Poll: White/Simon/Four 1st's For Giannis

[KG Living Legend]

 I think you have to if Giannis will extend for a couple of years. We become the favorites immediately when Tatum is ready.

Queta
Giannis
Tatum
Brown
Prichard

 Obviously can start Giannis at Center . But that team is scary big and athletic. Need PG help bad, but still have plenty of depth and defensive wings. Hauser, Walsh, Minot, Baylor, 

[Vermont Green]

I would do this trade.

Assuming this new injury is not serious of course.

[Who]

Not that bad of a return for Milwaukee. They can shift D White elsewhere and pick up another 2 first rounders for him. 6 first rounders for Giannis.

[Celtics2021]

It is not going to happen (I am fairly sure we do not have the ability to send out four firsts, for one thing), but I have seen far more ridiculous trade proposals for superstars on this board than this one.  Good job!

[Neurotic Guy]

That's an all-in move for sure.  Yeah, I think I'd be in favor of it - definitely provides a 3-4 year window of championship level talent - health presumed.  Giannis turns 31 on Saturday which puts him age-wise right about with the Jays (close) but seems like he'll be less likely to play into his upper 30's.  But I'll take a short window run at banners.

[slamtheking]

Only hesitancy I have is his willingness to sign an extension here and what it will cost.  Him, Tatum and Brown will basically cripple any financial ability to fill in a team around them going forward. 

having said that, adding Giannis to who we'd have left should make the C's contenders for the next few years

[Vermont Green]

Not that bad of a return for Milwaukee. They can shift D White elsewhere and pick up another 2 first rounders for him. 6 first rounders for Giannis.

What I was thinking, such as Houston.  Agree though that it is very unlikely.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

How about this:

Celtics receive: Giannis

Warriors receive: White

Bucks receive: Kuminga, Simons, Hield (contract filler), 4 1sts from the Celtics, 2 1sts from the Warriors

Why for Celtics? Celtics start Pritchard-Brown-Tatum-Giannis-Queta with Hauser, Hugo, Minott, Walsh off the bench. Still need more depth, but that's a contender.

Why for the Warriors? They flip Kuminga and Hield into White, who they were rumored to want. He's a better fit and allows them to make 1-2 more championship runs.

Why for the Bucks: Getting 6 legit 1sts plus two young players like Simons and Kuminga sets them up for a rebuild.

If Kuzma has to be in any trade with Giannis, then it gets more complicated, but not impossible. He actually fits right into our trade exemption, but then we'd need to flip his salary for someone making less than 13m a year to get back under the 2nd apron again. We have Hauser also as an asset to make that trade happen. The Jazz and Nets both have room in their cap to facilitate something.

[Moranis]

I'd think the Bucks would want Brown or Tatum if they were trading with Boston. 

[Birdman]

Paying Giannis, Brown & Tatum would cripple this team,  just gotta have D- leaguers as backups

[DefenseWinsChamps]

I'd think the Bucks would want Brown or Tatum if they were trading with Boston.

Probably a non-starter then.

If the Rockets are willing to trade Sengun, or if the Hawks are willing to trade Young, then they should do that.

Just don't think the Celtics would trade their finals MVP in a trade like that.

[Vermont Green]

Paying Giannis, Brown & Tatum would cripple this team,  just gotta have D- leaguers as backups

This is likely true.  The days of having (3) max contracts on a team are probably in the past, but I don't think this is entirely settled in terms of what is the best way to construct a roster with the current CBA rules/aprons/penalties.  A team of Tatum, Brown, and Giannis plus rookie deal players, vet min players, and whatever, would still be a very good  team.  Would it be better to, say, subtract Brown and add 2 or 3 "middle class" contracts?  The adage has always been that in the NBA, you don't want to trade a dollar for (4) quarters, which is what you would be doing if you off loaded one of the max deals.

[Celtics2021]

Paying Giannis, Brown & Tatum would cripple this team,  just gotta have D- leaguers as backups

This is likely true.  The days of having (3) max contracts on a team are probably in the past, but I don't think this is entirely settled in terms of what is the best way to construct a roster with the current CBA rules/aprons/penalties.  A team of Tatum, Brown, and Giannis plus rookie deal players, vet min players, and whatever, would still be a very good  team.  Would it be better to, say, subtract Brown and add 2 or 3 "middle class" contracts?  The adage has always been that in the NBA, you don't want to trade a dollar for (4) quarters, which is what you would be doing if you off loaded one of the max deals.

The Celtics could pull it off this year and next year, because Queta is under contract for the minimum and Pritchard is on such a sweetheart deal.  Combine that with Walsh and Minott also being at the minimum and Gonzalez and Scheierman being late firsts on rookie deals, and you have two viable NBA starters plus a 3-4 rotation guys under contract for $20 million.  The Celtics could remain under the second apron with that.

The problem, of course, would be after that.  Queta, Walsh, and Minott all become free agents after next season, and it is a lot to ask management to keep hitting on scrubs to fill out a rotation, rather than being able to keep some the scrubs that pan out on deals closer to the mid-level.  Especially since once you are competing it is harder to get minutes for the scrubs to develop them and know what you?ve got. 

The player I would be curious in kicking the tires on is Myles Turner.  No Giannis means the Bucks should move Turner while they can get something for him, and that signing, combined with the Lillard stretch, is going to look awful on a rebuilding team.  He makes $2 million less than Simons, so is affordable this year, and is signed for 2 more year plus a PO at a similar price.