Proposed Jaylen Brown Trade Ideas

[Moranis]

Garland and 5 is interesting.  Definitely would need to do something else with 5 or maybe that is how you get Giannis.

Clippers - Brown
Celtics - Giannis. Garland
Bucks - Bogdanovic, Hauser, Pritchard, Scheierman, Garza, 5, 27, 2028 BOS 1st

Partially on topic and partially off-topic

How much better is Garland than Pritchard?

Darius Garland has fallen down in my esteem over the last couple of seasons. There was a time a few years ago where I wondered about trading Jaylen Brown for D Garland in order to get a PG to help give the offense some direction.

However, since then, the league has gotten harsher and harsher on small guards defensively. Garland has become more and more of a defensive liability as this has happened. Furthermore, Garland has produced impressive regular season numbers but struggled to reproduce that same quality in the playoffs. Garland struggles to finish in the paint if anyone is around and he does not get to the FT line so he is highly reliant on his outside shot for his overall scoring efficiency. Much like Pritchard is. And while Garland is a very good shooter, he is not a great shooter. So this meant Garland has fallen in my estimation both offensively and defensively over the last few years.

I now have Garland ranked around middle of the pack among starting PGs (16th with Kyrie and Haliburton to come back and push Garland down 2 more spots). I have Pritchard around 20th / early 20s among starting PGs. So they are not far apart in my PG rankings.

------------------------

A different look at Garland and Pritchard.

Over the last 3 years, Garland has averaged 19.3ppg and 6.7apg with 2.8 turnovers and on a 58.3% TS. Pritchard has only been a starter this past season. Over the last 3 years, he has averaged 13.6ppg 4.0apg with only 1.0 turnover and on a 60.4% TS. This season Pritchard averaged 17.0ppg 5.2apg with only 1.4 turnovers (half of Garland's) and a 58.4% TS. So slight advantage in scoring in assists with more turnovers and equal scoring efficiency for Pritchard this year for Garland over last 3 years.

However, one of the things that has caused me to adjust how I rate Garland have been his playoff failures. So Garland has made the playoffs 3 times in his career and played 22 games. In the playoffs, Garland's numbers are 17.3ppg and 5.5apg. His FG% has dropped from 46.1% to 42.8%. His 3PT shooting from 39.1% to 34.3%. His TS% from 58.3% to 54.3%. He also averages 2.7 turnovers per game in the playoffs. Those are not good offensive numbers. That is poor efficiency. Garland has not been able to reproduce star (or near star) level regular season production into the playoffs.

Pritchard over the last 3 years has played 37 playoff games. He has played only 24mpg. 9.6ppg 2.5apg on 43.2% FG (similar to Garland), 36.8% 3PT (better than Garland) for an overall TS% of 56.8% (better than Garland). He has averaged 0.8 turnovers.

In terms of advanced stats from B-ref.com. Pritchard leads Garland in BPM and VORP in the playoffs. Pritchard has a 0.2 BPM compared to -1.1 for Garland. And a 0.5 VORP compared to 0.1 for Garland.

-------------------

I think Pritchard is a better defender than Garland. Both struggle with their lack of height but Pritchard has far more muscle and fights for position far better than Garland.

As scorers, Garland looks better based on his regular season stats but he has been a massive disappointment in the playoffs. I don't trust him as a scorer in the playoffs. In fact, I trust Pritchard more because he can adapt to a lower usage role and be more efficient whereas Garland thinks he is a star and can't back it up.

As passers / floor generals, they have different styles. Pritchard is a low risk low mistake player. As a result, he takes better care of the ball and shares it well. Garland will do a better job pushing the tempo and creating some easier shots for his teammates. But Garland is not a great playmaker either. Part of the reason they traded for Harden was because Garland wasn't good at creating easy hoops for the bigs. You can also see his assists drop in the playoffs along with his scoring because teams are not afraid of him driving to the basket because they know he cannot not finish in traffic so they do not help off of shooters as much. Plus, Garland takes more risks which results in more turnovers (less possessions for his team).

I like Garland's PG play in the regular season but I have been consistently disappointed with it in the postseason. I do not trust him as a floor general / passer / playmaker any more than I trust Pritchard.

Physically & athletically, Garland has an advantage in speed and being able to beat his man one-on-one but Pritchard has an advantage in muscle which helps him defensively and on the occasional drive. Neither guy can finish in a crowded lane. Pritchard can actually use his muscle to fend off a shot blocker now and then but neither is a good finisher inside.

I don't see the advantage for Garland over Pritchard.

I would rather have Pritchard over Garland.

Which makes me wonder if I should change my PG rankings some more and drop Garland further.

They have had such vastly different roles it is hard to compare them.  I mean Pritchard has only ever come off the bench in the playoffs.  76 games, 0 starts.  He did play about 33 mpg this year and his shooting numbers were way off from the regular season.  He was just ok playing starter minutes even without a single start.  His shooting numbers were down, passing down, rebounds down, etc. 

Garland has been hurt a lot, especially the toe the last couple of seasons, but he has been a starter his entire career.  He has been a much larger focus of his teams offense and thus defense against him.  The injuries are a real concern, but Garland is a significantly better player than Pritchard if healthy.  It isn't particularly close. 

[byennie]

Garland and 5 is interesting.  Definitely would need to do something else with 5 or maybe that is how you get Giannis.

Clippers - Brown
Celtics - Giannis. Garland
Bucks - Bogdanovic, Hauser, Pritchard, Scheierman, Garza, 5, 27, 2028 BOS 1st

Partially on topic and partially off-topic

How much better is Garland than Pritchard?

Darius Garland has fallen down in my esteem over the last couple of seasons. There was a time a few years ago where I wondered about trading Jaylen Brown for D Garland in order to get a PG to help give the offense some direction.

However, since then, the league has gotten harsher and harsher on small guards defensively. Garland has become more and more of a defensive liability as this has happened. Furthermore, Garland has produced impressive regular season numbers but struggled to reproduce that same quality in the playoffs. Garland struggles to finish in the paint if anyone is around and he does not get to the FT line so he is highly reliant on his outside shot for his overall scoring efficiency. Much like Pritchard is. And while Garland is a very good shooter, he is not a great shooter. So this meant Garland has fallen in my estimation both offensively and defensively over the last few years.

I now have Garland ranked around middle of the pack among starting PGs (16th with Kyrie and Haliburton to come back and push Garland down 2 more spots). I have Pritchard around 20th / early 20s among starting PGs. So they are not far apart in my PG rankings.

------------------------

A different look at Garland and Pritchard.

Over the last 3 years, Garland has averaged 19.3ppg and 6.7apg with 2.8 turnovers and on a 58.3% TS. Pritchard has only been a starter this past season. Over the last 3 years, he has averaged 13.6ppg 4.0apg with only 1.0 turnover and on a 60.4% TS. This season Pritchard averaged 17.0ppg 5.2apg with only 1.4 turnovers (half of Garland's) and a 58.4% TS. So slight advantage in scoring in assists with more turnovers and equal scoring efficiency for Pritchard this year for Garland over last 3 years.

However, one of the things that has caused me to adjust how I rate Garland have been his playoff failures. So Garland has made the playoffs 3 times in his career and played 22 games. In the playoffs, Garland's numbers are 17.3ppg and 5.5apg. His FG% has dropped from 46.1% to 42.8%. His 3PT shooting from 39.1% to 34.3%. His TS% from 58.3% to 54.3%. He also averages 2.7 turnovers per game in the playoffs. Those are not good offensive numbers. That is poor efficiency. Garland has not been able to reproduce star (or near star) level regular season production into the playoffs.

Pritchard over the last 3 years has played 37 playoff games. He has played only 24mpg. 9.6ppg 2.5apg on 43.2% FG (similar to Garland), 36.8% 3PT (better than Garland) for an overall TS% of 56.8% (better than Garland). He has averaged 0.8 turnovers.

In terms of advanced stats from B-ref.com. Pritchard leads Garland in BPM and VORP in the playoffs. Pritchard has a 0.2 BPM compared to -1.1 for Garland. And a 0.5 VORP compared to 0.1 for Garland.

-------------------

I think Pritchard is a better defender than Garland. Both struggle with their lack of height but Pritchard has far more muscle and fights for position far better than Garland.

As scorers, Garland looks better based on his regular season stats but he has been a massive disappointment in the playoffs. I don't trust him as a scorer in the playoffs. In fact, I trust Pritchard more because he can adapt to a lower usage role and be more efficient whereas Garland thinks he is a star and can't back it up.

As passers / floor generals, they have different styles. Pritchard is a low risk low mistake player. As a result, he takes better care of the ball and shares it well. Garland will do a better job pushing the tempo and creating some easier shots for his teammates. But Garland is not a great playmaker either. Part of the reason they traded for Harden was because Garland wasn't good at creating easy hoops for the bigs. You can also see his assists drop in the playoffs along with his scoring because teams are not afraid of him driving to the basket because they know he cannot not finish in traffic so they do not help off of shooters as much. Plus, Garland takes more risks which results in more turnovers (less possessions for his team).

I like Garland's PG play in the regular season but I have been consistently disappointed with it in the postseason. I do not trust him as a floor general / passer / playmaker any more than I trust Pritchard.

Physically & athletically, Garland has an advantage in speed and being able to beat his man one-on-one but Pritchard has an advantage in muscle which helps him defensively and on the occasional drive. Neither guy can finish in a crowded lane. Pritchard can actually use his muscle to fend off a shot blocker now and then but neither is a good finisher inside.

I don't see the advantage for Garland over Pritchard.

I would rather have Pritchard over Garland.

Which makes me wonder if I should change my PG rankings some more and drop Garland further.

They have had such vastly different roles it is hard to compare them.  I mean Pritchard has only ever come off the bench in the playoffs.  76 games, 0 starts.  He did play about 33 mpg this year and his shooting numbers were way off from the regular season.  He was just ok playing starter minutes even without a single start.  His shooting numbers were down, passing down, rebounds down, etc. 

Garland has been hurt a lot, especially the toe the last couple of seasons, but he has been a starter his entire career.  He has been a much larger focus of his teams offense and thus defense against him.  The injuries are a real concern, but Garland is a significantly better player than Pritchard if healthy.  It isn't particularly close.

Garland being significantly better in this argument, comes down to a bold assertion: that Garland is defended harder, because he's a higher usage starter. I don't buy that as a major effect.

Pritchard if you average out his last couple of years, is right around 15 & 5 on 12 FGA, 47/39/87 and low turnovers, medium usage. As a starter, he averages 18ppg for his career... 1 point less than Garland.

If you "upgrade" to Garland you get: ~20 & 7 on 16 FGA, 47/40/87 with double the turnovers and worse defense.

If Pritchard was traded tomorrow and given a higher usage starting position, it's highly likely he could put up near identical offensive numbers. Why wouldn't he make the leap from 17ppg to 20ppg? His FT percentage won't go down. He's already more efficient on 2PT FGs. I don't think his turnovers spike by double or he suddenly becomes a sub-35% 3PT shooter by taking 1 more per night.

It's possible that Garland has been asked to do more, or has more overall talent, but they are objectively VERY similar players.

[Celtics2021]

Garland and 5 is interesting.  Definitely would need to do something else with 5 or maybe that is how you get Giannis.

Clippers - Brown
Celtics - Giannis. Garland
Bucks - Bogdanovic, Hauser, Pritchard, Scheierman, Garza, 5, 27, 2028 BOS 1st

Boston would need depth but a Garland, White, Tatum, Giannis, Vucevic starting 5 is good and you still have Hugo, Walsh, and Queta plus Harper, Williams, Shulga

May not be enough for Milwaukee but by keeping Garland it better allows Acuff or whomever to have free reign on the Bucks. 

I still the Bucks best bet is Atlanta or Portland as a 3rd team, but the Clippers or Bulls is interesting because of the top 5 pick right now.

that's a hideous overpayment.  JB and maybe 27 for Giannis would be fair value in light of Giannis health concerns.  Bucks wouldn't take it but Giannis is not going to garner that much of a haul in the current trading environment. 

no way would I give up the rest of that for Garland.

It also fails the first apron hard cap test and the Stepian rule.  So there are some structural problems even beyond the crazy.

[Csfan1984]

Three team deal Wizard, Jazz, Cs

Cs trades Brown, PP, and a 1st swap.
Cs receive JJJ and 2nd overall pick (Darryn Peterson).

Jazz trade JJJ, LM and 2nd overall pick
Jazz receive PP, AD, 1 overall pick, 1 swap pick with Washington and filler contracts from Wiz.

Wizard trade pretty much half there roster, a future swap and #1.
receive LM and Brown.

C's end up
Peterson, White, Tatum, JJJ, Queta

Jazz get AJ and PP and look to maybe call for one more tank year flipping AD to another team.

Wiz end up with a big three in Young, JB and LM. That should equal playoff runs for a few years but they need to figure out the rest if they want to be a top team in the east.

[Moranis]

Garland and 5 is interesting.  Definitely would need to do something else with 5 or maybe that is how you get Giannis.

Clippers - Brown
Celtics - Giannis. Garland
Bucks - Bogdanovic, Hauser, Pritchard, Scheierman, Garza, 5, 27, 2028 BOS 1st

Boston would need depth but a Garland, White, Tatum, Giannis, Vucevic starting 5 is good and you still have Hugo, Walsh, and Queta plus Harper, Williams, Shulga

May not be enough for Milwaukee but by keeping Garland it better allows Acuff or whomever to have free reign on the Bucks. 

I still the Bucks best bet is Atlanta or Portland as a 3rd team, but the Clippers or Bulls is interesting because of the top 5 pick right now.

that's a hideous overpayment.  JB and maybe 27 for Giannis would be fair value in light of Giannis health concerns.  Bucks wouldn't take it but Giannis is not going to garner that much of a haul in the current trading environment. 

no way would I give up the rest of that for Garland.

It also fails the first apron hard cap test and the Stepian rule.  So there are some structural problems even beyond the crazy.

the trade worked on the trade machine. I had forgotten Boston traded the 29 1st, so yeah can't trade the 28 one. 

I don't see that as an overpay.  Brown and a bunch of role players for Giannis and Garland. 

[Moranis]

Atlanta - Brown, 40
New Orleans - Kuminga, Risarcher, 27, BOS 27 1st
Boston - Zion, Okongwu, 8

[Goldstar88]

Atlanta - Brown, 40
New Orleans - Kuminga, Risarcher, 27, BOS 27 1st
Boston - Zion, Okongwu, 8

I?d consider that. Zion is 25, he played in 62 games last year. Would need to load manage him so that he is (hopefully) good to go for the playoffs. I?d also like to bring back KP if they made this trade.

Starters: White, Hauser, Tatum, Zion, Porzingis
Branch: Pritchard, Scheierman, Harper Jr, Walsh, Okongwu, Queta, Garza

[slamtheking]

Atlanta - Brown, 40
New Orleans - Kuminga, Risarcher, 27, BOS 27 1st
Boston - Zion, Okongwu, 8

I?d consider that. Zion is 25, he played in 62 games last year. Would need to load manage him so that he is (hopefully) good to go for the playoffs. I?d also like to bring back KP if they made this trade.

Starters: White, Hauser, Tatum, Zion, Porzingis
Bench: Pritchard, Scheierman, Harper Jr, Walsh, Okongwu, Queta, Garza

horrible trade.  JB's the best player involved in the deal.  C's give up JB and 3 picks for a broken down Zion that'll be lucky to play half the games, an ok big in Okongwu and probably a PG prospect at 8.   

Atlanta gets the best player and a decent second rounder while unloading 2 players that have been truly underwhelming in their pro careers to the point where they're looking like busts for where they were drafted.  The only 'sacrifice' they make is giving up Okongwu. 

NO unloads the headache of Zion --> not knowing if he can play and that contract of his -- and gets 2 firsts as well as 2 forwards that while not great can at least get on the court and have an outside chance of becoming decent players.

If the C's are going the route of bringing in bigs with health issues, just resign Timelord and/or KP.  we at least know they'll fit with the team and get paid a lot less than Zion while allowing us to keep JB. 

[Vermont Green]

I guess the idea is that you want to trade Brown, ATL is a logical destination, but you like Zion better than what you could get from ATL.  Further assume that ATL would not send back Johnson.

I can't get this to work on Spotrac Trade Machine but it seems like it should:

To BOS:  Zion, Alexander-Walker ($56M)
To ATL:   Brown  ($57M)
To NOP:  Kuminga, Risacher ($38M)

I am not sure that NOP would expect any more than that from Zion.  He is a major risk.  BOS may take that risk plus BOS would get a reliable player in Alexander-Walker to replace Brown.  ATL gets Brown of course, keeps Johnson, but has to give up something (Alexander-Walker).

[Moranis]

I'd rather have Okongwu and 8 than NAW even giving up some late 1st's.  I think 8 is likely to lead to a long term starter whether it is a PG like Flemings or Brown, a swing like Ament., or a big like Steinbach.  I'd assume the team would take Brown.  He is a massive PG and would fit well with White. 

Brown, White, Tatum, Zion, Okongwu - Pritchard, Hugo, Hauser, Walsh, Queta - Harper, Scheierman, Shulga, Williams, Garza

I just see that team as more likely to win a title (even next year) than standing mostly pat and it opens the window for a longer time.  Obviously Zion's health is always going to be a thing, but he is still really efficient post injuries even as he has lost a bit of athleticism. And he did play 62 games last year. 

I don't know if Atlanta would do that trade.  They are the one I think would give the most pause.

[Birdman]

I want no part of Zion

[Who]

Zion is 25, he played in 62 games last year. Would need to load manage him so that he is (hopefully) good to go for the playoffs. I?d also like to bring back KP if they made this trade.

This is an interesting sequence

24 games played year 1
61 games played year 2
0 games played year 3
29 games played year 4

29 games played year 4
70 games played year 5
30 games played year 6

30 games played year 6
62 games played year 7
year 8

So a 20-30 game season on either side of a 60-70 game season. Year 1 24 games, then 61, down to 0 & 29. 29 to 70 to 30. 30 to 62 to ??.

Hopefully he breaks this habit next season and doesn't complete the sequence with another 20-30 game season after his 62 this year.