential) though it's a huge gamble I agree.
I'd much rather take Anunoby, but unsure whether the Raptors would trade him (for Smart or Brogdon).

In an ideal outcome it would be: Garland/White/Tatum/Anunoby/Williams (+ Brogdon, Hauser, Muscala, Horford)

Anyway to me Tatum, White and Rob Williams are absolute keepers. Of course Williams is injury-prone, but his contract is amazing, and he's just a rare difference maker. Hauser is a keeper as well (we've been looking for such a shooter for years). I thought Muscala was a good get, just use him.

Brown (I fear the financial consequential decisions by management after a supermax), Smart (poor judgment during crunch time) and Brogdon (good market, but injury-prone) are the guys I'd be looking to trade.

Other guys are also available. Horford should be a back-up now, but coaches deem to overplay him by his reputation.
So I'm looking to trade guards and that would bring opportunities for Pritchard, if we don't then he can explore his talents elsewhere. Gallinari and Kornet are expendable.

As the saying goes "stagnation means decline". Even if we make the NBA Finals, management needs to look forward and not sit still on roster building. The supermax is like a sword of Damocles. And we need to address the weaknesses this team still has.

[knuckleballer]

Bump

Let the Brown trade ideas commence.