Jaylen Brown Supermax

[jmen788]

What is the consensus on us giving him the supermax? That if we regret it that we can trade him for value... or could it be like a Westbrook situation where no one would touch him due to the crazy high salary... I would imagine it wouldn't be as bad as an over-the-hill Westbrook but could we really get anything of value for JB on a close to $60M/year AAV deal if we regret it? It kind of seems like we are stuck... that we are in a bad spot whether or not we give JB the supermax.

[keevsnick]

Bradley Beal had a no trade clause, a super max, has been injured the last two years and is a smaller guy who has never played defense entering his age 30 season and still returned positive value in a trade. Not a lot of positive value, but clearly not a dump.

Jaylen could suffer some catastrophic career ending injury, that's possible. But Bradley Beal is sort of the reasonable (ie bottom tier but not absolute bottom) worst case scenario to a Jaylen Brown super max contract and that wasn't even so bad.

So ya, give him the Supermax. Work it out later.

But DO NOT give his a no trade.

[jmen788]

Bradley Beal had a no trade clause, a super max, has been injured the last two years and is a smaller guy who has never played defense entering his age 30 season and still returned positive value in a trade. Not a lot of positive value, but clearly not a dump.

Jaylen could suffer some catastrophic career ending injury, that's possible. But Bradley Beal is sort of the reasonable (ie bottom tier but not absolute bottom) worst case scenario to a Jaylen Brown super max contract and that wasn't even so bad.

So ya, give him the Supermax. Work it out later.

But DO NOT give his a no trade.

It's just scary... $60M/year is sooo much! I guess we don't have a choice. He doesn't seem like the type that would take a bit less to help the team (not that he's obligated to or that we should expect him to.. but just saying).

[Kernewek]

Bradley Beal had a no trade clause, a super max, has been injured the last two years and is a smaller guy who has never played defense entering his age 30 season and still returned positive value in a trade. Not a lot of positive value, but clearly not a dump.

Jaylen could suffer some catastrophic career ending injury, that's possible. But Bradley Beal is sort of the reasonable (ie bottom tier but not absolute bottom) worst case scenario to a Jaylen Brown super max contract and that wasn't even so bad.

So ya, give him the Supermax. Work it out later.

But DO NOT give his a no trade.

He's not eligible for a no trade clause. And you can't add a no trade to an extension (which the super max is), it has to be in a new contract (i.e. a brand new deal signed by an UFA).

If he really suffered a career ending injury he wouldn't count against the cap anyway, although the team would still pay him some of the deal.

[footey]

He will likely get the super max but it won't have a "no trade" clause. I think the only serious negotiation will be whether there is a player option on the 5th year.  I hope team management pushes hard not to give in on that; not having player option would add more trade value, especially after year 2 of the deal, if the team chemistry isn't working.

[vjcsmoke]

I hope we don't have to pay him supermax.  I feel JB  is a star but not a superstar.  Then again nba money is crazy these days so who knows!

[footey]

Bulpett (the best) talked around league to JB's contract. 

Could be creative opportunity to offer JB an option after 3rd year to opt out (to capture even more $$ as FA as more revenue knocks up cap space) in exchange for giving Celtics team option on 5th year.

Check it out:

https://heavy.com/sports/boston-celtics/jaylen-brown-could-get-creative-with-celtics-supermax-contract-execs/

[PAOBoston]

I’d be curious is they offer him the full max. Maybe they are able to swing some between a normal max and the supermax (maybe like 33% of the cap vs the full 35%). He’s still be making more than a regular max.

[Moranis]

Team has to offer it, but it will be a bad contract

[knuckleballer]

It’s too much money for him, but I think the Celtics are giving it to him.

I’d prefer a trade, but that’s difficult with him entering his last year of his contract.  There were brief rumors of the Cavs looking to trade Garland.  I’d kick the tires on that.  Maybe, the Cavs would prefer a Brown/Mitchell combo and believe they can re-sign him.  Probably not though. 

A bit off topic, but why did the players union agree to this CBA?  It’s seems as though the league’s middle class are getting screwed. 

[tenn_smoothie]

Brown is not a supermax player.

[cman88]

Brown is not a supermax player.

the market says otherwise, who cares about Wycs money?

if celtics win a championship in the next 3 years will anyone here care if Brown was paid more than what you view as his "worth"??

[BitterJim]

Let's just be clear on one thing: Jaylen's supermax is not the same 40% max like some of the worst contracts out there, it's 35% which is the same as the normal max for a player with 10+ years of experience. If the cap continues to rise at 10%, he'd actually make a bit more by signing a 2 year extension and becoming a free agent right when he hits 10 years in the league (even if he isn't eligible for a 40% supermax at that point). It's entirely possible that Jaylen won't be worth the contract he gets (like it is with any player), but this isn't the ""supermax"" people usually think of, it's just getting the normal 10+ year max a couple of years early.

[footey]

Is anyone else confused/concerned about no announcement on Jaylen Brown's new contract?  I thought it could be announced officially as early has last midnight.  Are there any trade rumors concerning him?  I haven't seen any on Twitter. Wondering if the negotiation went off the rails.

[ozgod]

What is the consensus on us giving him the supermax? That if we regret it that we can trade him for value... or could it be like a Westbrook situation where no one would touch him due to the crazy high salary... I would imagine it wouldn't be as bad as an over-the-hill Westbrook but could we really get anything of value for JB on a close to $60M/year AAV deal if we regret it? It kind of seems like we are stuck... that we are in a bad spot whether or not we give JB the supermax.

I don't think there's a consensus as you will see on this thread 

I suspect they will give it to him, because that's what the market will decide he is worth. The opportunity cost of losing him would be too great and he would still be tradable even on a supermax. I personally think he's worth what he's getting paid right now but not a max, or a supermax, but I'm not writing the checks