In another thread I proposed this trade
Brown, Scheierman for Harper, Johnson, Sochan, Bryant, Champagnie
Not sure either team would actually do that, but that is what I'd be looking at especially with the added benefit of shedding nearly 11 million.
You do that, I might try to move White to Houston. Something like
White for VanVleet, Okogie, 2 1st
Trade Simons for someone like Stewart and then tank hard this year. Go into next year with Harper, Bryant, and Okogie getting heavy minutes and better able to play well. Add the very high pick in a deep draft with immense talent at the top.
So
Starters - Harper, Okogie, Johnson, Tatum, Dybantsa/Boozer
Bench - VanVleet, Pritchard, Bryant, Hugo, Hauser, Champagnie, Sochan, Queta, Stewart, Williams
Team is definitely younger so there will be some growing pains, but the top end talent and depth is also better extending the Tatum window though with less certainty
Also has more trade options. For example VanVleet's expiring plus the 2 future 1st from Houston could be attractive to teams. And you could use Harper and/or Dybantsa as the centerpiece of a trade for Giannis (or someone like that) if he asks to be traded.
Again, I don't think Boston moves Brown or White let alone both, but that is the type of thing I'd be looking at.
Many find you a pessimist, I think this is frankly optimistic.
1) the Spurs arent doing this trade. Browns simply not worth Harper.
2) With these trades, we will likely settle somewhere in the 4-7 range of the lottery which gives us somewhere between 20 and 40% chance at being able to select one of the premium prospects. You pencil in, us getting a top 3 pick
3) There remains the very real chance that these elite prospects end up being not that great.
A Brown trade makes sense if its like the one you outline: we get back a premium prospect in addition to pushing our own pick up a ton. The ancillary assets and cap relief are great too, but imo little more than details.
You outline a future where we trade Brown and White and tank and get Dybantsa or Boozer along with Harper.
I see trading Brown as looking much more like:
Starters - VanVleet, Okogie, Johnson, Tatum, Cenac Jr.
Bench - Pritchard, Bryant, Hugo, Hauser, Champagnie, Sochan, Queta, Stewart, Williams
The vision is beautiful when we get Harper (we wont), he turns into a star(50/50 chance) and we get Boozer/Dybantsa(we likely wont) and they turn into a start(probably 40% chance generously)
But gets much less rosy when we dont get a premium centerpiece and we take Chris Cenac Jr with the #6 pick.
I encourage you to turn your same rosy glasses to our current stated strategy of turning zeros into non-zeroes. Is it really more fanciful to think Brad can package Simons with future picks to find an Aaron Gordon/Jrue Holiday level #4 starter? That Queta or Minott can establish themselves as a good #5 starter?
That Brad might be able to conjure up additional depth next to Queta/Minott, Pritchard and Hauser to make the bench elite again?
I think both are fanciful visions but the fact is that we are now once again like most teams in the NBA: we do not have a clear path to a title. Tanking does not create that and nor does not tanking. The reason tanking seems more visible is that its easier to look at the best prospect in this years class, imagine him on your team, and imagine him living up to the hype. I dont think that path is actually more accessible than ccreating elite depth with minimal assets.
