Last week, the Boston Celtics made a monumental decision to part with Jaylen Brown by sending him to the Philadelphia 76ers, effectively changing the landscape of the Eastern Conference. Although Brown’s departure was inevitable, the move to Philadelphia was largely unexpected, to say the least.
The relationship between Jaylen Brown and the Celtics was deteriorating rapidly. While the fallout with the organization and players like Jayson Tatum was understandable, NBA insider Ric Bucher revealed there may have been another reason.
Bucher began his segment by addressing the comments surrounding Brown’s intelligence on social media.
“The movie Good Will Hunting resonated with me in a big way,” he stated. “Some of the smartest people I know don’t really want or need anyone to know they’re smart. Jaylen Brown doesn’t strike me as that type of person.”
Brown has recently been criticized for considering himself the smartest person in the room. Although the five-time All-Star has responded to these claims, it has clearly affected his public image.
While this would have been a valid reason for the Celtics to move on from Brown, Bucher built upon this and explained why trading Jaylen Brown may not have been as much of a problem for Boston.
“But here’s the real heart of why the Celtics were good with moving on from Jaylen at all costs: because they couldn’t afford to keep him,” Bucher added. “If anything has been made clear over the last three or four years, it’s that a franchise can’t possibly compete for a title with two players signed to super max contracts, which is what the Celtics had in Tatum and Brown. Two super maxes take up 70 percent of the salary cap. Trying to build out a championship roster in today’s game with the remaining 30 percent simply isn’t possible.”
Bucher noted that the circumstances could have been different if Brown had led the Celtics to the NBA Finals, adding that the Celtics would have considered retaining him and Jayson Tatum. However, with the team being eliminated in the first round of the playoffs, there wasn’t much leverage.
For the most part, there is some merit to this approach.
Currently, Brown possesses one of the NBA’s most expensive contracts, boasting a cap hit of $57.0 million for the 2026-27 season. When combining this with Jayson Tatum’s $58.4 million contract, the Celtics would have been in a tight spot while building a competitive roster.
Given that the five-time All-Star still has three years left on his deal, Boston would have struggled to remain competitive if they retained the duo of Brown and Tatum. In this regard, Boston made a simple decision to prioritize one over the other.
But was such a move sensible?
As important as Jayson Tatum is, parting with Jaylen Brown, especially after the season he had, seems largely unreasonable.
While being the best player on the roster, with averages of 28.7 points, 6.9 rebounds, and 5.1 assists per game over 71 appearances, Brown led the Celtics to a 56-26 record in the regular season (2nd in the East). When noting that he even finished sixth in MVP voting, he was clearly impactful for the team.
It is a well-known fact that advanced analytics don’t favor Brown. But considering his status as a former Finals MVP, such an outlook seems to miss the mark.
From Bucher’s perspective, parting with Brown could be perceived as the lesser evil, since retaining him and Tatum would be virtually impossible in the long run. Still, it can be argued that trading Brown, especially to a team in the same division, was ill-advised.
As things stand, many have criticized the Celtics for trading Brown, particularly given the returns. But considering that Boston could have more cards up their sleeve, only time will tell how the team fares after moving on from one of its best players.
