Simons to Boston. Trade idea

[KG Living Legend]

 I feel like this is a fair trade slighly in the Celtics favor though someone will disagree. Here it goes.

 Out. Prichard. Brogdon. 2025 Cs 1st. 2027 Cs First.

 In. Anfernee Simons.

 Blazers get a solid Veteran 6th man of the year who by the way is going to be Healthy for training camp. And three assets to flip for another Piece.

 Plus this opens the door for Scoot to play major mimutes in backcourt. Brodon can start or come off bbench.

 Celtics get our PG of the future and he can either start at the two and play White/Simons/Brown/Tatum/Zinger

Or

Zinger
Horford
Tatum
Brown
Simons

[KG Living Legend]

 If Simons is cool with coming off the bench that would be fantastic.

 Imagine Simons and Zinger against other teams reserves.

 Or picture resting Tatum or Brown. While pairing the other Zinger and Simons.

 Porzingis
 Tatum
 Simons

Or

Porzingis
Brown
Simons

Both those three would beat most teams.


Fully healthy Starters

Timelord
Porzingis
Tatum
Brown
White

Simons Horford Hauser Svi Brissett

[86MaxwellSmart]

Man, I thought you meant BEN Simmons...I was gonna call you Craaaaaazy.

[KG Living Legend]

 How about give your opinion on this idea. Would you include 3 firsts because thats what it would take.

[Moranis]

Simons is not a PG, but I'd do that trade

[Atzar]

I'm not a fan of Simons, so I wouldn't do it.  By some metrics he was among the very worst defensive players in the NBA this season.  Good offensive player but not good enough to make up for that IMO. 

Rather roll with what we already have at the position personally. 

[Surferdad]

Can't see anything happening until the Lillard thing is worked out.

[Vermont Green]

Brogdon was 6th man of the year and should be just as good if not better this season.  How are we better with Simons in that role?  Plus we give up Pritchard and picks?  Pritchard is replaceable so not too concerned about that but I don't get why people are so down on Brogdon that you want to ship him out with multiple picks.  Is this all about concern over durability?

[Vermont Green]

Can't see anything happening until the Lillard thing is worked out.

I would offer Pritchard, Brogdon, and 3 firsts for Lillard, but not Simons.  (I know the salaries wouldn't work).

[perks-a-beast]

I’d do it. Having Brogdon, Porzingiz, and Williams all on the team makes me very nervous. I think at least one has to go.

Also, Simons contract looks pretty appealing.

[KG Living Legend]

Brogdon was 6th man of the year and should be just as good if not better this season.  How are we better with Simons in that role?  Plus we give up Pritchard and picks?  Pritchard is replaceable so not too concerned about that but I don't get why people are so down on Brogdon that you want to ship him out with multiple picks.  Is this all about concern over durability?

 For Starters Simons is only 23 years old and is locked up through the 2026 season for a very reasonable 25 million per year.

 Could flip him anytime if it doesn't work out. If he works out he's even younger than Tatum and Brown and hasn't even hit his prime yet.

 White may have two years left of his prime before we see a downturn my opinion.

[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.

[Muzzy66]

I’d do it. Having Brogdon, Porzingiz, and Williams all on the team makes me very nervous. I think at least one has to go.

Also, Simons contract looks pretty appealing.

Simons has missed a higher percentage of games over his career then Brogdon has, so if having Brogdon on the roster concerns you health wise I don't know why Simons would make you feel any better.

[BitterJim]

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.

[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.

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.

Yeah - I wouldn't consider Simons a higher risk by any means, but if the idea is to trade a high health risk player (Brogdon) for a low health risk player then I don't think Simons meets that criteria.  I wouldn't feel much more confident relying on Simons/Timelord/Porzingis then i would relying on Brogdon/Timelord/Porzingis.  Same concerns more or less are still there.

It seems to me that the only real justification for trading Brogdon for Simons would be on the basis of age/upside - you're basically trading a guy who is more valuable right now for a guy who we hope to be more valuable later down the road.  I do understand that line of thinking, but my issue with it is that in this league opportunities to genuinely compete for titles don't come around that often.  I feel like the Celtics are in a genuine position to make a title run, and I think when you're in that position you want to go all in and 'strike while the iron is hot'.  Giving up a guy who helps you achieve that goal today for a younger guy who you HOPE can MAYBE one day be a better player in the future doesnt make a lot of sense to me.  We don't know where this team will be 2 or 3 years from now.  Maybe Brown demands a trade. Maybe Tatum signs elsewhere.  Maybe 3 years from now the team is going through an unexpected rebulid.  You don't want to be looking back saying "[dang], we should have given it all we had whlie we had the chance". 

Honestly I wouldn't even make that trade straight up.  I don't think Simons' youth and ever-so-slightly better health record is enough to compensate for the huge weaknesses as a defender and playmaker.  Part of what makes Brogdon so valuable is that ability to play multiple positions and contribute in multiple ways. Sure as hell not keen on throwing one or two firsts on top. I'd much rather keep Brogdon.