Free Agent/Trade/Waiver Thread, 2025-26

[Fierce1]

Just checked the luxury tax brackets and I fully understand the reason why it makes sense to trade Simons for financial reasons.

But what I disagree with is trading Simons for a downgrade in talent.

It would be awful if Simons gets traded for any of the following players: Okogie, Mann, Slo-Mo, KCP, or Bey.

Scoring or scorers should not be taken for granted.

The Pacers are not really a defensive team, but they got to the Finals with great offense.

In contrast, the Orlando Magic were a defensive team that punishes you with physical play.

But the Magic exited in the 1st rnd because even if they got stops, they were not a good shooting team.

This is where Joe's math comes in.

Basically it's about getting more scores than stops.

A team with 5 Simons will beat a team with 5 Ben Simmons.

[celtxman]

Just checked the luxury tax brackets and I fully understand the reason why it makes sense to trade Simons for financial reasons.

But what I disagree with is trading Simons for a downgrade in talent.

It would be awful if Simons gets traded for any of the following players: Okogie, Mann, Slo-Mo, KCP, or Bey.

Scoring or scorers should not be taken for granted.

The Pacers are not really a defensive team, but they got to the Finals with great offense.

In contrast, the Orlando Magic were a defensive team that punishes you with physical play.

But the Magic exited in the 1st rnd because even if they got stops, they were not a good shooting team.

This is where Joe's math comes in.

Basically it's about getting more scores than stops.

A team with 5 Simons will beat a team with 5 Ben Simmons.

I'm OK with a trade asking back less talent now, facilitating championship moves in the future .

[djFan71]

Simons just isn’t as good offensively as those other guys either, is the main problem. If he was $30M wouldn’t be an issue. But even those guys aren’t the types of players I prefer. Kyrie is another level than the rest so I was on board (after initially hating trading the pick).

It’s also weird to cast vague insinuations on other people’s motives and then not say what they are. Why can’t people have basketball reasons for not preferring a particular player without it being something shady?

It’s not shady it’s just not being said, using things that don’t add up instead. It’s my opinion of what’s going on, not that it’s true. There are a lot of things I don’t say as a mod, because people will derail the thread.

It’s just weird calling out defense as though it’s a major flaw that they never allow. Sure, Kyrie is generational. (Not in that bucks series but w/e) Kemba and IT4 were very talented scorers, made more marvelous because of size, but there isn’t a chasm between them and Simons or many of the other scoring non defenders, especially because one was probably the worst defender in history, while Simons is bad, and the other wasn’t much better.

Anyway, I’m done. It’s not that serious.

People were all over IT and Kemba here as defensive liabilities that would get hunted in the playoffs. It wasn’t waved away for them either. Plenty of people complained about that. Kyrie too but he was generationally good offensively, so he got more leeway. And I’d argue there indeed is a chasm between those guys’ careers (peak only for IT) and Simons’ best season to date.

If you don’t think the arguments add up, respond to a specific one and ask for clarification. The “oh there must be something else going on” but I can’t say cuz I’m a mod thing is useless at best, presumptuous and insulting at worst.

This probably came off harsher than I meant, but your original comment rubbed me the wrong way. You’re a great poster and I know being a mod is tough. If there’s something non shady that you suspect people of that you still feel you can’t say as a mod, so be it. I’ll take your word for it.

[Bad-Thoma]

It’s not shady it’s just not being said, using things that don’t add up instead. It’s my opinion of what’s going on, not that it’s true. There are a lot of things I don’t say as a mod, because people will derail the thread.

It’s just weird calling out defense as though it’s a major flaw that they never allow. Sure, Kyrie is generational. (Not in that bucks series but w/e) Kemba and IT4 were very talented scorers, made more marvelous because of size, but there isn’t a chasm between them and Simons or many of the other scoring non defenders, especially because one was probably the worst defender in history, while Simons is bad, and the other wasn’t much better.

Anyway, I’m done. It’s not that serious.

People were all over IT and Kemba here as defensive liabilities that would get hunted in the playoffs. It wasn’t waved away for them either. Plenty of people complained about that. Kyrie too but he was generationally good offensively, so he got more leeway. And I’d argue there indeed is a chasm between those guys’ careers (peak only for IT) and Simons’ best season to date.

If you don’t think the arguments add up, respond to a specific one and ask for clarification. The “oh there must be something else going on” but I can’t say cuz I’m a mod thing is useless at best, presumptuous and insulting at worst.

This probably came off harsher than I meant, but your original comment rubbed me the wrong way. You’re a great poster and I know being a mod is tough. If there’s something non shady that you suspect people of that you still feel you can’t say as a mod, so be it. I’ll take your word for it.

I'm just kind of lost on Shak's original comment myself which was why I posted the gif, I was curious what the unsaid motivations might be. Shak's leaving me hanging but it's all good, letting it go as well.

[Fierce1]

Just checked the luxury tax brackets and I fully understand the reason why it makes sense to trade Simons for financial reasons.

But what I disagree with is trading Simons for a downgrade in talent.

It would be awful if Simons gets traded for any of the following players: Okogie, Mann, Slo-Mo, KCP, or Bey.

Scoring or scorers should not be taken for granted.

The Pacers are not really a defensive team, but they got to the Finals with great offense.

In contrast, the Orlando Magic were a defensive team that punishes you with physical play.

But the Magic exited in the 1st rnd because even if they got stops, they were not a good shooting team.

This is where Joe's math comes in.

Basically it's about getting more scores than stops.

A team with 5 Simons will beat a team with 5 Ben Simmons.

I'm OK with a trade asking back less talent now, facilitating championship moves in the future .

Yeah, but how less talent are we talking about?

Can you provide a trade proposal?

[Fierce1]

Just something to think about for those thinking of moves now for a championship in the future.

Back in 2011, the Mavs beat the Heat in the Finals.
But after winning a chip, Mark Cuban decided to break up the team because he wanted cap space to sign Deron Williams and Dwight Howard.

Cuban was envisioning a Big 3 of Dirk, Deron, and Dwight.

We all know how that worked out for Cuban.

Same thing with Ainge.
Ainge just got lucky the Cs had those Brooklyn picks.

Back in 2014 and 2015, Ainge didn't make any major moves because he was planning to use the cap space for 2 max free-agents.

KD was the primary target.

We all know KD picked GSW and the best the Celtics got was Gordon Hayward.

Imagine if the Celtics didn't have those two #3 picks, 2016 and 2017.

No JB and no JT would have meant the Cs not close to making the Finals because a Big 3 of IT, Horford, and Hayward would not be good enough for a championship run.

[Fierce1]

https://www.basketballnetwork.net/old-school/rick-pitino-on-why-he-regretted-leaving-kentucky-for-the-celtics

Rick Pitino on why he regretted leaving Kentucky for the Celtics: "I took over a team with 15 wins banking everything on the Tim Duncan Lottery"

[Celts17Pride]

https://www.basketballnetwork.net/old-school/rick-pitino-on-why-he-regretted-leaving-kentucky-for-the-celtics

Rick Pitino on why he regretted leaving Kentucky for the Celtics: "I took over a team with 15 wins banking everything on the Tim Duncan Lottery"

Nice of Rick Pitino to use Tim Duncan as an excuse for his failures. Pitino failed as coach and president because of the way he treated his players (not to mention Red Auerbach) and his incredibly impatience as president/GM. Trading Billups after 51 games and quickly handing out contracts to Travis Knight, Pervis Ellison etc. Pitino was a complete failure and it was all his own fault.

[Fierce1]

https://www.basketballnetwork.net/old-school/rick-pitino-on-why-he-regretted-leaving-kentucky-for-the-celtics

Rick Pitino on why he regretted leaving Kentucky for the Celtics: "I took over a team with 15 wins banking everything on the Tim Duncan Lottery"

Nice of Rick Pitino to use Tim Duncan as an excuse for his failures. Pitino failed as coach and president because of the way he treated his players (not to mention Red Auerbach) and his incredibly impatience as president/GM. Trading Billups after 51 games and quickly handing out contracts to Travis Knight, Pervis Ellison etc. Pitino was a complete failure and it was all his own fault.

Agree with your take about Rick Pitino.

Here's the thing, would Pitino accept the Celtics job if he knew Cs were not getting Tim Duncan?

A case of already thinking about having Tim Duncan because they had 2 picks in the top 6.

I agree with planning for the future, but don't sacrifice the present for a potential future that might or might not happen.

[Hal14]

Just checked the luxury tax brackets and I fully understand the reason why it makes sense to trade Simons for financial reasons.

But what I disagree with is trading Simons for a downgrade in talent.

It would be awful if Simons gets traded for any of the following players: Okogie, Mann, Slo-Mo, KCP, or Bey.

Scoring or scorers should not be taken for granted.

The Pacers are not really a defensive team, but they got to the Finals with great offense.

In contrast, the Orlando Magic were a defensive team that punishes you with physical play.

But the Magic exited in the 1st rnd because even if they got stops, they were not a good shooting team.

This is where Joe's math comes in.

Basically it's about getting more scores than stops.

A team with 5 Simons will beat a team with 5 Ben Simmons.

I'm OK with a trade asking back less talent now, facilitating championship moves in the future .

There's no guarantee of those championship moves happening though.

You need talent to win championships.

Simons has talent.

Sure, we can dump him, get nothing back and *hope* we can replace him with talent in a future move. But what if that future move never happens?

What if that other team we want to trade with won't trade us that talented player? Or that talented player signs elsewhere as a FA? Then we're stuck with nothing in that salary slot.

Other option is, keep the talent since you have it.

That's a strategy built on a hope and a prayer..and relying on another team to trade us a good player and/or relying on a FA to sign with us instead of 1 of the other 29 teams. Or just keep he talented player we already have - Simons.

Or, try to make a move that gets us a talented player and then if no such move is possible, then keep Simons as a backup plan so we're not left with a roster that doesn't have enough talent around the Jays.

[31to6]

https://www.basketballnetwork.net/old-school/rick-pitino-on-why-he-regretted-leaving-kentucky-for-the-celtics

Rick Pitino on why he regretted leaving Kentucky for the Celtics: "I took over a team with 15 wins banking everything on the Tim Duncan Lottery"

Nice of Rick Pitino to use Tim Duncan as an excuse for his failures. Pitino failed as coach and president because of the way he treated his players (not to mention Red Auerbach) and his incredibly impatience as president/GM. Trading Billups after 51 games and quickly handing out contracts to Travis Knight, Pervis Ellison etc. Pitino was a complete failure and it was all his own fault.

Agree with your take about Rick Pitino.

Here's the thing, would Pitino accept the Celtics job if he knew Cs were not getting Tim Duncan?

A case of already thinking about having Tim Duncan because they had 2 picks in the top 6.

I agree with planning for the future, but don't sacrifice the present for a potential future that might or might not happen.

I was a teenager and the internet barely existed but even I knew the Cs had a 36% chance of landing the #1 pick ie Tim Duncan in 1997.

Pitino wrote a book called "Success is a Choice" and then hitched his NBA wagon to those odds. Silly move.
To his credit, he's remained relevant at the college level, which is cool I guess, but to his discredit he seems sketchy and sleazy and I will never like him or forgive him for dumping David Wesley and Rick Fox.

[celtxman]

Just checked the luxury tax brackets and I fully understand the reason why it makes sense to trade Simons for financial reasons.

But what I disagree with is trading Simons for a downgrade in talent.

It would be awful if Simons gets traded for any of the following players: Okogie, Mann, Slo-Mo, KCP, or Bey.

Scoring or scorers should not be taken for granted.

The Pacers are not really a defensive team, but they got to the Finals with great offense.

In contrast, the Orlando Magic were a defensive team that punishes you with physical play.

But the Magic exited in the 1st rnd because even if they got stops, they were not a good shooting team.

This is where Joe's math comes in.

Basically it's about getting more scores than stops.

A team with 5 Simons will beat a team with 5 Ben Simmons.

I'm OK with a trade asking back less talent now, facilitating championship moves in the future .

Yeah, but how less talent are we talking about?

Can you provide a trade proposal?

I'm talking about literally giving Simons away if the salary space gained now will result in championship pieces before next year. So think trades and TPE being used before the trade deadline or even after the season. I'm willing to concede this season only and nothing more. I will be at the front of the line in being critical if they are not ready or worse, able, to win a championship trust me.

[Hal14]

I'm OK with a trade asking back less talent now, facilitating championship moves in the future .

Yeah, but how less talent are we talking about?

Can you provide a trade proposal?

I'm talking about literally giving Simons away if the salary space gained now will result in championship pieces before next year. So think trades and TPE being used before the trade deadline or even after the season. I'm willing to concede this season only and nothing more. I will be at the front of the line in being critical if they are not ready or worse, able, to win a championship trust me.

That's a big "if".

[cl2117]

Yeah, but how less talent are we talking about?

Can you provide a trade proposal?

I'm talking about literally giving Simons away if the salary space gained now will result in championship pieces before next year. So think trades and TPE being used before the trade deadline or even after the season. I'm willing to concede this season only and nothing more. I will be at the front of the line in being critical if they are not ready or worse, able, to win a championship trust me.

That's a big "if".

There is also a big "if" as to whether Simons is at all a positive value for us at his cap number.

No one wants him right now given his cost vs. on court value. We can keep him for the year but next year we either lose him for nothing or have to pay him and while it'll likely be a much much lower cap number he still might not be a positive value. Keep in mind that for him to be available at a cap number whereby we are getting good value, he likely has to be mediocre to poor this year otherwise he'll have other bidders.

Keeping Simons seems as fraught with risk as trading him for package X. Both are big unknowns.

I'm happy adding value to him for a worthwhile upgrade, but haven't seen a good proposal yet that makes sense for us. I'm also happy to trade him for a lesser package that saves us money and/or gets us salaries that are more useful for us down the line. The latter option seems like there are a lot more possibilities than with the former.

Keeping him feels like the worst option. If he plays well, he's likely going to stay as an overpaid/undersized scoring guard with no defense. If he plays mediocre to poor, we can keep him at a reasonable cap number but have a guy who didn't shine in a year in our system and isn't going to be a valued trade chip either.

[Curmudgeon]

What you hope is that he plays well and can be moved to a contender at or before the deadline. There will be injuries and other guys who do not play up to expectations on other teams. Keeping him after the deadline is the worst of the worst.

[djFan71]

What package do we think we're getting for Simons at the deadline from a contender that we wouldn't get now? I feel like it's maybe the difference of maybe a 2nd or 2?

Now: Simons for lesser salary and lesser players like Josh Green, SloMo, etc
Deadline: Simons for expiring + 2nd(s)?

If you do it now, you duck the tax and free up time to develop guys that will be here long term.
If you do it later, you get maybe a decent pick, but probably don't save enough to duck the tax.

Contenders at the deadline aren't going to take back $12M more in salary than they send out. They're not going to send us a long-term big. So, what is the hope here?

Caveats:
- I know he can improve and we decide to keep him
- I know we don't have to duck the tax

I'm specifically asking about the scenario where keeping him to the deadline and getting a better return is the goal. What do we think that better return is? And is it worth not ducking the tax and losing development time for our young guys over?

[Larry_Russell]

Just checked the luxury tax brackets and I fully understand the reason why it makes sense to trade Simons for financial reasons.

But what I disagree with is trading Simons for a downgrade in talent.

It would be awful if Simons gets traded for any of the following players: Okogie, Mann, Slo-Mo, KCP, or Bey.

Scoring or scorers should not be taken for granted.

The Pacers are not really a defensive team, but they got to the Finals with great offense.

In contrast, the Orlando Magic were a defensive team that punishes you with physical play.

But the Magic exited in the 1st rnd because even if they got stops, they were not a good shooting team.

This is where Joe's math comes in.

Basically it's about getting more scores than stops.

A team with 5 Simons will beat a team with 5 Ben Simmons.

I'm OK with a trade asking back less talent now, facilitating championship moves in the future .

LOL, how bad would a return of players need to be for it to be considered a "downgrade"

[Celts17Pride]

What package do we think we're getting for Simons at the deadline from a contender that we wouldn't get now? I feel like it's maybe the difference of maybe a 2nd or 2?

Now: Simons for lesser salary and lesser players like Josh Green, SloMo, etc
Deadline: Simons for expiring + 2nd(s)?

If you do it now, you duck the tax and free up time to develop guys that will be here long term.
If you do it later, you get maybe a decent pick, but probably don't save enough to duck the tax.

Contenders at the deadline aren't going to take back $12M more in salary than they send out. They're not going to send us a long-term big. So, what is the hope here?

Caveats:
- I know he can improve and we decide to keep him
- I know we don't have to duck the tax

I'm specifically asking about the scenario where keeping him to the deadline and getting a better return is the goal. What do we think that better return is? And is it worth not ducking the tax and losing development time for our young guys over?

I don't propose any kind of Simons trade because I have no clue what the Celtics are doing. I know through the media's conversations with other teams that the Celtics want to move off of Simons. What do the Celtics want? Salary dump? Better player? Draft picks? Potential players for 2026/2027? Get below both aprons and the tax?

Honestly, I have no clue.

[Larry_Russell]

What package do we think we're getting for Simons at the deadline from a contender that we wouldn't get now? I feel like it's maybe the difference of maybe a 2nd or 2?

Now: Simons for lesser salary and lesser players like Josh Green, SloMo, etc
Deadline: Simons for expiring + 2nd(s)?

If you do it now, you duck the tax and free up time to develop guys that will be here long term.
If you do it later, you get maybe a decent pick, but probably don't save enough to duck the tax.

Contenders at the deadline aren't going to take back $12M more in salary than they send out. They're not going to send us a long-term big. So, what is the hope here?

Caveats:
- I know he can improve and we decide to keep him
- I know we don't have to duck the tax

I'm specifically asking about the scenario where keeping him to the deadline and getting a better return is the goal. What do we think that better return is? And is it worth not ducking the tax and losing development time for our young guys over?

If you can trade simons for Josh Green you do it now. Green for his warts is a vastly superior defender, has better shooting splits (excluding the weird awfulness at the FT Line) and is a fraction of the cost.

Just looking at expiring deals worth within 10 mill of Simons and I would gladly take ANY of them over anfernee

[djFan71]

What package do we think we're getting for Simons at the deadline from a contender that we wouldn't get now? I feel like it's maybe the difference of maybe a 2nd or 2?

Now: Simons for lesser salary and lesser players like Josh Green, SloMo, etc
Deadline: Simons for expiring + 2nd(s)?

If you do it now, you duck the tax and free up time to develop guys that will be here long term.
If you do it later, you get maybe a decent pick, but probably don't save enough to duck the tax.

Contenders at the deadline aren't going to take back $12M more in salary than they send out. They're not going to send us a long-term big. So, what is the hope here?

Caveats:
- I know he can improve and we decide to keep him
- I know we don't have to duck the tax

I'm specifically asking about the scenario where keeping him to the deadline and getting a better return is the goal. What do we think that better return is? And is it worth not ducking the tax and losing development time for our young guys over?

I don't propose any kind of Simons trade because I have no clue what the Celtics are doing. I know through the media's conversations with other teams that the Celtics want to move off of Simons. What do the Celtics want? Salary dump? Better player? Draft picks? Potential players for 2026/2027? Get below both aprons and the tax?

Honestly, I have no clue.

I think it's "whatever they can get of that". My preference would be 1) Better player for 26-27, 2) Salary dump.
But people keep saying we can get a better return at the deadline, and I'm just wondering what they think that looks like.