Jaylen Brown Supermax

[RJ87]

Trying to map some of this out with real numbers...

Next year's cap should be $149,623,100.  The second apron should be around $201,073,400, assuming it goes up 10%.

We have $136,761,750 in committed salaries next year for ten players.  This doesn't include Pritchard's qualifying offer.

If JB's salary next year is a straight 35% of the cap, it would be $52,368,085.

Adding that to committed salary, we'd be at $189,129,835 with 11 players under contract.

That would give us $11,943,565 in room to fill out the roster by adding three or four players.

I've made this point a couple of times, but no one seems to bite on it.

Why do we care about players 12-15 on the bench? They shouldn't impact winning in the regular season, and they definitely won't impact winning in the playoffs. What team is relying on their 3rd team players to win?

If we have devastating injuries this regular season, we should have time to make a move before the trade deadline.

I care about players 12 through 15, in that they're part of the roster and should be filled with the best quality player or prospect possible.

But, all of those guys are likely to either be on rookie contracts or vet minimums.

I get that you care about the guys 12-15. I just don't know why.

I'm not seeing evidence of those guys playing 25+ minutes a game, averaging 10+ points with 7 rebounds and 5 assists. Sure, it might happen once in a while, but we probably aren't calling them the 14th best player. They're probably the 7th or 8th best player and considered a role player.

The 1986 Celtics (many here think this was the greatest collection of talent, at least for big men) played 8 guys more than 10 minutes during the regular season. 8 guys played more than 6 minutes a game in the playoffs. Rick Carlisle and Sly Williams averaged just under 10 minutes a game, though Sly only played in 6 regular season games. The remaining players were: David Thirdkill, Sam Vincent, and Greg Kite (who averaged 7 minutes and 2pts per game). They had 13 guys on their roster and 3 rode the pine.

Too long ago? This year's Nuggets played 8 players more than 4 minutes a game in the playoffs.

Where are these deep teams with 12-15 solid players, and why is that suddenly a priority?

The Heat relied on their 11th and 12th player in the playoffs.  Their 13th guy (Jovic) seems like a solid enough prospect, and their 15th guy was essentially a player-coach.  They also kept Orlando Robinson on a two-way, who seems like he may see NBA minutes.  Only Omer Yurtseven seemed like pure roster filler. 

Sure, they're the gold standard, but we should strive to be like the Heat.  A team doesn't need to play 12+ players in playoff games, but it should have 12+ players who can play if called upon without seriously harming the team.

Also, as an aside...  what bench players are currently giving 10 points / 7 rebounds / 5 assists?

To be fair though, the Heat aren't going all out to fill out the end of their bench. It's not like anyone was heralding them signing Gabe Vincent to a 2-way a few years ago. They're going bargain shopping too with fringe league guys and undrafted prospects. The difference is that they find gems in the rough more often than most.

[Vermont Green]

The Heat relied on their 11th and 12th player in the playoffs.  Their 13th guy (Jovic) seems like a solid enough prospect, and their 15th guy was essentially a player-coach.  They also kept Orlando Robinson on a two-way, who seems like he may see NBA minutes.  Only Omer Yurtseven seemed like pure roster filler. 

Sure, they're the gold standard, but we should strive to be like the Heat.  A team doesn't need to play 12+ players in playoff games, but it should have 12+ players who can play if called upon without seriously harming the team.

Also, as an aside...  what bench players are currently giving 10 points / 7 rebounds / 5 assists?

I don't think that is terribly realistic, even under the old CBA rules, far less so now.  It is really not possible to pay for top end players and also pay to be 12+ deep.  That said, I think we have guys 8 to 11 who can play, not all as well as the top 7 but our top 7 is really good.  Of course there is a drop off.  And of course we have to pay top dollar for our top players.  Our 8-11 is:

Pritchard
Hauser
Brissett
Kornet

We could trade someone like Brown (#2) and then get better players for #8 - #11 but that doesn't make the team better.  I actually like how we stack up right now with only one exception.  I think we could benefit from one vet who could slot maybe 8-10, a vet min or a TPE trade.  But I don't see how you can expect the 10th or 12th guy to step in and play as well as Brogdon or Horford (for example), much less a starter, without a significant drop off.

I'm not saying that the 12th man has to be as good as the 7th man.  They just have to be able to play some minutes without absolutely embarrassing themselves and the team.  They will obviously be below average, but not G-league level.

OK, clarification acknowledged, but do you agree that we now 11 deep with players that are not G-League level and would not absolutely embarrass themselves when they need to play?  We might quibble over Kornet I guess at #11 but to me, he is acceptable in a emergency use only role.  Played over 800 minutes, 69 games last season.  He was a drop off from Grant, but how much really?  But Pritchard, Hauser, and Brissett clearly meet the criteria, right?

[Roy H.]

The Heat relied on their 11th and 12th player in the playoffs.  Their 13th guy (Jovic) seems like a solid enough prospect, and their 15th guy was essentially a player-coach.  They also kept Orlando Robinson on a two-way, who seems like he may see NBA minutes.  Only Omer Yurtseven seemed like pure roster filler. 

Sure, they're the gold standard, but we should strive to be like the Heat.  A team doesn't need to play 12+ players in playoff games, but it should have 12+ players who can play if called upon without seriously harming the team.

Also, as an aside...  what bench players are currently giving 10 points / 7 rebounds / 5 assists?

I don't think that is terribly realistic, even under the old CBA rules, far less so now.  It is really not possible to pay for top end players and also pay to be 12+ deep.  That said, I think we have guys 8 to 11 who can play, not all as well as the top 7 but our top 7 is really good.  Of course there is a drop off.  And of course we have to pay top dollar for our top players.  Our 8-11 is:

Pritchard
Hauser
Brissett
Kornet

We could trade someone like Brown (#2) and then get better players for #8 - #11 but that doesn't make the team better.  I actually like how we stack up right now with only one exception.  I think we could benefit from one vet who could slot maybe 8-10, a vet min or a TPE trade.  But I don't see how you can expect the 10th or 12th guy to step in and play as well as Brogdon or Horford (for example), much less a starter, without a significant drop off.

I'm not saying that the 12th man has to be as good as the 7th man.  They just have to be able to play some minutes without absolutely embarrassing themselves and the team.  They will obviously be below average, but not G-league level.

OK, clarification acknowledged, but do you agree that we now 11 deep with players that are not G-League level and would not absolutely embarrass themselves when they need to play?  We might quibble over Kornet I guess at #11 but to me, he is acceptable in a emergency use only role.  Played over 800 minutes, 69 games last season.  He was a drop off from Grant, but how much really?  But Pritchard, Hauser, and Brissett clearly meet the criteria, right?

Yeah, I'd put us at 10.  Kornet is a missed opportunity to me, because there was seemingly room to upgrade the team at his spot.  I see him as a fringe roster player.  Same thing with Banton, Walsh, and Champagnie.  Walsh is a legit prospect, though, and I'll concede that Kornet didn't embarrass himself.  I just wish we had somebody who was better when we've got so much injury risk in the front court.

[Irish Stew]

Jimmy Stewart of "Felger and Mazz" suggested that part of the reason for the holdup in the Brown supermax signing is that he might be willing to take a little less in order to bring in Wendell Carter of the Magic. I assume that the price would be a 1st round pick. Doesn't sound realistic to me but I would certainly be in favor.

[Vermont Green]

Yeah, I'd put us at 10.  Kornet is a missed opportunity to me, because there was seemingly room to upgrade the team at his spot.  I see him as a fringe roster player.  Same thing with Banton, Walsh, and Champagnie.  Walsh is a legit prospect, though, and I'll concede that Kornet didn't embarrass himself.  I just wish we had somebody who was better when we've got so much injury risk in the front court.

Agree on all, but my prediction is that we are going to waive Champagnie and add a vet min player to replace him, or maybe some other transaction to replace Champagnie.  I know that Stevens the other day said "we are set with bigs" or something like that but I still think we could add a PF, which would bump Kornet down the depth chart.  And even if it is exactly a 3/4 as Stevens said, we can still upgrade Champagnie's slot from a bottom roster prospect to an actual 8-11 level player.  If we do even that one simple move, it gets us to 11.5 useful players (we can put Kornet as the 0.5).

I will say further that even if we aren't able to upgrade Champagnie's slot by the start of the season, I am not that concerned to start the season just the way we are.  Finding the right FA to bring in on a min contract is not as simple as going to Trader Joe's and picking up some food.  And if it is a trade, it is even harder.  The player still has to be a good fit, accept the role, be good enough to actually help, want to be in Boston, and so on.  Or in the case of a trade, the other team has to be willing.  We don't need to be impatient on this.

[Who]

The Heat relied on their 11th and 12th player in the playoffs.  Their 13th guy (Jovic) seems like a solid enough prospect, and their 15th guy was essentially a player-coach.  They also kept Orlando Robinson on a two-way, who seems like he may see NBA minutes.  Only Omer Yurtseven seemed like pure roster filler. 

Sure, they're the gold standard, but we should strive to be like the Heat.  A team doesn't need to play 12+ players in playoff games, but it should have 12+ players who can play if called upon without seriously harming the team.

Also, as an aside...  what bench players are currently giving 10 points / 7 rebounds / 5 assists?

I don't think that is terribly realistic, even under the old CBA rules, far less so now.  It is really not possible to pay for top end players and also pay to be 12+ deep.  That said, I think we have guys 8 to 11 who can play, not all as well as the top 7 but our top 7 is really good.  Of course there is a drop off.  And of course we have to pay top dollar for our top players.  Our 8-11 is:

Pritchard
Hauser
Brissett
Kornet

We could trade someone like Brown (#2) and then get better players for #8 - #11 but that doesn't make the team better.  I actually like how we stack up right now with only one exception.  I think we could benefit from one vet who could slot maybe 8-10, a vet min or a TPE trade.  But I don't see how you can expect the 10th or 12th guy to step in and play as well as Brogdon or Horford (for example), much less a starter, without a significant drop off.

I'm not saying that the 12th man has to be as good as the 7th man.  They just have to be able to play some minutes without absolutely embarrassing themselves and the team.  They will obviously be below average, but not G-league level.

OK, clarification acknowledged, but do you agree that we now 11 deep with players that are not G-League level and would not absolutely embarrass themselves when they need to play?  We might quibble over Kornet I guess at #11 but to me, he is acceptable in a emergency use only role.  Played over 800 minutes, 69 games last season.  He was a drop off from Grant, but how much really?  But Pritchard, Hauser, and Brissett clearly meet the criteria, right?

Yeah, I'd put us at 10.  Kornet is a missed opportunity to me, because there was seemingly room to upgrade the team at his spot.  I see him as a fringe roster player.  Same thing with Banton, Walsh, and Champagnie.  Walsh is a legit prospect, though, and I'll concede that Kornet didn't embarrass himself.  I just wish we had somebody who was better when we've got so much injury risk in the front court.

I'm at 9. I want to see more of Brissett before I include him. He got beaten out for playing time by some pretty mediocre talent like Nesmith and Jalen Smith.

[Vermont Green]

Jimmy Stewart of "Felger and Mazz" suggested that part of the reason for the holdup in the Brown supermax signing is that he might be willing to take a little less in order to bring in Wendell Carter of the Magic. I assume that the price would be a 1st round pick. Doesn't sound realistic to me but I would certainly be in favor.

This does seem strange.  Carter is under contract for $13M this season.  Brown's extension is not going to have any impact on the Celtics cap this season, whether he takes less or not.  That all starts next season.   A trade would have to involve a lot more than a first round pick, salaries would have to match.  It would have to be something like Brogdon + Picks for Carter and Cole Anthony.  But why would ORL do that trade, it makes no sense.  Unless we are back to a 3-way with LAC where they take Brogdon and send Morris (expiring) and picks to ORL.  That seems like a lot for LAC to give up for Brogdon.  Do they have any desirable young players they could send to ORL?

[Roy H.]

Jimmy Stewart of "Felger and Mazz" suggested that part of the reason for the holdup in the Brown supermax signing is that he might be willing to take a little less in order to bring in Wendell Carter of the Magic. I assume that the price would be a 1st round pick. Doesn't sound realistic to me but I would certainly be in favor.

This does seem strange.  Carter is under contract for $13M this season.  Brown's extension is not going to have any impact on the Celtics cap this season, whether he takes less or not.  That all starts next season.   A trade would have to involve a lot more than a first round pick, salaries would have to match.  It would have to be something like Brogdon + Picks for Carter and Cole Anthony.  But why would ORL do that trade, it makes no sense.  Unless we are back to a 3-way with LAC where they take Brogdon and send Morris (expiring) and picks to ORL.  That seems like a lot for LAC to give up for Brogdon.  Do they have any desirable young players they could send to ORL?

You've put way more thought into that than the clowns making stuff up on Felger and Mazz.

[green_bballers13]

The Heat relied on their 11th and 12th player in the playoffs.  Their 13th guy (Jovic) seems like a solid enough prospect, and their 15th guy was essentially a player-coach.  They also kept Orlando Robinson on a two-way, who seems like he may see NBA minutes.  Only Omer Yurtseven seemed like pure roster filler. 

Sure, they're the gold standard, but we should strive to be like the Heat.  A team doesn't need to play 12+ players in playoff games, but it should have 12+ players who can play if called upon without seriously harming the team.

Also, as an aside...  what bench players are currently giving 10 points / 7 rebounds / 5 assists?

I don't think that is terribly realistic, even under the old CBA rules, far less so now.  It is really not possible to pay for top end players and also pay to be 12+ deep.  That said, I think we have guys 8 to 11 who can play, not all as well as the top 7 but our top 7 is really good.  Of course there is a drop off.  And of course we have to pay top dollar for our top players.  Our 8-11 is:

Pritchard
Hauser
Brissett
Kornet

We could trade someone like Brown (#2) and then get better players for #8 - #11 but that doesn't make the team better.  I actually like how we stack up right now with only one exception.  I think we could benefit from one vet who could slot maybe 8-10, a vet min or a TPE trade.  But I don't see how you can expect the 10th or 12th guy to step in and play as well as Brogdon or Horford (for example), much less a starter, without a significant drop off.

I'm not saying that the 12th man has to be as good as the 7th man.  They just have to be able to play some minutes without absolutely embarrassing themselves and the team.  They will obviously be below average, but not G-league level.

OK, clarification acknowledged, but do you agree that we now 11 deep with players that are not G-League level and would not absolutely embarrass themselves when they need to play?  We might quibble over Kornet I guess at #11 but to me, he is acceptable in a emergency use only role.  Played over 800 minutes, 69 games last season.  He was a drop off from Grant, but how much really?  But Pritchard, Hauser, and Brissett clearly meet the criteria, right?

Yeah, I'd put us at 10.  Kornet is a missed opportunity to me, because there was seemingly room to upgrade the team at his spot.  I see him as a fringe roster player.  Same thing with Banton, Walsh, and Champagnie.  Walsh is a legit prospect, though, and I'll concede that Kornet didn't embarrass himself. I just wish we had somebody who was better when we've got so much injury risk in the front court.

I agree with all of this, especially the bolded. I think where I may differ is that I don't have a sense of urgency to lock up another legit role player (or 2) to backup Porzingis before the trade deadline.

I'd also like to see Brad fill out this bench with legit role players. I bet he's higher on Brissett than others. I also think he has collected a ton of 2nd round picks to trade for role players on bad teams that may be better than the current lot of free agents.

I think this team wins 50 games even with an injury or two. I'm done being concerned about regular season records and playoff seeding. We need to improve regular season management of minutes because our guys are getting tired late in these playoff runs. Miami is a great example of a team that didn't play well during the regular season but flipped the switch at the right moment. So to your point, I would like to see more help for the bench and would love if Brad replicated most of what Riley has done in Miami.

[SHAQATTACK]

I like when Brown is used as a weapon , he is explosive.  The point guard needs to handle the ball and feed his scoring options with what the defense gives .  Brown does better when others get involved and Brown waits for the play to come to him.  I don’t care for Tatum to bring ball down either.   We need point guard with handles .

[Moranis]

if Brown is as bad as some fans say, how did he average 27ppg on 49% shooting and make the all-nba team?

DeRozan did that 2 seasons, but you didn't see anyone claiming he should be paid like the best player in the sport. LaVine, like DeRozan, also had 50% shooting and over 27 ppg 3 seasons ago and he didn't even make an All NBA Team.  There is context to everything and you seem to be missing that.  Brown is a good player, but he isn't 35% of the cap good.  We are already seeing the 2nd apron crunch when he let a rotation player walk because we didn't want to pay him the MLE.  What do you think will happen in 2 seasons when Brown is at 35%, Tatum and Prozingis are around 45% of the cap? Who is being salary dumped at that point.  Might as well just trade White, Brogdon, and Rob now as they all won't be on the team in 2 years with their 35% cap hit collectively.  Brogdon, in particular, should be moved now.  No reason to let his value erode.

So you agree, its not about what makes the team more likely to win a championship in the next 3 years, you are worried about what happens after all their contracts are up.

if the team doesn't win a chip in the next 2-3 years Brown will probably be traded anyway or KP or both. Maybe Tatum requests a trade because the team hasn't won anything and went backwards after getting rid of Brown.

So why ruin our chances of winning next year? If anything this is an argument of why we should go ALL IN the next couple years. because its our best chance of winning and keeping Tatum and/or brown

Not at all. In fact, I've been saying for years Brown should be traded because he doesn't impact winning the way he should for his talent.  In fact, Boston has been better with Brown on the bench per possession almost every year he has been here and every post season since he became a starter.  When Brown doesnt play at all, Boston maintains its winning percentage and that is without replacing him.  Tatum is quite simply better when Brown doesnt take his space on the floor,  and the team goes as Tatum goes.  Given his lack of impact to winning, you shouldn't sign him to a supermax.

Bill Simmons said it best that Boston basically has no choice in giving him that contract and when was the last time a team had no choice and it worked out. Essentially Boston has to sign him to that contract, not that Boston wants to sign him to that contract. Simmons is right.

[mobilija]

if Brown is as bad as some fans say, how did he average 27ppg on 49% shooting and make the all-nba team?

DeRozan did that 2 seasons, but you didn't see anyone claiming he should be paid like the best player in the sport. LaVine, like DeRozan, also had 50% shooting and over 27 ppg 3 seasons ago and he didn't even make an All NBA Team.  There is context to everything and you seem to be missing that.  Brown is a good player, but he isn't 35% of the cap good.  We are already seeing the 2nd apron crunch when he let a rotation player walk because we didn't want to pay him the MLE.  What do you think will happen in 2 seasons when Brown is at 35%, Tatum and Prozingis are around 45% of the cap? Who is being salary dumped at that point.  Might as well just trade White, Brogdon, and Rob now as they all won't be on the team in 2 years with their 35% cap hit collectively.  Brogdon, in particular, should be moved now.  No reason to let his value erode.

So you agree, its not about what makes the team more likely to win a championship in the next 3 years, you are worried about what happens after all their contracts are up.

if the team doesn't win a chip in the next 2-3 years Brown will probably be traded anyway or KP or both. Maybe Tatum requests a trade because the team hasn't won anything and went backwards after getting rid of Brown.

So why ruin our chances of winning next year? If anything this is an argument of why we should go ALL IN the next couple years. because its our best chance of winning and keeping Tatum and/or brown

Not at all. In fact, I've been saying for years Brown should be traded because he doesn't impact winning the way he should for his talent.  In fact, Boston has been better with Brown on the bench per possession almost every year he has been here and every post season since he became a starter.  When Brown doesnt play at all, Boston maintains its winning percentage and that is without replacing him.  Tatum is quite simply better when Brown doesnt take his space on the floor,  and the team goes as Tatum goes.  Given his lack of impact to winning, you shouldn't sign him to a supermax.

Bill Simmons said it best that Boston basically has no choice in giving him that contract and when was the last time a team had no choice and it worked out. Essentially Boston has to sign him to that contract, not that Boston wants to sign him to that contract. Simmons is right.

Except for the year Brown was injured for the playoffs and we lost in the 1st round, right?

[Irish Stew]

Jimmy Stewart of "Felger and Mazz" suggested that part of the reason for the holdup in the Brown supermax signing is that he might be willing to take a little less in order to bring in Wendell Carter of the Magic. I assume that the price would be a 1st round pick. Doesn't sound realistic to me but I would certainly be in favor.

This does seem strange.  Carter is under contract for $13M this season.  Brown's extension is not going to have any impact on the Celtics cap this season, whether he takes less or not.  That all starts next season.   A trade would have to involve a lot more than a first round pick, salaries would have to match.  It would have to be something like Brogdon + Picks for Carter and Cole Anthony.  But why would ORL do that trade, it makes no sense.  Unless we are back to a 3-way with LAC where they take Brogdon and send Morris (expiring) and picks to ORL.  That seems like a lot for LAC to give up for Brogdon.  Do they have any desirable young players they could send to ORL?

I wonder if it's possible that Horford would be included in the trade. He has one less year on his contract left, and since Orlando would not be interesred in such an old player, we would have to include pick(s). What this has to do with the Brown signing, I don't know.

[Moranis]

if Brown is as bad as some fans say, how did he average 27ppg on 49% shooting and make the all-nba team?

DeRozan did that 2 seasons, but you didn't see anyone claiming he should be paid like the best player in the sport. LaVine, like DeRozan, also had 50% shooting and over 27 ppg 3 seasons ago and he didn't even make an All NBA Team.  There is context to everything and you seem to be missing that.  Brown is a good player, but he isn't 35% of the cap good.  We are already seeing the 2nd apron crunch when he let a rotation player walk because we didn't want to pay him the MLE.  What do you think will happen in 2 seasons when Brown is at 35%, Tatum and Prozingis are around 45% of the cap? Who is being salary dumped at that point.  Might as well just trade White, Brogdon, and Rob now as they all won't be on the team in 2 years with their 35% cap hit collectively.  Brogdon, in particular, should be moved now.  No reason to let his value erode.

So you agree, its not about what makes the team more likely to win a championship in the next 3 years, you are worried about what happens after all their contracts are up.

if the team doesn't win a chip in the next 2-3 years Brown will probably be traded anyway or KP or both. Maybe Tatum requests a trade because the team hasn't won anything and went backwards after getting rid of Brown.

So why ruin our chances of winning next year? If anything this is an argument of why we should go ALL IN the next couple years. because its our best chance of winning and keeping Tatum and/or brown

Not at all. In fact, I've been saying for years Brown should be traded because he doesn't impact winning the way he should for his talent.  In fact, Boston has been better with Brown on the bench per possession almost every year he has been here and every post season since he became a starter.  When Brown doesnt play at all, Boston maintains its winning percentage and that is without replacing him.  Tatum is quite simply better when Brown doesnt take his space on the floor,  and the team goes as Tatum goes.  Given his lack of impact to winning, you shouldn't sign him to a supermax.

Bill Simmons said it best that Boston basically has no choice in giving him that contract and when was the last time a team had no choice and it worked out. Essentially Boston has to sign him to that contract, not that Boston wants to sign him to that contract. Simmons is right.

Except for the year Brown was injured for the playoffs and we lost in the 1st round, right?

Yeah, I had forgotten he missed a playoffs entirely, when I was looking at his on/off differential.  He is entirely red for the years he played except his rookie year, including the most recent season when his differential per 100 possessions was -6.5 (only White and Grant were worse - and no one else was negative). 

[tenn_smoothie]

if Brown is as bad as some fans say, how did he average 27ppg on 49% shooting and make the all-nba team?

DeRozan did that 2 seasons, but you didn't see anyone claiming he should be paid like the best player in the sport. LaVine, like DeRozan, also had 50% shooting and over 27 ppg 3 seasons ago and he didn't even make an All NBA Team.  There is context to everything and you seem to be missing that.  Brown is a good player, but he isn't 35% of the cap good.  We are already seeing the 2nd apron crunch when he let a rotation player walk because we didn't want to pay him the MLE.  What do you think will happen in 2 seasons when Brown is at 35%, Tatum and Prozingis are around 45% of the cap? Who is being salary dumped at that point.  Might as well just trade White, Brogdon, and Rob now as they all won't be on the team in 2 years with their 35% cap hit collectively.  Brogdon, in particular, should be moved now.  No reason to let his value erode.

So you agree, its not about what makes the team more likely to win a championship in the next 3 years, you are worried about what happens after all their contracts are up.

if the team doesn't win a chip in the next 2-3 years Brown will probably be traded anyway or KP or both. Maybe Tatum requests a trade because the team hasn't won anything and went backwards after getting rid of Brown.

So why ruin our chances of winning next year? If anything this is an argument of why we should go ALL IN the next couple years. because its our best chance of winning and keeping Tatum and/or brown

Not at all. In fact, I've been saying for years Brown should be traded because he doesn't impact winning the way he should for his talent.  In fact, Boston has been better with Brown on the bench per possession almost every year he has been here and every post season since he became a starter.  When Brown doesnt play at all, Boston maintains its winning percentage and that is without replacing him.  Tatum is quite simply better when Brown doesnt take his space on the floor,  and the team goes as Tatum goes.  Given his lack of impact to winning, you shouldn't sign him to a supermax.

Bill Simmons said it best that Boston basically has no choice in giving him that contract and when was the last time a team had no choice and it worked out. Essentially Boston has to sign him to that contract, not that Boston wants to sign him to that contract. Simmons is right.

Yep, I also think trading Jaylen might be the best thing for the team and for Brown.
How about Jaylen Brown, Hauser, Kornet, Champagnie to Toronto for Pascal Siakam.
The salaries work under the CBA. I would have liked to have kept Hauser, but I chose Peyton Pritchard instead.
Brown gets a new start as the top dog in Toronto and the Celts gain an inside force and have a more content locker room with a solid pecking order.
Then, Brad pulls his head out of his ass and hires a competent head coach and the Celtics hang a few banners.