Agree that’s too much for Lillard, especially given the age difference.
I think a Towns trade should be considered, too. Not sold on him, but I like the idea better than giving an incomplete player like JB the largest contract in NBA history.
And I think the Minny trade could make sense, too. Towns doesn’t fit alongside Gobert, and JB would seemingly fit next to Edwards as a 3 (and is seemingly close to Edwards). For us, Towns provides a versatile big either as a 4 or smaller ball 5, and he fits Tatum’s timeline.
I think a Cleveland Garland swap could make sense for both sides, too, as well as Siakam being a possibility.
All this will be predicated on JB being potentially interested in the destination, though.
Towns is a deal Minneosta might do, because they can't really move Gobert, and Towns and Gobert just clearly don't fit. I just hate that move for Boston. He is a complete nothing on defense, he turns it over more than Brown, is soft, and has just never demonstrated to any degree that he contributes to winning. Also, he's on the EXACT SAME CONTRACT AS BROWN. Literally dollar for dollar the first 4 years. If Boston is moving Brown for money reasons it 100% will not be for KAT, because that deal solves nothing.
Siakam for Brown makes basketball sense for Toronto, but for contract reasons neither team would do it. With Brown Boston at least has the supermax to offer him, with Siakam they don't have that ace in the whole. He's a walk risk, as is Brown for Toronto. Also, i don't love the fit of Siakam on the team. His three is his weakest skill, and we need shooters to space for Tatum. Also, he's older than Brown. Its a move for the sake of a move.
Garland is under a 25% max contract for five years. Cleveland isn't trading that for 1 year of Brown unless Brown agrees to an extension pre-trade, and I don't think he would. Even then Brown and Mitchell are more redundant than Mitchell and Garland so I don't see it for the Cavs. Also, I don't love small guards come playoff time.
I don't know, these guys don't solve any real issue for the c's, and in some cases create new issues. If the trade is KAT/Garland/Beal/Siakam or guys on that level I'm keeping Brown.
The Lillard idea I at least get. That guy solves your late game offense problem, lets Tatum move off ball more. It makes some sense at least even if I think there's no chance it happens.
Towns can't sign for 35% max though, while Brown can. Neither is worth 35% max, but Boston has to offer it to Brown, and can't to Towns. That is where money is saved.
Brown isn't a winning player for Boston. You just need to come to terms with that. Now maybe Towns or Siakam or Garland or whomever also is not a winning player for Boston, but maybe they are. We know Brown isn't. Thst is why a change is needed.
You're right, he can't. BECAUSE HE ALREADY HAS. Towns signed the same super max last off season, it kicks in 24-25 same as Brown. It is one year shorter than Browns would be, otherwise exact same money.
I think Brown is winning player because they win with him and when Tatum and Brown are on the court they've generally been excellent. But we've been over that already, so agree to disagree.
Towns signed a 4 year 224 million extension. Brown's is 5 years, 295 million. Fair amount different.
The numbers don't lie. Boston is better when Brown isn't on the floor. That is the opposite of a winning player.
Its literally just the last year that's different. Money is exactly the same the first 4. And, not for nothing, but that's different then saying "KAT can't sign the 35% max, Brown can."
And again, we've been over this. Some years Boston has been better with Brown off the floor, some years its been roughly the same, some years they've been better with him on (as recently as LAST year). I care more about how the team plays when both Tatum and Brown are on. Numbers there are pretty good. It's all a mixed bag.
Look, i get where you are coming from. I really do. Your main point isn't crazy or anything. I just don't think this is the summer for a Brown trade for reasons I've been over.
Except we saw time and time again that as soon as we sat JT, the offense went to crap. Hell, just last night it was a 10 point swing when Joe inexplicably sat JT for nearly half of the first quarter, which gave them momentum the rest of the game.
Sure, they’ll be on together more often than not, but you’re undervaluing the time with just JB on the floor. if you’re paying someone $50M a year they should be able to at least keep your team’s head above water while the best player is out. JB has shown time and time again that he just cannot consistently do this.
So I wouldn’t feel comfortable paying him that much money when he’s demonstrated this time and time again, in addition gj his obvious weaknesses around ball-handling and decision-making.
Okay, first off its wasn't inexplicable. Tatum had a sprained ankle. They took him out likely to give it time for the ankle to stiffen up. This should have been obvious watching Tatum limp around in the second half. Secondly that run also coincided with Brogdon entering which has been a disaster all series. Not his fault, but he's a zero with the injury.
To your last point: Maybe I am. I don't know, seems to me your stars play 45+ minutes in games that matter in the playoffs so how they play together is FAR more important than the three minutes they play a part. But maybe that's wrong.
Uh, what? Lol That’s the last thing you want to do if you continue to plan on playing on it. Stopping activity leads to the healing process starting and inflammation.
Yeah, the ankle stiffening up is the last thing you want. Let him keep playing to keep it loose and hope adrenaline takes over.
He looked much worse coming out of halftime because he sat for another prolonged period.
I'm sorry, this is nonsense. He looks worse because he SAT FOR FOUR MINUTES? The guy couldn't move. I don't know if people remember but for the entire rest of that quarter he basically didn't want the ball, because ever time he put pressure on that ankle he was in obvious pain. He took literally one shot the entire quarter after the sprain.
Like at some point getting mad at Joe because he didn't play a guy who literally couldn't move right the full 48 minutes seems like grasping at straws.
I worked in physical therapy for over a decade. The initial ankle sprain hurts, then it feels tight with a bit of weakness. Try to get some compression on it asap with a retape and give it go. But sitting him causes the ankle to stiffen up. Then throw in a 15 minute halftime break and the problem is compounded and the swelling starts to set in.
My point is there was no winning that situation. Maybe sitting him was bad, although tbh he looked the best he did all game in the 2nd quarter. He was 3-6 in the 2nd, AFTER sitting. But he also wasn't able to do anything in that first quarter, again one shot he missed. Not even trying to dribble. In some cases there is not right answer, they were screwed either way. I don't think him sitting hurt the situation, he might as well not have been out there anyway.
1) That’s just twisted ankle management 101. It’s basic biology and how inflammation and the recovery process works. You don’t sit a guy like that right after twisting the ankle, and if he does need a break then you have him do some light exercise or jogging or something to keep him active while resting - no different than the stationary bikes for guys with knee concerns.
2) But that’s all beside the point. The original point was that it made no sense to rest him there given that we’ve been atrocious with Tatum off the court the entire playoffs (-5.7), especially this series. Yet, idiotic Joe rests him there at a pivotal moment - while simultaneously playing injured Malcolm, as you highlight - and it proved disastrous to the tune of a 10 point swing. The hilarious thing is that Tatum did end up playing the entire second half until the bench was put in, all on a bum ankle. Couldn’t play him when it mattered in the first quarter, but could play him all second half after the game was mostly already decided.
So, yes, it was an idiotic, inexplicable move to take Tatum out there, both jn terms of managing the ankle sprain and the overall futility we’ve displayed without him on the court.
