Free Agent/Trade/Waiver Thread, 2025-26, pt 3 – (Trade Deadline = Thurs, Feb. 5, 3pm, ET)

[Jammer]

That might end up being the “BIG” move.

No I don't think so. I think people just really underrate how Brad thinks about this team. He is not someone who ever sits on his hands, ever.

This feels like a bigger deadline to me for the Celtics than most think. I don't think Brad is married to it at all. We'll see though

I don’t know what Brad Stevens will do but the Celtics have really only two tradable players in Simons and Hauser. If Brad Stevens doesn’t want to move either (which I have no idea how he feels) then there really isn’t anything to trade that will bring back anything substantial.

I don’t believe Stevens can get someone like Day’Ron Sharpe unless he moves one of Simons or Hauser because the Celtics are over the 1st apron.

Stevens would have to combine players like Minott, Tillman and Boucher which is less likely in my opinion

The RealGM Trade Checker says that the Celtics could swap Baylor Scheierman for Day'Ron Sharpe straight up. Which means they could use any or Walsh, Gonzalez, Minott or Hauser as well. If Scheierman, obviously Draft Compensation would be required. I just deleted the link to the Trade ID, but you can run it yourself and see that it works.

[Fierce1]

The RealGM Trade Checker says that the Celtics could swap Baylor Scheierman for Day'Ron Sharpe straight up. Which means they could use any or Walsh, Gonzalez, Minott or Hauser as well. If Scheierman, obviously Draft Compensation would be required. I just deleted the link to the Trade ID, but you can run it yourself and see that it works.

That's because of the KP TPE.

[Jammer]

My view, and I've said it before, but I'll say it again.

The Celtics have 24 games between the trade deadline and March 31. If Tatum was back as early as April 1, they have to survive 24 games after the trade deadline. If he comes back April 10, the Celtics have to survive 29 games from the trade deadline.

They need 3 of Gonzalez, Walsh, Minott, Hauser and Scheierman available if White, Pritch, Simons and Brown are available. If you remove any of the previous due to trade or injury you have less wiggle room for 7 healthy players EVERY GAME. If anyone goes down, it's even less. Plus, the Celtics guard scoring goes to hell without Simons. If they think they can sign him for 3 years at 45 million they might just keep in around. They won't get that kind of production out of the draft or a realistic free agent signing this summer.

Hauser or Scheierman could be available, but losing Hauser will throw cause all the PF minutes, and backup SF and SG minutes, to be split between Walsh, Minott and Gonzalez with some appearances by Scheierman for the 29 games between the Trade Deadline and April 10 (Game 30).

Brad may pull something off, but it's going to be sensible and NOT gut the team in the process.

[Jammer]

The RealGM Trade Checker says that the Celtics could swap Baylor Scheierman for Day'Ron Sharpe straight up. Which means they could use any or Walsh, Gonzalez, Minott or Hauser as well. If Scheierman, obviously Draft Compensation would be required. I just deleted the link to the Trade ID, but you can run it yourself and see that it works.

That's because of the KP TPE.

Thanks for the clarification.

[Fierce1]

My view, and I've said it before, but I'll say it again.

The Celtics have 24 games between the trade deadline and March 31. If Tatum was back as early as April 1, they have to survive 24 games after the trade deadline. If he comes back April 10, the Celtics have to survive 29 games from the trade deadline.

They need 3 of Gonzalez, Walsh, Minott, Hauser and Scheierman available if White, Pritch, Simons and Brown are available. If you remove any of the previous due to trade or injury you have less wiggle room for 7 healthy players EVERY GAME. If anyone goes down, it's even less. Plus, the Celtics guard scoring goes to hell without Simons. If they think they can sign him for 3 years at 45 million they might just keep in around. They won't get that kind of production out of the draft or a realistic free agent signing this summer.

Hauser or Scheierman could be available, but losing Hauser will throw cause all the PF minutes, and backup SF and SG minutes, to be split between Walsh, Minott and Gonzalez with some appearances by Scheierman for the 29 games between the Trade Deadline and April 10 (Game 30).

Brad may pull something off, but it's going to be sensible and gut the team in the process.

Tatum's only coming back in Feb. or March.

April will be too late.

[Jammer]

My view, and I've said it before, but I'll say it again.

The Celtics have 24 games between the trade deadline and March 31. If Tatum was back as early as April 1, they have to survive 24 games after the trade deadline. If he comes back April 10, the Celtics have to survive 29 games from the trade deadline.

They need 3 of Gonzalez, Walsh, Minott, Hauser and Scheierman available if White, Pritch, Simons and Brown are available. If you remove any of the previous due to trade or injury you have less wiggle room for 7 healthy players EVERY GAME. If anyone goes down, it's even less. Plus, the Celtics guard scoring goes to hell without Simons. If they think they can sign him for 3 years at 45 million they might just keep in around. They won't get that kind of production out of the draft or a realistic free agent signing this summer.

Hauser or Scheierman could be available, but losing Hauser will throw cause all the PF minutes, and backup SF and SG minutes, to be split between Walsh, Minott and Gonzalez with some appearances by Scheierman for the 29 games between the Trade Deadline and April 10 (Game 30).

Brad may pull something off, but it's going to be sensible and NOT gut the team in the process.

Tatum's only coming back in Feb. or March.

April will be too late.

Interesting thought. And I meant to say NOT GUT the team in the process.

[jmr07019]

Scheierman and the Pels 2nd for Sharpe? Seems fair for both teams

[Parliament10]

My view, and I've said it before, but I'll say it again.

The Celtics have 24 games between the trade deadline and March 31. If Tatum was back as early as April 1, they have to survive 24 games after the trade deadline. If he comes back April 10, the Celtics have to survive 29 games from the trade deadline.

They need 3 of Gonzalez, Walsh, Minott, Hauser and Scheierman available if White, Pritch, Simons and Brown are available. If you remove any of the previous due to trade or injury you have less wiggle room for 7 healthy players EVERY GAME. If anyone goes down, it's even less. Plus, the Celtics guard scoring goes to hell without Simons. If they think they can sign him for 3 years at 45 million they might just keep in around. They won't get that kind of production out of the draft or a realistic free agent signing this summer.

Hauser or Scheierman could be available, but losing Hauser will throw cause all the PF minutes, and backup SF and SG minutes, to be split between Walsh, Minott and Gonzalez with some appearances by Scheierman for the 29 games between the Trade Deadline and April 10 (Game 30).

Brad may pull something off, but it's going to be sensible and NOT gut the team in the process.

Tatum's only coming back in Feb. or March.

April will be too late.

Interesting thought. And I meant to say NOT GUT the team in the process.

Every since Tatum said that he has a target date, I've always thought that it would/will be Feb. 8.
That's who he went OUT against.

There's another Game before the All-Start Break, and plenty of time to get into Game-shape.

[Gant]

per 36 minutes:
Zubac: 17.0 pts, 12.3 rebs, 1.1 blk, 2.8 asts, .632 TS%, 3.4 screen assists
Queta: 14.9 pts. 12.0 rebs, 1.8 blk, 2.0 asts, .665 TS%, 5.6 screen assists

[darrendaye]

Scheierman and the Pels 2nd for Sharpe? Seems fair for both teams

IMO, Walsh would be the clearer match since it would be his time Sharpe would be taking. I'm not in favor of it. But that's how I'd see it going down.

[brackdan70]

Scheierman and the Pels 2nd for Sharpe? Seems fair for both teams

Yeah it seems fair. It adds a lot of tax though.
5.5x the difference between Sharpes and Scheiermans Salary
About 20 million $. Is that something the team would do?

[redslastlaugh]

Scheierman and the Pels 2nd for Sharpe? Seems fair for both teams

Yeah it seems fair. It adds a lot of tax though.
5.5x the difference between Sharpes and Scheiermans Salary
About 20 million $. Is that something the team would do?

I'd love it if the new ownership group took on a few million at the deadline to defy expectations.
I'm so exhausted of seeing Nets fans on social being all: "BOS needs to pay us a first if we're gonna trade Terance Mann for Anfernee Simons. They need to get out the tax and we're the only ones who can help them."
Like, if the new owners, added money or picks and were just like, "we're in it to win, so eff off." lol, I'd just be so happy. Get under the tax next yr, lol

[jmr07019]

Scheierman and the Pels 2nd for Sharpe? Seems fair for both teams

Yeah it seems fair. It adds a lot of tax though.
5.5x the difference between Sharpes and Scheiermans Salary
About 20 million $. Is that something the team would do?

The last owner made 5.5 billion over 20 years or 275 million a year so ya new owner should pony up and improve the team.

[brackdan70]

Scheierman and the Pels 2nd for Sharpe? Seems fair for both teams

Yeah it seems fair. It adds a lot of tax though.
5.5x the difference between Sharpes and Scheiermans Salary
About 20 million $. Is that something the team would do?

I'd love it if the new ownership group took on a few million at the deadline to defy expectations.
I'm so exhausted of seeing Nets fans on social being all: "BOS needs to pay us a first if we're gonna trade Terance Mann for Anfernee Simons. They need to get out the tax and we're the only ones who can help them."
Like, if the new owners, added money or picks and were just like, "we're in it to win, so eff off." lol, I'd just be so happy. Get under the tax next yr, lol

Agree totally. And it does seem like they are fine with the current bill of 39 ish million. That is sustainable and it is a profitable franchise even with that amount of tax. Now is that all still the case with adding another 20 million? I’d guess if they feel like contenders then yes.
I think at a 60 million tax bill the franchise is pretty close to break even. It’s been a while since I dug into the financials though.

[jmr07019]

Scenario A: new owner pinches pennies and the Jays never get another title

Scenario B: new owner spends a lot on tax payments the next 5 years but the Celtics win 2 more titles

The new owner will make way more money in scenario B. It will require spending up front and there's no guarantee of success but I'm certainly hoping Chisholm goes with scenario B. Counting beans just isn't all that fun.

[jmr07019]

Scheierman and the Pels 2nd for Sharpe? Seems fair for both teams

IMO, Walsh would be the clearer match since it would be his time Sharpe would be taking. I'm not in favor of it. But that's how I'd see it going down.

I'm not overly familiar with Sharpe but I thought he would be taking Garza's minutes.

I value Walsh more than Scheierman and would be very hesitant, perhaps outright against, giving him up for Sharpe. Certainly if it's Walsh who's being traded then the pels pick would not be included.

[Gant]

The second apron mattered, but the remaining tax doesn't matter and won't drive decisions. If the Celtics make a good deal that also lowers the tax then they'll do it. If it's a deal where it makes the team worse, they won't.

It was Brad Stevens who decided it was necessary to break up the team, not Bill Chisholm. From Adam Himmelsbach's terrific December article on Chisholm:

as the Celtics attempted to repeat as champions last season, a grim reality loomed. A roster revamp would be needed to avoid severe penalties for being above the salary cap’s second apron. And when Tatum ruptured his Achilles tendon last May, it further altered the road map. Stevens called Chisholm in July and essentially apologized.

“We have to retool,” Stevens recalled telling him. “Like, we just have to.”

The moves were necessary, but the optics of the financial reset coinciding with Chisholm’s arrival made him easy fodder for casual fans. Chisholm was unbothered. He did not acquire the Celtics for the profits and insists that investments don’t increase in value by penny-pinching, anyway.

“I made money in my life so I could do this,” he said. “And we’re going to do whatever we can to win.”

If the Celtics trade Simons it'll be to improve the team, and maybe to lock up a good player like Zubac who's on a reasonable contract, as there's no guarantee Simons will return.

On Sharpe: The Celtics tried to sign him this summer, but failed, probably due to not being able to offer much at the time. He's got potential and is on the upswing. The Celtics do need another impact big body.

[Larry_Russell]

Hauser, Boucher amd Tillman to Chicago

Smith to brooklyn

Ayo amd sharpe to.bostom

[BillessuR6]

There is no sense in trading Hauser. His contract is a bargain. Same as Pritchard.



Sent from my SM-A536B using RealGM mobile app

[hugepatsfan]

I don't get the sense that ducking the tax would be an ownership decision, at least not directly. It would be a Brad decision for basketball team-building reasons as far as best allocating his budget.

I don't work for an NBA team but I imagine the way it works is ownership gives the GM a budget and the GM builds the best teams he can within that. That budget includes salary and tax. And it's just simple math - if you pay repeater rate penalties that same budget yields less on court talent. By all accounts ownership's budgets are going to allow for a hefty amount of luxury tax, but that math still exists where at regular rates vs. repeater that same amount of payroll gets you more on court talent. I also imagine to some degree there's rollover impact where if you save money one year ownership is willing to spend it the next year.

If the Celtics duck the tax this year they save about $6M in salary (the $12M they are over the tax by pro rated for the amount to be paid the rest of the year, rounded to half a season for convenience of the math). They save the ~$40M tax payments they're due to make at current salary. And they get a payout as a below the tax line team which is about $10-15M. So they save about $56-61M by going below the tax this year. Plus they would pay regular vs. repeater rates next year so they get the incremental savings of that. (Or if they duck again next year, they totally reset repeater penalties for probably the rest of Tatum/Brown's prime.)

If they duck the tax this year and/or next year, I don't think it will be because ownership told Brad to. I think it will be just because Brad crunched the numbers, considered the existing roster, what he thinks needs to be added and the expected salary of those pieces, who he wants to re-sign and at how much, the anticipated recovery timeline for Tatum not only getting on the court but being "himself" again, etc. and decided that it was in the best interests to duck the tax now to help team building over the long haul. And I don't think the ownership budget he has is restrictive to where that'd be driving the decision.