Jaylen Brown - underrated?

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
16,557
I think the likelihood of JB signing a contract before the ASB are zero. At this point in time, there are just too many unknowns for everyone involved. Jaylen thinks he will be in the top tier of RFAs next summer. The Celtics hope that he would be, but they just don't know. IMHO, they'd be foolish to give him big money now, and Jaylen would be foolish to accept a big discount now. Let's see how he plays this season (which many think should be better than last for him), and then make a decision.
Isn't there an October 15 deadline for an extension?

edit: October 14. https://hoopshype.com/2019/06/17/boston-celtics-contracts-key-dates-deadlines-options-trade-eligibility/
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,708
I think the likelihood of JB signing a contract before the ASB are zero. At this point in time, there are just too many unknowns for everyone involved. Jaylen thinks he will be in the top tier of RFAs next summer. The Celtics hope that he would be, but they just don't know. IMHO, they'd be foolish to give him big money now, and Jaylen would be foolish to accept a big discount now. Let's see how he plays this season (which many think should be better than last for him), and then make a decision.
The deadline for rookies to sign extensions is October, after that they have to wait until the ensuing offseason. I’d agree, though, and say that the odds that he’s a member of the Thunder are better than those of him extending.
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
2,227
One advantage to giving Jaylen a market extension now is that, in a future trade next offseason, his full salary would count rather than half if the Celtics instead end up negotiating a S&T.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,708
One advantage to giving Jaylen a market extension now is that, in a future trade next offseason, his full salary would count rather than half if the Celtics instead end up negotiating a S&T.
That was definitely what they were looking to do with Rozier (to create trade ballast for a Davis deal). They'll clearly push to reach an agreement with Brown. I do think that there's an offhand cvhance that they deal him, though, rather than watch him hit RFA status and end up gambling on either matching a max offer (because I think there's nigh on a 100% chance that he gets one) or on recouping full value in a sign & trade.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
3,181
Jaylen's obviously his own person, but it's interesting to me how much NBA players are betting on themselves not getting injured. Kawhi, for example, only going for a 3 year deal. Quite a few players going for 4 year rather than 5 year deals. Different situation, but MaMo going for the 1 year $15 million on a craptacular team than $20 million over two years on a playoff contender. IT should give seminars to NBA players about the riskiness of their situation.
 

Big John

lurker
Dec 9, 2016
1,667
The salaries are so astronomical-- never mind the sneaker deals, endorsements, etc.-- that some young men in the 20's don't see a material difference in having $40M after tax as opposed to, say, $25M. Their agents do, but sometimes tails don't wag the dog.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,708
Jaylen's obviously his own person, but it's interesting to me how much NBA players are betting on themselves not getting injured. Kawhi, for example, only going for a 3 year deal. Quite a few players going for 4 year rather than 5 year deals. Different situation, but MaMo going for the 1 year $15 million on a craptacular team than $20 million over two years on a playoff contender. IT should give seminars to NBA players about the riskiness of their situation.
You can only sign five year deals with a team that has your Bird Rights, and doing so usually means you surrender a max tier. Most rookies that fall into the max tier sign five year deals with ETOs, though.
 

bowiac

I've been living a lie.
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
12,309
New York, NY
Jaylen's obviously his own person, but it's interesting to me how much NBA players are betting on themselves not getting injured. Kawhi, for example, only going for a 3 year deal. Quite a few players going for 4 year rather than 5 year deals. Different situation, but MaMo going for the 1 year $15 million on a craptacular team than $20 million over two years on a playoff contender. IT should give seminars to NBA players about the riskiness of their situation.
The Durant contract seems relevant here. He suffered the most devastating injury there is, and still got a max deal with a player option at the back end. I don't know if Kawhi could get a full max if he tore his Achilles, but it's unclear how much he's risking really. Almost any other injury and he's probably still in line for a mega payday in two years.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
7,935
IT should give seminars to NBA players about the riskiness of their situation.
If IT had the slightest clue that he merely lost the roll of the dice, rather than forces beyond his control being out to get him, or it being "just another challenge he needed to overcome", he might have drawn the proper lessons and be on a path to explaining them to people. But from all his comments, he's not.

Humans are not built to intuitively understand how to think about probabilities. That's why we're all so risk-averse - give someone a cherry-picked example of a bad outcome from a certain action that they're already predisposed to dislike, and they'll act as if that's the only outcome possible. No you can't take our kid on a hike, he'll get eaten by bears. Conversely, point out the odds of something (like injuries) that they're convinced is entirely in their control, and they'll ignore them. Hence fear of flying on airplanes but no common fear of driving on highways.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
4,438
Kiev, Ukraine
Jaylen's obviously his own person, but it's interesting to me how much NBA players are betting on themselves not getting injured. Kawhi, for example, only going for a 3 year deal. Quite a few players going for 4 year rather than 5 year deals. Different situation, but MaMo going for the 1 year $15 million on a craptacular team than $20 million over two years on a playoff contender. IT should give seminars to NBA players about the riskiness of their situation.
This is much more true for players on their 3rd contract. Guys coming off the rookie deal have tended to want to lock in the 50-100M of earnings, although it’s true there is a limit to what they’ll do for discounts.

Wings are also in better position to take the risk than bigs are.
 

Nick Kaufman

protector of human kind from spoilers
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2003
10,076
A Lost Time
If IT had the slightest clue that he merely lost the roll of the dice, rather than forces beyond his control being out to get him, or it being "just another challenge he needed to overcome", he might have drawn the proper lessons and be on a path to explaining them to people. But from all his comments, he's not.

Humans are not built to intuitively understand how to think about probabilities. That's why we're all so risk-averse - give someone a cherry-picked example of a bad outcome from a certain action that they're already predisposed to dislike, and they'll act as if that's the only outcome possible. No you can't take our kid on a hike, he'll get eaten by bears. Conversely, point out the odds of something (like injuries) that they're convinced is entirely in their control, and they'll ignore them. Hence fear of flying on airplanes but no common fear of driving on highways.
Completely agreed. However, if you can reasonably assign an injury probability on yourself over the next few years, it should be relatively easy to make the right decision. So, let's say you are between a short term contract that will lead to a bigger more lucrative contract and a longer contract in which you give a discount to your team. By assigning a x% of injury probability before the bigger more lucrative contract comes into play, you can see which decision has the most expected Value.

Having said that, since this is a game that's going to be played only once and since the consequences of an injury might be catastrophic for you, prudence may require you to take an even more conservative course of action than probabilities would dictate. That's especially the case if you are about to sign your first big contract. On the other hand, if you have already been through a large contract and you have more money than any individual needs in the bank, like say 30 million or 40 million and you are making choices between 160 million or 100 million with the downside of only making 10 million in a low probability scenario, then it's still might be worth it to just take the most EV+ action.
 

In my lifetime

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
916
Connecticut
However, the point is that people don't do act or think in that statistical fashion.

There are many fascinating articles and studies on irrational probabilistic behavior. It would be interesting to study whether professional athletes who are outliers in many ways also make these probability decisions differently having experience succeeding against long odds, ie, becoming professional athletes.
 

Nick Kaufman

protector of human kind from spoilers
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2003
10,076
A Lost Time
Yes, I agreed that most people don't make statistically based decisions. However my point is that on certain occasions, the riskier route might be the best decision as well.
 

sezwho

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
476
Brooklyn by way of Orono
The salaries are so astronomical-- never mind the sneaker deals, endorsements, etc.-- that some young men in the 20's don't see a material difference in having $40M after tax as opposed to, say, $25M. Their agents do, but sometimes tails don't wag the dog.
I believe this is what we are seeing as well, and it’s refreshing because it reflects a much more ‘woke’ evaluation than EV (no disrespect to E Van’s calculations of course).

25-40 million $ is a sizable gap on paper of course, but for most people in this situation maximizing EV is a silly exercise.

Making choices to prioritize happiness, when you are already set up for generations, over maximizing Expected Value is the logical choice.

I’m oddly fascinated by implied risk in financial transactions, but don’t think risk philic/phobic logically shouldn’t even be ‘in the calculation’ at this point.

Unless you are the agent.