Golden State Warriors general manager Mike Dunleavy told reporters in mid-August that if Stephen Curry were to request a trade, he'd look into honoring the request. There were never any reports linking Curry to the Boston Celtics, but given that it was feasible without giving up Jayson Tatum, it was fun to think it was a possibility. Even at 38, he's still Steph Curry after all.
But it appears that's not on the table. ClutchPoints' Brett Siegel speculates that Curry will sign his upcoming extension with the Warriors. More specifically, per Siegel himself, "he's not going to be leaving the Golden State Warriors."
The Warriors are ready to offer Stephen Curry a 2-year, $136.7 million max extension when he's eligible on Saturday and will be retiring a Warrior, per @BrettSiegelNBA on Clutch Scoops:
— ClutchPoints (@ClutchPoints) August 28, 2026
“Whether or not Steph takes that or if he takes a discount, the ball is totally in his… pic.twitter.com/44cl04AaQw
First of all, props to Curry for sticking through it with the Warriors even though it truly feels like their window has been closed for some time. Loyalty has come into question a lot in the NBA, so it's rare to see a team and its franchise player mutually demonstrate how attached they are to each other
Second, and more importantly, if this is all true, it basically ends the Curry dream in Boston. It would have been nice to see one of the best players of all-time finish his career as a Celtic (it's happened before), but also give them a better shot at a title, even if he is firmly in the twilight of his career.
Boston is still well-positioned this season to make some noise, even if they just traded Jaylen Brown. Their chances would have been better with Curry, but they'll manage.
Boston would have been better for Curry
For anyone who hasn't been around, it's hard to see what's exciting about the Warriors. They were one of the NBA's oldest teams last season, learned the hard way of what happens when a team depend on old stars when Jimmy Butler went down with an ACL tear, and did pretty much nothing to improve themselves.
Maybe Butler comes back around the same, but that's kind of hard for someone in their mid-30s who suffers an injury this late into their career. Even so, the risk is still there for players like him, Curry, Draymond Green, and Al Horford. Oh, and they kept Kristaps Porzingis, who is 10 times worse as a risk than he was when the Celtics brought him in three years ago.
All of this is to say not that the Celtics would have helped Curry win more titles, but they would have given him a better chance. Given that Joe Mazzulla's philosophy primarily revolves around threes, Curry would have been his best weapon in that department.
It's a shame for all parties, but the Celtics won't be the ones who suffer from no Curry on the roster.
Add us as a preferred source on Google