Free Agent/Trade/Waiver Thread, 2025-26, part 2

[Curmudgeon]

But not last year. Shooting numbers don't impress me. Winning does. And only two of those players-- Curry and Leonard--have been the no. 1 guy on a championship team.

Simons is not just about shooting.

He can get in the lane and score in a variety of ways.

The Cs only had that when Kyrie was a Celtic.

A guard like Simons will make the Celtic offense less predictable.

Adding what Simons brings to the table will result in winning.

We'll see.

[phincsfan]

I'm a big Sam fan and I think this could be his PP type of breakout year, but with Rico and Ooooogo' I think he has become movable if one of those guys can step up. If they both play well, their combined salary is half of Sam's.

If Sam starts off hot, he could be the guy a contending team targets in February and IMO he could easily fetch a 1st rd pick in 26'.

Looking at next years money (170mil), take away Sam's 10mil and you could easily sign Simons (if he scores his average and improves on D). A Sam move would also open up money for Neems in 26/27 (4yrs/60mil) if he plays well enough this season.

For 26/27', JT, JB, White, Simons, PP, Neems, Rico, Oooogo', Garza isn't terrible for a sub 200mil payroll.

I still think this years roster gets the C's a mid-teens pick maybe even a high lottery, plus a Sam 1st rd trade pick could infuse another quality young player.

[djFan71]

I'm a big Sam fan and I think this could be his PP type of breakout year, but with Rico and Ooooogo' I think he has become movable if one of those guys can step up. If they both play well, their combined salary is half of Sam's.

If Sam starts off hot, he could be the guy a contending team targets in February and IMO he could easily fetch a 1st rd pick in 26'.

Looking at next years money (170mil), take away Sam's 10mil and you could easily sign Simons (if he scores his average and improves on D). A Sam move would also open up money for Neems in 26/27 (4yrs/60mil) if he plays well enough this season.

For 26/27', JT, JB, White, Simons, PP, Neems, Rico, Oooogo', Garza isn't terrible for a sub 200mil payroll.

I still think this years roster gets the C's a mid-teens pick maybe even a high lottery, plus a Sam 1st rd trade pick could infuse another quality young player.

I like Sam as well, but I actually wish we'd flipped him for a 2nd and kept Luke. His deal with SAS is basically the same money. It would have been better roster balance. Like you mentioned we have plenty of young wings (Walsh too). I'd feel a lot better about our frontcourt if it was Luke, Queta and Garza. That with Boucher and Minott is respectable enough until Tatum is back.

[bucknersrevenge]

I'm a big Sam fan and I think this could be his PP type of breakout year, but with Rico and Ooooogo' I think he has become movable if one of those guys can step up. If they both play well, their combined salary is half of Sam's.

If Sam starts off hot, he could be the guy a contending team targets in February and IMO he could easily fetch a 1st rd pick in 26'.

Looking at next years money (170mil), take away Sam's 10mil and you could easily sign Simons (if he scores his average and improves on D). A Sam move would also open up money for Neems in 26/27 (4yrs/60mil) if he plays well enough this season.

For 26/27', JT, JB, White, Simons, PP, Neems, Rico, Oooogo', Garza isn't terrible for a sub 200mil payroll.

I still think this years roster gets the C's a mid-teens pick maybe even a high lottery, plus a Sam 1st rd trade pick could infuse another quality young player.

I like Sam as well, but I actually wish we'd flipped him for a 2nd and kept Luke. His deal with SAS is basically the same money. It would have been better roster balance. Like you mentioned we have plenty of young wings (Walsh too). I'd feel a lot better about our frontcourt if it was Luke, Queta and Garza. That with Boucher and Minott is respectable enough until Tatum is back.

This makes so much sense it's scary. Is there any doubt that if we could've gotten close to what the Spurs offered he would've stayed? At this point, love Sam as I do, but he's sweetener in the next roster upgrade for me. We have too many inexpensive bench wings to cultivate to rationalize keeping Hauser at his money longterm. Only way it makes sense for him to stay is if one of our starters leave in his place.

[djFan71]

I'm a big Sam fan and I think this could be his PP type of breakout year, but with Rico and Ooooogo' I think he has become movable if one of those guys can step up. If they both play well, their combined salary is half of Sam's.

If Sam starts off hot, he could be the guy a contending team targets in February and IMO he could easily fetch a 1st rd pick in 26'.

Looking at next years money (170mil), take away Sam's 10mil and you could easily sign Simons (if he scores his average and improves on D). A Sam move would also open up money for Neems in 26/27 (4yrs/60mil) if he plays well enough this season.

For 26/27', JT, JB, White, Simons, PP, Neems, Rico, Oooogo', Garza isn't terrible for a sub 200mil payroll.

I still think this years roster gets the C's a mid-teens pick maybe even a high lottery, plus a Sam 1st rd trade pick could infuse another quality young player.

I like Sam as well, but I actually wish we'd flipped him for a 2nd and kept Luke. His deal with SAS is basically the same money. It would have been better roster balance. Like you mentioned we have plenty of young wings (Walsh too). I'd feel a lot better about our frontcourt if it was Luke, Queta and Garza. That with Boucher and Minott is respectable enough until Tatum is back.

This makes so much sense it's scary. Is there any doubt that if we could've gotten close to what the Spurs offered he would've stayed? At this point, love Sam as I do, but he's sweetener in the next roster upgrade for me. We have too many inexpensive bench wings to cultivate to rationalize keeping Hauser at his money longterm. Only way it makes sense for him to stay is if one of our starters leave in his place.

I'm probably a little higher on Luke than some, but his deal is a bargain. It's a great backup big salary - and descending. We could have started a little lower this year and done increases and it could have been even slightly less than Sam this year.

To be fair, timing was tough for Brad. He still had Niang on the books, didn't know he could get Boucher, etc. And he was a little busy flipping Jrue and KP, so a Sam deal would have been even more on top of that. BUT... you know what options are out there, and a Sam for Luke and a 2nd deal right now is a no brainer.

[Bad-Thoma]

But not last year. Shooting numbers don't impress me. Winning does. And only two of those players-- Curry and Leonard--have been the no. 1 guy on a championship team.

But not last year? What point are you trying to make with that? Haliburton was almost an exact match for that list and was in the finals and he's not exactly a plus defender. How, logistically, would more than even a couple of those guys be in the finals "last year"? I'd say that's one of the most disingenuous arguments I've seen but this is RealGM.

Also, in what world is ANYONE talking about talking about Simons being a #1 guy? If the C's are healthy and have a #3 at best guy who can is capable of giving you 20 on any given night while shooting 36-40% on 3, that's pretty valuable. No one knows whether he'll be here very long and that's fine but the people acting like he is trash are being silly. He's a decent player that could thrive on a better team. He's not going to win you much as a 1st option on a bad team, that's established. But that will in no way or shape be his role in Boston if he is here long enough to have one.

[phincsfan]

I like Sam as well, but I actually wish we'd flipped him for a 2nd and kept Luke. His deal with SAS is basically the same money. It would have been better roster balance. Like you mentioned we have plenty of young wings (Walsh too). I'd feel a lot better about our frontcourt if it was Luke, Queta and Garza. That with Boucher and Minott is respectable enough until Tatum is back.

This makes so much sense it's scary. Is there any doubt that if we could've gotten close to what the Spurs offered he would've stayed? At this point, love Sam as I do, but he's sweetener in the next roster upgrade for me. We have too many inexpensive bench wings to cultivate to rationalize keeping Hauser at his money longterm. Only way it makes sense for him to stay is if one of our starters leave in his place.

I'm probably a little higher on Luke than some, but his deal is a bargain. It's a great backup big salary - and descending. We could have started a little lower this year and done increases and it could have been even slightly less than Sam this year.

To be fair, timing was tough for Brad. He still had Niang on the books, didn't know he could get Boucher, etc. And he was a little busy flipping Jrue and KP, so a Sam deal would have been even more on top of that. BUT... you know what options are out there, and a Sam for Luke and a 2nd deal right now is a no brainer.

Luke is definitely cheap, but I think Stevens and the owners group wants one of two things:

1- Build cheaply through the draft to make their mark on a foundation
2- Free up space for a splash (which may end up being Simons if he plays well) JT, JB, White, Simons 85-90ppg for those guys at 165-170mil isn't too shabby.

With deals like Luke and Sam that hinders that. PP is still a steal at his contract cost.

That's why I think Sam is eventually moved.

[Curmudgeon]

He's a very good offensive player but a terrible defender. We'll see how he does. It's pretty obvious that no other team in the league is interested in Simons at $26M unless the Celtics are willing to take back trash.

[djFan71]

This makes so much sense it's scary. Is there any doubt that if we could've gotten close to what the Spurs offered he would've stayed? At this point, love Sam as I do, but he's sweetener in the next roster upgrade for me. We have too many inexpensive bench wings to cultivate to rationalize keeping Hauser at his money longterm. Only way it makes sense for him to stay is if one of our starters leave in his place.

I'm probably a little higher on Luke than some, but his deal is a bargain. It's a great backup big salary - and descending. We could have started a little lower this year and done increases and it could have been even slightly less than Sam this year.

To be fair, timing was tough for Brad. He still had Niang on the books, didn't know he could get Boucher, etc. And he was a little busy flipping Jrue and KP, so a Sam deal would have been even more on top of that. BUT... you know what options are out there, and a Sam for Luke and a 2nd deal right now is a no brainer.

Luke is definitely cheap, but I think Stevens and the owners group wants one of two things:

1- Build cheaply through the draft to make their mark on a foundation
2- Free up space for a splash (which may end up being Simons if he plays well) JT, JB, White, Simons 85-90ppg for those guys at 165-170mil isn't too shabby.

With deals like Luke and Sam that hinders that. PP is still a steal at his contract cost.

That's why I think Sam is eventually moved.

I'm not sure on #1. You do that when you don't have the top tier guys yet. We do. I think Brad will get good vets around them for next season however he can. I think your #2 is more likely. They'll use some/most of that salary slot for one more top 100-ish type player. I'd prefer it be a big, but if you have a stable of 2-3 passable centers, and Tatum at the 4, you can get by if it's a 3rd guard like Simons (if he improves in our environment).

That's why having someone like Luke at that money would have been ideal to me. I think you can afford one or 2 guys in the $10-15M range and still do the above. But, I do agree we could move Sam just due to redundancy. So, it's maybe next summer for another backup level big to add to Queta/Garza and/or a FA.

[phincsfan]

I'm probably a little higher on Luke than some, but his deal is a bargain. It's a great backup big salary - and descending. We could have started a little lower this year and done increases and it could have been even slightly less than Sam this year.

To be fair, timing was tough for Brad. He still had Niang on the books, didn't know he could get Boucher, etc. And he was a little busy flipping Jrue and KP, so a Sam deal would have been even more on top of that. BUT... you know what options are out there, and a Sam for Luke and a 2nd deal right now is a no brainer.

Luke is definitely cheap, but I think Stevens and the owners group wants one of two things:

1- Build cheaply through the draft to make their mark on a foundation
2- Free up space for a splash (which may end up being Simons if he plays well) JT, JB, White, Simons 85-90ppg for those guys at 165-170mil isn't too shabby.

With deals like Luke and Sam that hinders that. PP is still a steal at his contract cost.

That's why I think Sam is eventually moved.

I'm not sure on #1. You do that when you don't have the top tier guys yet. We do. I think Brad will get good vets around them for next season however he can. I think your #2 is more likely. They'll use some/most of that salary slot for one more top 100-ish type player. I'd prefer it be a big, but if you have a stable of 2-3 passable centers, and Tatum at the 4, you can get by if it's a 3rd guard like Simons (if he improves in our environment).

That's why having someone like Luke at that money would have been ideal to me. I think you can afford one or 2 guys in the $10-15M range and still do the above. But, I do agree we could move Sam just due to redundancy. So, it's maybe next summer for another backup level big to add to Queta/Garza and/or a FA.

IMO, JT's injury created that potential scenario.

That injury doesn't happen, I still think the roster gets tweaked for tax reasons, but the front office would do whats best to keep them a top 3-5 team. Maybe only one of Porzingis and Jrue gets moved while doing their best to develop in house players.

I'm sticking with JT missing the entire 25/26 season to ensure a fully healthy JT for 26/27. Even then, it may take some time to get back in game shape. I think the new owners group will use this season to see how Joe does with 2 all stars instead of 6, how his staff develops Simons and Neems, how JB responds to being the #1 option and how White adjust to a new role as a #2.

Can this roster make the playoffs? Sure, but is ownership depending on that playoff revenue in year 1 of their new investment?

I think they see this as a season to have reason to make moves they feel will be best for the future of their investment. That's what new owners do, especially one's who wrote checks with lots of zero's on them. IMO, they want to leave their mark on the foundation.

When the sale was first brought up, maybe 3 things were brought up. Wyc, publicly brought up getting out of the 2nd apron.

- How do we continue to be a title contending team?
- Look into their own building that could create multiple streams of revenue
- Lower the tax bill

Then JT's achilles popped. The 3rd thing was addressed ASAP in a pretty big way.

As bad as some fans think JB's contract is, he's still a star in Boston, does positive things off the court and compared to contracts that have been given out and will be given out, his will look just fine. It's simple math. Luxury line, aprons and the cap will increase and his contract will fit just fine. The front office needs to be smart about the smaller contracts that linger. Get the right fits. Lots of the payroll is tied up in JT, JB and White, but they produce 70ppg and play 65+ games a season.

I've said before that I always respected what Bob Myers did with the Warriors when they were winning and had draft picks in the high 20's. They did a good job at developing in house and made the right moves that fit. Now there were no apron consequences, and that made a difference back then.

[djFan71]

Luke is definitely cheap, but I think Stevens and the owners group wants one of two things:

1- Build cheaply through the draft to make their mark on a foundation
2- Free up space for a splash (which may end up being Simons if he plays well) JT, JB, White, Simons 85-90ppg for those guys at 165-170mil isn't too shabby.

With deals like Luke and Sam that hinders that. PP is still a steal at his contract cost.

That's why I think Sam is eventually moved.

I'm not sure on #1. You do that when you don't have the top tier guys yet. We do. I think Brad will get good vets around them for next season however he can. I think your #2 is more likely. They'll use some/most of that salary slot for one more top 100-ish type player. I'd prefer it be a big, but if you have a stable of 2-3 passable centers, and Tatum at the 4, you can get by if it's a 3rd guard like Simons (if he improves in our environment).

That's why having someone like Luke at that money would have been ideal to me. I think you can afford one or 2 guys in the $10-15M range and still do the above. But, I do agree we could move Sam just due to redundancy. So, it's maybe next summer for another backup level big to add to Queta/Garza and/or a FA.

IMO, JT's injury created that potential scenario.

That injury doesn't happen, I still think the roster gets tweaked for tax reasons, but the front office would do whats best to keep them a top 3-5 team. Maybe only one of Porzingis and Jrue gets moved while doing their best to develop in house players.

I'm sticking with JT missing the entire 25/26 season to ensure a fully healthy JT for 26/27. Even then, it may take some time to get back in game shape. I think the new owners group will use this season to see how Joe does with 2 all stars instead of 6, how his staff develops Simons and Neems, how JB responds to being the #1 option and how White adjust to a new role as a #2.

Can this roster make the playoffs? Sure, but is ownership depending on that playoff revenue in year 1 of their new investment?

I think they see this as a season to have reason to make moves they feel will be best for the future of their investment. That's what new owners do, especially one's who wrote checks with lots of zero's on them. IMO, they want to leave their mark on the foundation.

When the sale was first brought up, maybe 3 things were brought up. Wyc, publicly brought up getting out of the 2nd apron.

- How do we continue to be a title contending team?
- Look into their own building that could create multiple streams of revenue
- Lower the tax bill

Then JT's achilles popped. The 3rd thing was addressed ASAP in a pretty big way.

As bad as some fans think JB's contract is, he's still a star in Boston, does positive things off the court and compared to contracts that have been given out and will be given out, his will look just fine. It's simple math. Luxury line, aprons and the cap will increase and his contract will fit just fine. The front office needs to be smart about the smaller contracts that linger. Get the right fits. Lots of the payroll is tied up in JT, JB and White, but they produce 70ppg and play 65+ games a season.

I've said before that I always respected what Bob Myers did with the Warriors when they were winning and had draft picks in the high 20's. They did a good job at developing in house and made the right moves that fit. Now there were no apron consequences, and that made a difference back then.

I guess I over-estimated you meant by build with the draft. If you just mean fill in the back end rotation guys with hits from our picks - and especially give them time to develop this year, then I agree. But, I think you still get a mix of cheaper vets in there too, spots 6-10 aren't all gonna come from picks.

[phincsfan]

I'm not sure on #1. You do that when you don't have the top tier guys yet. We do. I think Brad will get good vets around them for next season however he can. I think your #2 is more likely. They'll use some/most of that salary slot for one more top 100-ish type player. I'd prefer it be a big, but if you have a stable of 2-3 passable centers, and Tatum at the 4, you can get by if it's a 3rd guard like Simons (if he improves in our environment).

That's why having someone like Luke at that money would have been ideal to me. I think you can afford one or 2 guys in the $10-15M range and still do the above. But, I do agree we could move Sam just due to redundancy. So, it's maybe next summer for another backup level big to add to Queta/Garza and/or a FA.

IMO, JT's injury created that potential scenario.

That injury doesn't happen, I still think the roster gets tweaked for tax reasons, but the front office would do whats best to keep them a top 3-5 team. Maybe only one of Porzingis and Jrue gets moved while doing their best to develop in house players.

I'm sticking with JT missing the entire 25/26 season to ensure a fully healthy JT for 26/27. Even then, it may take some time to get back in game shape. I think the new owners group will use this season to see how Joe does with 2 all stars instead of 6, how his staff develops Simons and Neems, how JB responds to being the #1 option and how White adjust to a new role as a #2.

Can this roster make the playoffs? Sure, but is ownership depending on that playoff revenue in year 1 of their new investment?

I think they see this as a season to have reason to make moves they feel will be best for the future of their investment. That's what new owners do, especially one's who wrote checks with lots of zero's on them. IMO, they want to leave their mark on the foundation.

When the sale was first brought up, maybe 3 things were brought up. Wyc, publicly brought up getting out of the 2nd apron.

- How do we continue to be a title contending team?
- Look into their own building that could create multiple streams of revenue
- Lower the tax bill

Then JT's achilles popped. The 3rd thing was addressed ASAP in a pretty big way.

As bad as some fans think JB's contract is, he's still a star in Boston, does positive things off the court and compared to contracts that have been given out and will be given out, his will look just fine. It's simple math. Luxury line, aprons and the cap will increase and his contract will fit just fine. The front office needs to be smart about the smaller contracts that linger. Get the right fits. Lots of the payroll is tied up in JT, JB and White, but they produce 70ppg and play 65+ games a season.

I've said before that I always respected what Bob Myers did with the Warriors when they were winning and had draft picks in the high 20's. They did a good job at developing in house and made the right moves that fit. Now there were no apron consequences, and that made a difference back then.

I guess I over-estimated you meant by build with the draft. If you just mean fill in the back end rotation guys with hits from our picks - and especially give them time to develop this year, then I agree. But, I think you still get a mix of cheaper vets in there too, spots 6-10 aren't all gonna come from picks.

The first option was me thinking they would have a top 15 pick this draft, so they'd want to get it right for a cheap foundational piece. Hopefully they're an eventual starter.

[playa-hater]

So I just read where Ben Simmons and Russ Westbrick are "threatening to sit out the year If they aren't offered more than the Minimum"

Damn, that'll teach the NBA. The NBA may collapse without them

[Bad-Thoma]

So I just read where Ben Simmons and Russ Westbrick are "threatening to sit out the year If they aren't offered more than the Minimum"

Damn, that'll teach the NBA. The NBA may collapse without them

I saw a story that said both might go without a deal going into the season as they are both hoping for more than the minimum but didn't see anything about threatening, where did you see that?

[Hal14]

Read on Twitter

[playa-hater]

So I just read where Ben Simmons and Russ Westbrick are "threatening to sit out the year If they aren't offered more than the Minimum"

Damn, that'll teach the NBA. The NBA may collapse without them

I saw a story that said both might go without a deal going into the season as they are both hoping for more than the minimum but didn't see anything about threatening, where did you see that?

I read it opening up my Home Page yesterday. I don't remember who wrote it.

[Celts17Pride]

Read on Twitter

I think Brad Stevens last moves (Simons, Simmons, whoever) will come during the week of Sep 8th. If Simons makes it past the 8th/9th then he probably will make it until mid-season. I still think Simons will be gone sometime in the Sep 7th-9th range.

[ddb]

Read on Twitter

I think Brad Stevens last moves (Simons, Simmons, whoever) will come during the week of Sep 8th. If Simons makes it past the 8th/9th then he probably will make it until mid-season. I still think Simons will be gone sometime in the Sep 7th-9th range.

I think you're right. 9/7 is the day Simons can be aggregated with other players in a trade. I'd imagine if Brad plans on taking that route, he has a couple deals in mind, perhaps even a deal that's agreed to in principle. My guess is it would happen in that 7th-10th of Sept range.

At the end of the day, the market needs to develop for a player like Simons. Example, what if a contending team loses a key scoring type guard to injury in the preseason? Then a market has developed, and Brad may be able to get something done.

Other option is hanging on to him and seeing what he can do in a contract year.

[165bows]

Really surprised there hasn’t been another trade idk what to say

[brackdan70]

Really surprised there hasn’t been another trade idk what to say

Be patient. I guarantee there will be a trade…..eventually.