RealGM

Jaylen Brown and the Boston Celtics have agreed to a five-year, $304 million supermax extension.

Brown's contract is fully guaranteed and has a trade kicker. Brown, however, doesn't have a player option as part of the deal.

Brown qualified for the supermax after making an All-NBA team this past season.

Via Shams Charania/The Athletic

Classic case of damned if you do damned if you don't.

Celts had to sign him, though that trade kicker is shocking - it will hurt his trade value

This is going to be an albatross as soon as it kicks in.
Jaylen is a great player who can take over a game occasionally, but he's a sub par shooter, who is fringe All-NBA (the qualification that make him eligible for the supermax) who's only made 2 all star games in 7 years.
Inconsistency is his biggest problem, you put all his best stretches from different parts of his game together and he's one of the best players in the league, but you only get slices of his best on a game by game basis.
I agree he's worth a sizable NBA contract, but I can't see him living up to a ~$60 million a year average contract into his early 30s.

Lol jaylen brown wrongfully stole hardens all-nba spot because of the bias Boston media. So this is perfect for me

I would have traded the trade kicker for the 5th year player option. As we've seen with players like Harden and Middleton that player option can end up saving the team money or at least giving some optionality.

There needs to be tiers for All-NBA for the supermax. A Jaylen Brown All-NBA is very different from a Nikola Jokic All-NBA. They shouldn't both qualify for the same max amount.

So, Jaylen Brown is the best player in the NBA?

theman wrote:So, Jaylen Brown is the best player in the NBA?

No, that would be Alex Rodriguez

sw995 wrote:Classic case of damned if you do damned if you don't.

Celts had to sign him, though that trade kicker is shocking - it will hurt his trade value

I'll take the "damned if you don't" option. I disagree that they "had to" sign him. There is not one player worth that $60M per year average salary. Salaries in sports have been ridiculous for a long time, but this is insanity.

Wow crazy.. we are getting up there now. I wonder how long it will take before above avg players start getting 100 million per year.

Beethoven wrote:Wow crazy.. we are getting up there now. I wonder how long it will take before above avg players start getting 100 million per year.

And we will enjoy advertisements all over the floor and jerseys to pay for it.

Brown had to get 60 to make VanVleet's 43 look reasonable.

Should have traded him last season:|

Don’t dribble left and he’s worth it.

Tom White wrote:

sw995 wrote:Classic case of damned if you do damned if you don't.

Celts had to sign him, though that trade kicker is shocking - it will hurt his trade value

I'll take the "damned if you don't" option. I disagree that they "had to" sign him. There is not one player worth that $60M per year average salary. Salaries in sports have been ridiculous for a long time, but this is insanity.

if this is the amount of money that the nba makes annually, then it MUST be paid to the players according to the cba.you rather have it go to the owners?

Brad Stevens should have stuck to coaching; what a mess. People turn on the TV to watch Steph and Lebron. No one turns one the TV to watch Jaylen Brown. In a world where players can demand trades but need talent around them, how do they keep Jason Tatum happy?

Wow did the Suadi's buy the Boston Celtics?

Holy smokes... that's about $300k per career assist!

Tom White wrote:
I'll take the "damned if you don't" option. I disagree that they "had to" sign him. There is not one player worth that $60M per year average salary. Salaries in sports have been ridiculous for a long time, but this is insanity.

Ridiculous is questioning what the (predominantly black) talent gets paid without ever questioning how much the (predominantly white) owners are making, despite providing nothing of value beyond their obscene pilfered wealth. $60M AAV is the bottom end of what one of the greatest athletes on the planet would get if not for the salary cap, which was instituted to suppress player salaries and help the owners steal more money.

DickMotta4Prez wrote:

Tom White wrote:
I'll take the "damned if you don't" option. I disagree that they "had to" sign him. There is not one player worth that $60M per year average salary. Salaries in sports have been ridiculous for a long time, but this is insanity.

Ridiculous is questioning what the (predominantly black) talent gets paid without ever questioning how much the (predominantly white) owners are making, despite providing nothing of value beyond their obscene pilfered wealth. $60M AAV is the bottom end of what one of the greatest athletes on the planet would get if not for the salary cap, which was instituted to suppress player salaries and help the owners steal more money.

Ridiculous is turning every issue into a racial issue. (So tired!)

You clearly have no idea how the BRI works, but the salary cap would be the same, with or without max salaries. Having maximum salaries makes minimum salaries possible. If Lebron got $100m than most of his supporting cast would get <$1m. Skin color has got nothing to do with it. It's about giving everyone that makes the NBA life altering money, not just the ones that sell the most jerseys.

DickMotta4Prez wrote:

Tom White wrote:
I'll take the "damned if you don't" option. I disagree that they "had to" sign him. There is not one player worth that $60M per year average salary. Salaries in sports have been ridiculous for a long time, but this is insanity.

Ridiculous is questioning what the (predominantly black) talent gets paid without ever questioning how much the (predominantly white) owners are making, despite providing nothing of value beyond their obscene pilfered wealth. $60M AAV is the bottom end of what one of the greatest athletes on the planet would get if not for the salary cap, which was instituted to suppress player salaries and help the owners steal more money.

Yes and I'm sure the salary cap was not intended at all to improve parity between teams in the league. Perhaps you'd prefer the La Liga Spanish Soccer model where only 2 teams have any realistic hope of ever winning a title?

Also if max salaries are so bad why don't the players ever fight to remove them in CBA discussions or lock out over it?