Should the Celtics target Jaren Jackson Jr. via trade?
The former DPOY is reportedly on the Celtics radar
We’re almost three weeks away from the Feb. 5 trade deadline. The Boston Celtics have lost their last two games. And, talk over a new addition continues to simmer in the background.
In recent weeks, we’ve heard about rumored interest in Ivica Zubac. More recently, Daniel Gafford. And yesterday, Jaren Jackson Jr’s name got thrown into the mix.
“Multiple league sources have asserted something whispered in the wind for a long time: The Boston Celtics would love to add Jaren Jackson Jr,” Moore wrote via his Hardwood Paroxysm newsletter. “…But if Boston loads up a pick-heavy trade package with some nice talent or tradeable contracts (Jordan Walsh, Hugo Gonzalez) for a Memphis team that would be starting over, does that get them there? Is anyone going to beat that offer for Jaren? is Jaren’s value better in a year under Iisalo and next to Edey, or worse?”
Jackson, 26, is a former Defensive Player of the Year. He’s also finished inside the top-five on a separate occasion and the top-seven on another. Put simply, he’s the type of defensive lynchpin that can underwrite years of championship contention.
Just look at what Draymond Green and his generational defensive IQ helped produce with the Golden State Warriors.
Still, nobody is perfect, and Jackson comes with concerns, most notably, his rebounding.
According to Cleaning The Glass, Jackson is grabbing defensive boards on 14.3% of the Memphis Grizzlies’ defensive possessions, ranking him in the 32nd percentile. Not what you would hope for from a 6-foot-11 big man.
Jackson hasn’t averaged six rebounds per game throughout his eight years in the league (this season included), making him one of the most unreliable board-eaters at his position. And, while some of this is tied to Memphis’ scheme, which encourages Jackson to roam and contest rather than sit in rebounding position, eight seasons of subpar board work suggest it’s more than just role-based noise.
However, what he lacks in rebounding, he more than makes up for in versatility.
Jackson is a diverse defensive talent who can anchor the paint, operate as a roamer, and open up switchability throughout the front court.
Don’t be fooled, though. He’s just as much of a four as he is a five. In fact, he’s worked well when paired with Zach Edey or other bigs over the past two seasons, where he’s split his time (almost) evenly between both positions.
So, the Celtics wouldn’t necessarily need to live with him at the five. They could run him at the four when going ultra big.
Imagine a rotation of Derrick White, Jaylen Brown, Jayson Tatum, Jaren Jackson Jr. and Neemias Queta.
Size, switchability 1-through-4, and two high-level rim protectors clean things up when the perimeter defense breaks down or is stretched to near breaking point. Defenses will take more risks and play with added aggression when they know there’s a sturdy line of defense around the rim.
Or, if you wanted more floor spacing and overall balance between offense and defense…
Derrick White, Jaylen Brown, Jayson Tatum, Sam Hauser and Jackson Jr.
The question is, do you deem the potential asking price to be worthwhile?
Here are some ideas of how a trade could look
Shout out to my podcast co-host, Billy Calabrese, for the first trade idea…
With this deal, the Celtics would be removing the distraction of Anfernee Simons’ expiring contract. However, the wing depth that has been such a big part of the team’s overall success this season would be decimated.
I can be talked into losing Walsh and Minott. Both had enjoyed some good stretches over the first half of the season, but I’d argue there are firm ceilings in place for both of them, especially once Jayson Tatum returns to the rotation and minutes become far harder to come by.
Losing Hugo Gonzalez, though? Now, that’s difficult.
A move for Jackson would signal that defense will be your calling card. Gonzalez has a decently high floor as a wing stopper who can eat minutes guard opposing team’s best players. You could argue that Walsh is in the same mould; however, I’d hedge my bets with Gonzalez’s development.
Removing the attachment to outgoing talent for a moment, some other issues arise.
The Celtics would be incredibly thin at the guard position, with no scoring punch off the bench. Joe Mazzulla would need to give Baylor Scheierman a boost in role and responsibilities — and we haven’t seen enough to believe he could handle that, although I am still a believer.
Furthermore, Boston would be down to 11 players. Stevens would need to find and trust some veteran talent on the free agent market to round out the roster. And with it, the chances of ducking out of the luxury tax would evaporate.
Considering how well the Celtics have played over the first half of the season, losing multiple members of the rotation would be a hard sell, even if the return is one of the league’s better defenders.
Still, you have to give up something to get something…So the question becomes ‘what can you live with?’
If you don’t like the concept of losing all three of Minott, Walsh and Gonzalez, this trade could be for you. You’re still giving up Walsh, as he’s young enough, athletic enough and talented enough to become a key component for the Grizzlies’ rebuild, but you’re supplementing the deal with some extra picks.
The downside to this move is that you’re losing both Hauser and Simons. Unless you’re moving Pritchard back to the bench, there’s next to no scoring within the second unit for the second half of the season.
And, once again, you would need to go and find some additional talent in the free agency market or via additional trades.
In truth, you can mix and match the young wings, the draft picks and end-of-bench guys. Boston has multiple players in that $2-$3 million contract range. The crux of any trade would sit around Anfernee Simons.
Understanding Jackson Jr’s contract
Jackson Jr. signed a five-year, $205 million contract extension in 2025. He is in the final year of his previous rookie extension, which expires at the end of this season.
From 2026-27, Jackson Jr’s salary will start at $49 million and incrementally increase up to $53.5 million in 2029-30 (player option season).
Now, it’s worth noting that because the upcoming extension was not a rookie extension, Jackson is not under the poison pill provision (as far as I’m aware).
As such, the path to trading for him is as straightforward as any other NBA deal.
The problem is, Boston would then have three max-to-supermax talents on the roster.
Next season, Jaylen Brown will account for 34.4% of the Celtics’ cap space. Jayson Tatum will account for 35.2% of the cap. And, JJJ would eat another 29.5%.
Those three players would account for 99.1% of the allowable cap. All other players would be pushing Boston closer, and most likely into, the first or second luxury tax aprons.
Where I stand on a potential JJJ trade
This is a tough one.
The reason I was/am such a big proponent of trading for Zubac was that I believed that, assuming he’s available, a better big would be unlikely to hit the trade market in the coming years.
Jackson changes some of that calculus.
Is he a better center than Zubac? From a positional standpoint, that’s debatable.
Is he a better player? Yes, I would argue he is.
However, at least with a move for Zubac, or someone with a similar value contract, the Celtics would keep some financial flexibility.
A move for JJJ would cement Boston’s roster and provide little room to pivot outside of trading a star. All future deals would be about tightening the fringes and finding upside where it becomes available.
We’re only half a season into the retooling process. It doesn’t make sense for the Celics to make one big deal that could potentially cost most of the developmental talent on the roster, so soon after willingly entering this current phase.
If JJJ truly becomes available, the Celtics should absolutely perform their due diligence. That should include checking around the league on what other options exist. If he’s deemed to be the best talent available, then cool, make the move you need to make.
But as of writing this, I’m 70/30 toward a deal. I’m still not fully sold, simply because of the potential cost and future financial limitations. From a skill set and talent perspective, I’m all in.
What about you?