for competing teams its bad, for the wizards its what we need to do to keep stars in dc.

Dunks & Threes had Brown at +2.2 EPM and Young at +2.1 EPM. Take that how you will.

i mean its about fit with the wizards they need a guard that can pass (main playmaker) and score as a 2ndary option

wizards also have a ton of cap space since majority of there players are cheap deals or rookies. so taking a gamble like this while tre johnson, aj, george and wiley grow isnt a bad idea

Trae’s contract is pretty bad for most teams, but as others have said context matters. Wizards had a lot of cap space and I actually think Trae will help those young guys get some great looks. Regardless what your opinion of Trae is, everyone can agree he’s an incredible passer.

Brown was not negative value, they got 2 FRPs.

Trae Young contract is cancerous, but context matters.

Wizards have a ton of cap space and won’t have to pay any of their young talent significant money (IF they become good) during Trae’s contract.

Why is this getting so overblown still.

The league thinks he’s a “negative asset”? The return wasn’t great but you don’t give up two first round picks for a “negative asset”.

Trae agreed to the extension before the trade. That’s why the wizards were the only team interested. That’s why he asked to go there. Nothing else makes sense.

Trae made the Eastern Conference Finals with Kevin Huerter or John Collins as the second best player. He makes the finals if he doesn’t step on that referee.

People love to hate Trae and blame him, our team was run terribly there for a bit after the Owners son became our defacto lead decision maker.

Trae Young is Tiny Archibald 2.0. The Wizards have a chance to do something here. Tiny ended up winning with the Bird Celtics, could see something similar up in Washington.

In which case I’d have found my 13th reason.

Trae is a facilitating machine, led the league in assists multiple years. Never had a frontcourt near as good as the Wizards on paper, so his defensive deficiencies won’t be as glaring. He doesn’t have to be the primary scoring option anymore and his teardrop or lob is unstoppable when the offense is rolling.

Jaylen Brown for $65 million a year and an extension coming up when he’s 30 is insanity.

There is something absurd about the Brown dialogue.

It doesnt seem like it comes from an organic place.

If AJ turns into a superstar, nobody on the Wizards is untouchable except him. Paying Trae wouldn’t be an issue. He makes everyone around him better on offense, doesn’t stream, and his contract lines up nicely with AJ’s deal.

It’s an awful contract.

Its possible Boston really didn’t want to give Jaylen a max extension

Honestly I think Trae is a good player and the Wizards very well could be a playoff team next season.

That 10 mil difference absolutely matters and a nontrivial part of the problem is Brown was their 2nd option being paid like that, wizards don’t even necessarily have a first option.

Hot take, but IMO it’s hard to justify more than 30% of the cap for any one player in the league (30% of the 2026-27 cap being approximately $49.49M), especially if that player is over 30 and we’ve assumedly already seen their prime years.

Once you get into the 35%+ of the cap range on these contracts (approx $57.74M in 2026-27), then it gets really prohibitive, especially if they’re like 32-33 years old and likely declining.

I understand the rules are what cause these contracts to happen and escalate, and it’s great for the players that they have this earning power, but the longer these contracts go on, the less they are tied to the player’s current ability and worth, which makes team building really difficult.

It would likely never happen (because the player would be giving up money that they’ve already secured for each other through previous CBAs), but it would be an interesting exercise if contracts could only max out at 30% of the cap number for the year they’re signed in, and minimum contracts were 2% of the cap across the board (\(3.30M for 2026-27), with Rookie deals at a flat 4% of the cap (\)6.60M for 2026-27) guaranteed for 3 years (1st and 2nd Round picks), with no escalators or “super max” to unlock, eg. If you were signing a 4-year deal starting this year, it would be \(49.49M x 4 years = \)197.95M locked in through to the end of the 2029-30 season. Cal goes up, and your number stays the same because of when you signed the deal.

A system like this would reduce the number of bad value contracts significantly and wouldn’t force teams to overpay to retain players as the rules currently dictate. Salary would be tied a lot more closely to a player’s value in a given year. It would potentially revolutionise and revive free agency for star players too, as most who are in their prime would probably opt for shorter deals to “bet on themselves” and allow for a pay rise with their next deal with the cap going up too. It would bring up the league’s lower and middle classes too in pay and relative value. In this system where \(49.49M is the max this year, if someone like Trae Young was still signing a new deal right now, they'd probably be in the \)25-30M a year range, based on where they’re at and their value right now.

How is he a negative asset? They got 2 picks and a player for him. Your premise doesn’t even make sense

yeah like everyone’s saying, for losing teams it’s what they have to do to establish a core, he’ll be good for their young guys. the squad doesn’t look bad, give the wizards a few years they’ll be back in the playoffs

Trae Young is harder to evaluate than Jaylen Brown because he’s a game changing talent, but also has huge flaws. Put him in the right situation, and his numbers (counting stats and advanced analytics) are pretty damn good- the question is if it’s worth the amount of sacrifice it takes to build around him.

In 20 years this is gonna be on some YouTube ice berg ranking shit

Signing the contract is not the same as trade value, they want him to stay and play in wash. If they were to move off of him down the road theyll have to attach picks probably

Brown is not viewed as a negative asset. The Sixers had to give up a smaller contract and multiple FRP/swaps to acquire him.

Not anywhere near as bad because he chose to go to a team that had no big contracts.

Not all contracts are built the same. Foxs contract is bad but it doesn’t harm the spurs the same way browns contract will for the Sixers. Or how Poeltls contract hurts the raptors.

There are 15 contracts paying more than Trae Young next year. All of them except two are older than him.

Trae Young won’t drive into three people and dribble the ball off his foot /s

Jaylen is not viewed as a negative asset, he was traded for positive value in the form of picks. You have negative value when your team takes a negative return, or you are packaged with more positive things to offset the bad contract. PG will be a decent player on the Celtics even if he does not do a ton to replace Brown.

“Negative value” is not “less value than I might have expected”.

Yes.

This is a great comparison… it really displays how much of a head scratcher this is from Celtics Front Office

I’m assuming you mean from the league/analytics perspective that led to Brown being undervalued. This mainly came from stats like darko (https://www.darko.app) that compare your impact on lineups for scoring plays created for the team or defensively take away opponents chances (I’m simplifying here). Brown ranks 35th here. Trae Young ranks 101st. I’d say most of the league would think Trae’s contract is much worse than Brown’s but it only takes one dumb team to give a bad a contract.

He deserves this and much worse after that dunk contest, never forget

Irresponsibly, unbelievably bad

Very, very bad

Really really bad.

The main reason Trae Young didn’t net any picks for the hawks was because it was time to pay him

Someone really compared a playmaker that generates looks for his team despite their diminutive stature to a ball hog that could not pass to an open teammate even if they’re directly in front of them.

How in the world are you concluding the NBA thinks Brown is a negative asset when he returned a +2.6 EPM, 17 ppg 39% 3P starting wing and two 1st round picks?

A negative asset means Boston would have to give the other team multiple 1st round picks.

Even if you think the Trae Young contract is bad, if you think the Sixers won the Jaylen Brown trade, it should show you that having the “negative asset star player” (“worst contract in the league” Paul George) is still better than having nothing at all. It’s always a human trade piece for a star in the future. These “untradable contracts” ALWAYS end up being tradable if you just wait long enough. Especially if the player has cache and legit name value.

Bad

If they were happy giving him that deal I wonder if they wouldn’t have preferred to wait for Jaylen brown since they want to win now

Its weird, jb has been fantastic the last 5 years, and has no value, trae is a offense only guy with good but not great shooting and has tons of value, at least to washington

Most Toxic contract in the league

What were the other offers?

And what about Fox’s contract?

Bookmarking my heart out.

worst contract in all sports

The thing with these kind of contracts is that they are totally fine if you can afford them. A young team, full of guys in their rookie deals, an take on a contract like that until they enter their second contract. The issue is that, once you actually want to get rid of them, they are worth little or might even be negative.

It’s the kind of bad contract only the Wizards would give.

Wizards aren’t Celtics, they have a lot less options

Trae is one of the best passers in the league and he used to be able to shoot 3s. If he can find his shot again, then he’s worth the money imo.

Trae Young bien rodeado, te puede dar un campeonato antes que brown post celtics

The league doesn’t view Jaylen as a negative asset, otherwise there would have been no market for him at all. The Celtics IMO wildly underestimated his value, but even then he brought back 1sts.

The Trae contract, OTOH, is negative value to basically any contending team, as he is way too expensive and gives back on D just as much as provides on O, plus he doesn’t move AT ALL off the ball. He thinks he’s James Harden, but he’s closer to Jordan Clarkson. The Wizards logic is that he is a floor raiser PG he can potentially be a knockdown threat from 3 (he’s not), plus they had the cap space to sign him. It kind of makes sense for this year and maybe next year, but the last 2 years are going to be a disaster and whoever pushed for this deal made a big mistake.

I’d say it’s an abomination but by Washington standards it’s an improvement. 

It’s catastrophic and people were already shitting on the contract as soon as it was signed.

It’s literally double what Trae should have gotten in terms of AAV.

Trae Young got traded for two role players. His value is way worse than Jaylen Brown

Trae is right up there with Fox as being the worst contracts in the league. Washington just continues to screw up

It’s why a team like the Wizards will remain shit