Dishing Olynyk

[mauf]

5/$65m for a backup big??? Those are the moves other teams make......Ainge has never paid big money for reserves or marginal starters on the downside based solely on production (Raef, Theo, Amir and Zeller's contracts were trade assets not production assets). Posey, Perkins, Rondo, even Tony Allen (who I HATED to see go), Sullinger.......he has a long track record of low-cost value players on his second unit, most while still on rookie deals. Even when we were contenders Posey was dirt cheap coming off an awful year, Eddie House was a journeyman vagabond, Baby and Powe young'uns, while PJ Brown and Cassell were cheap pickups.

I can't imagine Olynyk being a Celtic next year unless he agrees to an Amir or Zeller like deal that gives Ainge trade/expiring deal flexibility and I wouldn't expect him to do this.

As I've said above (multiple times), this summer will likely be the last time the C's are under the cap for a long time. If renouncing KO is necessary to bring in an elite player like Hayward, then of course Danny will do that, but if that's not in the cards, the choice is likely between overpaying KO and overpaying someone else's role player; it's not like the cap space can be rolled over to next year. Who exactly do you think will be available this summer who is better than KO?

 

[mauf]

I can't see KO coming back for that money knowing that Yabu and Zizic are in the pipeline.

It's not up to him. In all likelihood, he's choosing between a one-year deal and a multi-year deal, both with Boston.

 

[JakeRae]

As I've said above (multiple times), this summer will likely be the last time the C's are under the cap for a long time. If renouncing KO is necessary to bring in an elite player like Hayward, then of course Danny will do that, but if that's not in the cards, the choice is likely between overpaying KO and overpaying someone else's role player; it's not like the cap space can be rolled over to next year. Who exactly do you think will be available this summer who is better than KO?

This is correct. Furthermore, if it's not necessary, he will also pay Olynyk after the cap is used up. A fair contract would be movable in the future even if it doesn't have much value, if the Celtics run into luxury tax issues, so paying him a market price contract only ends up hurting the team if he gets hurt or stops being a quality player.

 

[sox311]

Ainge hasn't had a Rusney Castillo or Pablo Sandoval, thankfully yes, but I believe he will pay for Kelly if he strikes out with Hayward. Better to dance with the devil you know than offer the Bismack Biyambos of the world 17 million a year. Then again, Jeff Green got 15 million this year, so a one year overpay to a vet could be in line too.

But it he does land Hayward who knows what that means for Jae.

 

[sezwho]

Swapping Jae for Haywood doesn't raise this team to championship level in my opinion (which may over value Crowders contribution on both ends of the court?) and that has to be the goal now.

I enjoy watching KO play and appreciate maufman spelling out the circumstances under which he would likely be retained - I agree with that analysis. I just really hope they can do better. When his shot isn't falling, which it doesn't for extended periods, he is just not very valuable. Traditional asset-management indicates that you should only have a very high volatility asset in your portfolio if it offers well above average returns and I don't think Kelly warrants that.

Perhaps i am skewed by the exceptional performance we get night in and night out at the 1-4 spots. Heck, even our back up guards (Brown and Smart) are quite strong and I see Horford as a good/very good power forward.

Watching the occasionally efficient Amir, at least over limited minutes, has me pining for a difference making 5.

I admit I don't see the path, and maybe we have our own big Z about to arrive from Europe, but that sure feels like wishcasting. The gaping hole in our roster is at Center, and unless Zizic turns out to be the real deal right away, if we don't figure out how to transmogrify our assets, we will be in the same place next year.

Trader Danny, get it done.

 

[moondog80]

If they sign Olynyk, what does this mean for Isaiah, Avery, Marcus, and the theoretical free agent? Can't have all of them, right? Given all that, I think they roll the dice on Zizic filling Olynyk's role. But it's going to be an interesting offseason.

 

[sezwho]

If they sign Olynyk, what does this mean for Isaiah, Avery, Marcus, and the theoretical free agent? Can't have all of them, right? offseason.

I get they can only sign the FA if there is room under the cap, but your larger question had me thinking about one of the assumptions I've been kicking around in my head - namely that the salary tax be damned. I'm not saying this from a 'I don't care its not my money/stick my head in the sand' perspective, but because I genuinely think Wyc and the partners really won't hold back if they are building a championship contender. I suppose there is some place they wouldn't go, but I don't think we lose a difference maker on the court over luxury cap dollars. Curious what others think.

 

[ALiveH]

I think it depends on considerations that are unknowable to us. I think back to the decision to let Sullinger go - another rotation player. There was definitely some negative behind the scenes stuff that was only hinted at, plus we were bringing in Horford who is way better in most ways (except rebounding). I think it depends on how KO fits behind the scenes, what Brad / Danny think about his value-add on the court, resource allocation, and whether they think that can be replaced by Guershon / Zizic / veteran free agent on short money.

I'm a little hazy on whether they can use the RFA rights to spin KO into an asset, e.g., sign-and-trade for (yet another) 2nd round pick or heavily protected 1st.

 

[smastroyin]

If they sign Olynyk, what does this mean for Isaiah, Avery, Marcus, and the theoretical free agent? Can't have all of them, right? Given all that, I think they roll the dice on Zizic filling Olynyk's role. But it's going to be an interesting offseason.

All of the technicalities of the NBA CBA make this a lot harder than any of the other sports. At the end of the day, unless they choose to also sign only one of Isaiah, Avery, and Marcus they are going over the cap whether KO is here or not (the Nets picks will have rookie scale salaries and cap holds, too, remember). So the decision to clear the decks for FA after this year is going to mean those guys aren't here. This is why the question of whether they can win in the playoffs with Isaiah as a starter is a question we keep discussing.

 

[mauf]

If they sign Olynyk, what does this mean for Isaiah, Avery, Marcus, and the theoretical free agent? Can't have all of them, right? Given all that, I think they roll the dice on Zizic filling Olynyk's role. But it's going to be an interesting offseason.

They need to renounce KO to sign a max-money FA like Hayward. If that doesn't pan out, however, they can resign KO, then go over the cap to extend IT/AB/Smart. (Of course, it's probably a misallocation of resources to sign all three of them beyond next year, especially if they draft Fultz or Ball.)

 

[HomeRunBaker]

As I've said above (multiple times), this summer will likely be the last time the C's are under the cap for a long time. If renouncing KO is necessary to bring in an elite player like Hayward, then of course Danny will do that, but if that's not in the cards, the choice is likely between overpaying KO and overpaying someone else's role player; it's not like the cap space can be rolled over to next year. Who exactly do you think will be available this summer who is better than KO?

We have significant pay raises due to several impact players on this roster. Isaiah, Smart, and Bradley are each having their AAV increase by a minimum of 2.5x over the next two years. This isn't about being under the cap to sign a FA (even if one would be available), it is about not blowing through the luxury tax to where you are paying a backup front court player an effective rate of $26m or so with tax penalty factored in. The cost of Olynyk isn't simply being over the cap.......it is the difference between blowing through the tax (which Ainge isn't going to do for an Olynyk) or losing one of the three abovementioned players to FA for nothing in return.

I get they can only sign the FA if there is room under the cap, but your larger question had me thinking about one of the assumptions I've been kicking around in my head - namely that the salary tax be damned. I'm not saying this from a 'I don't care its not my money/stick my head in the sand' perspective, but because I genuinely think Wyc and the partners really won't hold back if they are building a championship contender. I suppose there is some place they wouldn't go, but I don't think we lose a difference maker on the court over luxury cap dollars. Curious what others think.

Wyc and Co. have been consistent from Day One in claiming that they will pay the luxury tax for a championship team. To me that doesn't mean recklessly paying an effective rate of roughly $26m for a backup front court player. It means making a deal using Ratliff's expiring contract for KG. It means structuring Amir and Zeller's contracts with a 2nd year player option as a valuable expiring deal to acquire a Blake, George, or Butler......even when it doesn't happen you can clearly foresee the preparation for going over the tax for the purpose of acquiring an impact player. I have never seen Ainge recklessly throw money at a backup role player who doesn't even possess the upside to be anything more moving forward.

There is an enormous difference between the two paths.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

We have significant pay raises due to several impact players on this roster. Isaiah, Smart, and Bradley are each having their AAV increase by a minimum of 2.5x over the next two years. This isn't about being under the cap to sign a FA (even if one would be available), it is about not blowing through the luxury tax to where you are paying a backup front court player an effective rate of $26m or so with tax penalty factored in. The cost of Olynyk isn't simply being over the cap.......it is the difference between blowing through the tax (which Ainge isn't going to do for an Olynyk) or losing one of the three abovementioned players to FA for nothing in return.


Wyc and Co. have been consistent from Day One in claiming that they will pay the luxury tax for a championship team. To me that doesn't mean recklessly paying an effective rate of roughly $26m for a backup front court player. It means making a deal using Ratliff's expiring contract for KG. It means structuring Amir and Zeller's contracts with a 2nd year player option as a valuable expiring deal to acquire a Blake, George, or Butler......even when it doesn't happen you can clearly foresee the preparation for going over the tax for the purpose of acquiring an impact player. I have never seen Ainge recklessly throw money at a backup role player who doesn't even possess the upside to be anything more moving forward.

There is an enormous difference between the two paths.

Wait, why is the cost of Olynyk necessarily losing one of Bradley/Smart/IT for nothing? None of those three guys are guaranteed a spot on this team, and it's very unlikely that all three get their raises as Celtics.

It's also more than a little disingenuous to start referring to a 13mm Olynyk contract as "an effective rate of 26m." There are plenty of ways to avoid the tax, and a 13mm deal for Olynyk isn't a particularly reckless spend. It's basically the exact deal Ainge gave a roleplayer in Jeff Green.

 

[sezwho]

It's also more than a little disingenuous to start referring to a 13mm Olynyk contract as "an effective rate of 26m." There are plenty of ways to avoid the tax, and a 13mm deal for Olynyk isn't a particularly reckless spend. It's basically the exact deal Ainge gave a roleplayer in Jeff Green.

Can you be more specific? I don't think $13m is reckless either, but am I missing something about cap manipulation? The rules around who can get what in FA I find pretty complex, but as opposed to NFL for example, I thought the cap hit of a player is pretty straightforward. Aside from just dumping a rotation player or relinquishing rights to someone you actually want, is there some cap game to be played?

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

Sure. My point was just that HRB's assumption that the C's are in the tax also assumes that the trio of IT, Smart, and Bradley all receive big contracts from the Celtics. I was only pointing out that that's far from a given, and you can avoid the tax by. . .not doing that.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Wait, why is the cost of Olynyk necessarily losing one of Bradley/Smart/IT for nothing? None of those three guys are guaranteed a spot on this team, and it's very unlikely that all three get their raises as Celtics.

It's also more than a little disingenuous to start referring to a 13mm Olynyk contract as "an effective rate of 26m." There are plenty of ways to avoid the tax, and a 13mm deal for Olynyk isn't a particularly reckless spend. It's basically the exact deal Ainge gave a roleplayer in Jeff Green.

Isaiah and Bradley are going to have AAV's of $20m+ locked into long term deals, Smart maybe a little less in the $16-17m range. Horford is on the books.....if we retain all 3 of the guards we will be blowing through the tax on an Olynyk deal resulting in a dollar for dollar tax bill.

The Jeff Green signing was far less restrictive as we had no players on the team due, or worth (cough Rondo) extending and we weren't going to ever be over the tax when he was here.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

Isaiah and Bradley are going to have AAV's of $20m+ locked into long term deals, Smart maybe a little less in the $16-17m range. Horford is on the books.....if we retain all 3 of the guards we will be blowing through the tax on an Olynyk deal resulting in a dollar for dollar tax bill.

The Jeff Green signing was far less restrictive as we had no players on the team due, or worth (cough Rondo) extending and we weren't going to ever be over the tax when he was here.

Yeah, I know. My point is the C's are unlikely to pay three guards that much given that they may well draft another guard this year, and have to find minutes for Brown.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Yeah, I know. My point is the C's are unlikely to pay three guards that much given that they may well draft another guard this year, and have to find minutes for Brown.

Maybe our difference here is on who we feel Ainge will draft. I don't expect it to be a guard with so much frontcourt talent available. I'd place drafting a guard as our 3rd most likely outcome behind drafting a frontcourt player and trading the pick. Brown's ability to create mismatches offensively at the 2 without becoming a mismatch on the other end really adds to our backcourt logjam.....and I use that word in a positive way.

Olynyk's 20 backup minutes can find takers between whichever 4 we draft, Zizic, and maybe even Yabusele.....with the latter being the least likely to help next year. There really isn't a need to commit $13m or so to this position with other capable replacements already on the roster on rookie deals.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

I think the major difference isn't in who we draft. I think it's highly unlikely that the C's give that money to all three of IT, Smart, and Bradley given the roster construction. If they land the number one pick, I'd say the odds of that are 0%. Regardless of which pick they land, I suspect that either Bradley or Smart get shopped this off season.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

Maybe our difference here is on who we feel Ainge will draft. I don't expect it to be a guard with so much frontcourt talent available. I'd place drafting a guard as our 3rd most likely outcome behind drafting a frontcourt player and trading the pick. Brown's ability to create mismatches offensively at the 2 without becoming a mismatch on the other end really adds to our backcourt logjam.....and I use that word in a positive way.

Olynyk's 20 backup minutes can find takers between whichever 4 we draft, Zizic, and maybe even Yabusele.....with the latter being the least likely to help next year. There really isn't a need to commit $13m or so to this position with other capable replacements already on the roster on rookie deals.

Doesn't this largely depend on where we draft? That could require trading down?

 

[HomeRunBaker]

I think the major difference isn't in who we draft. I think it's highly unlikely that the C's give that money to all three of IT, Smart, and Bradley given the roster construction. If they land the number one pick, I'd say the odds of that are 0%. Regardless of which pick they land, I suspect that either Bradley or Smart get shopped this off season.

I don't disagree with that. To me, Avery doesn't make as great of an impact to deserve $20m+ which is why I feel Ainge will look to move him. It aligns with my feeling that Ainge wouldn't spend as much to retain Olynyk as would be necessary.

It sounds crazy that a likely 1-seed is still in rebuilding mode but that is exactly where we still are until either a major trade to land an impact starter occurs, we sign a top tier FA (unlikely), or until Jaylen-2017 pick-2018 pick grow to be the impact 2-way players we are missing. When that time comes for us to be a true championship contender I don't expect Wyc & Co. to allow Ainge to blow through the luxury tax when in-house replacements are right there to take those 2nd unit minutes.

 

[Eddie Jurak]

I think the odds are that Olynyk will be gone because someone, not Ainge, will be willing to roll the dice and overpay him.

That said, I'd like that not to be true and for us to be able to keep him.

 

[mauf]

Isaiah and Bradley are going to have AAV's of $20m+ locked into long term deals, Smart maybe a little less in the $16-17m range. Horford is on the books.....if we retain all 3 of the guards we will be blowing through the tax on an Olynyk deal resulting in a dollar for dollar tax bill.

I don't see how we have enough minutes to go around to keep IT4, AB, Brown, and Smart all happy, even if we don't draft a guard with the BKN pick. Maybe you're in the camp that says we should trade JB and the BKN pick for Jimmy Butler, but if Danny was willing to do that, it would've happened by now -- and besides, I think you'd need KO more than ever in that scenario, as there would be essentially no chance of bringing in a better big man from outside.

 

[Eddie Jurak]

I don't see how we have enough minutes to go around to keep IT4, AB, Brown, and Smart all happy, even if we don't draft a guard with the BKN pick. Maybe you're in the camp that says we should trade JB and the BKN pick for Jimmy Butler, but if Danny was willing to do that, it would've happened by now -- and besides, I think you'd need KO more than ever in that scenario, as there would be essentially no chance of bringing in a better big man from outside.

I agree; even without drafting a guard, I don't think there is room for IT, AB, Smart, Brown, the pick (who will be a 3 if not a guard), AND Jae.

 

[smastroyin]

The biggest question that needs to be answered (and we can't) is whether Stevens is setting his offense based on the players he has, or if the Celtics have the players that he wants to run the offense he wants. In other words, is he planning around KO's weaknesses and if someone else comes in will he just move to something else?

Also, if Amir Johnson doesn't come back and you don't sign KO, how are you filling out the roster? Zizic and Yabu? Probably need to bring in another vet one way or the other.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

I don't see how we have enough minutes to go around to keep IT4, AB, Brown, and Smart all happy, even if we don't draft a guard with the BKN pick. Maybe you're in the camp that says we should trade JB and the BKN pick for Jimmy Butler, but if Danny was willing to do that, it would've happened by now -- and besides, I think you'd need KO more than ever in that scenario, as there would be essentially no chance of bringing in a better big man from outside.

I've always said that Avery would be the guy to go in a trade but even so that trade would bring back a good sized salary in return. I would never trade Jaylen for any 2nd tier star......I loved him on draft night and he's grown just as I expected as a rookie. I was mocked by some (forgot if it was here or CelticsNuts) for suggesting that his size/skill can create mismatches to where he can be a Paul Pierce-type player for us.

 

[mcpickl]

They need to renounce KO to sign a max-money FA like Hayward. If that doesn't pan out, however, they can resign KO, then go over the cap to extend IT/AB/Smart. (Of course, it's probably a misallocation of resources to sign all three of them beyond next year, especially if they draft Fultz or Ball.)

I think this summer is going to be really tricky.

If they can't get Hayward or another top level free agent, I'd think IT will push to get extended this summer rather than wait another year.

To do so, the Celtics would have to eat into their cap space to give him a raise on his current salary, then extend him off of that.

Could get a bit ugly this summer if they take that route, at the expense of keeping Olynyk or using the space to otherwise improve the team. Also could leave Bradley pissed off if they extend IT but leave Bradley to play out his cheap deal.

Tons of moving parts for Ainge to deal with in June.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

The biggest question that needs to be answered (and we can't) is whether Stevens is setting his offense based on the players he has, or if the Celtics have the players that he wants to run the offense he wants. In other words, is he planning around KO's weaknesses and if someone else comes in will he just move to something else?

Also, if Amir Johnson doesn't come back and you don't sign KO, how are you filling out the roster? Zizic and Yabu? Probably need to bring in another vet one way or the other.

You can always find backend rotation guys on the cheap. Ainge has made a career out of filling out his rotation in this manner mostly out of his own draft picks (Baby, Powe, Tony Allen, Olynyk, Sullinger, etc) but has also found cheap guys on the scrap heap to give us 10-12 mpg or more in some cases (Posey, Marquis Daniels, House, Nate Rob, Shaq, Jermaine O'Neil, Gerald Green)......or the veteran minimum midseason pickups (Antoine when he returned, Marbury, Cassell, PJ Brown, Finley, etc)

Zizic is going to step right in I'm fairly certain but adding a veteran frontcourt guy is certainly a need with or even without Amir returning. These guys are always available cheap......it's silly imo to pay Olynyk the amount necessary to retain him. These Bismack Biyombo-type deals are the ones other teams have a history of doing, Ainge doesn't have any track record of this type of irresponsible spending.

 

[NoXInNixon]

I think the major difference isn't in who we draft. I think it's highly unlikely that the C's give that money to all three of IT, Smart, and Bradley given the roster construction. If they land the number one pick, I'd say the odds of that are 0%. Regardless of which pick they land, I suspect that either Bradley or Smart get shopped this off season.

I suspect IT gets shopped this offseason.

 

[smastroyin]

What remains puzzling is the whole idea that the Celtics weren't in on Boogie. Yes, maybe he is just that much of an epic colossal asshole, but his skills and age make him the perfect star for this team otherwise. He could help win this year and next, he doesn't displace any of the better players on the roster now, and if you build a new core around him because you aren't in on IT/AB long term he fits many different styles.

Obviously it could all be a front in terms of he's just such an asshole they weren't interested, but the "fact" that Stevens didn't really want him is making me wonder what the mid and long term plans are to upgrade the team. Which wraps into this discussion because sure you don't want to overpay KO, but I think any time Horford is off the floor, the offense will go into the shitter if you have a traditional post-up center.

I think the chances of dealing IT are pretty low right now. I understand all of the arguments about him as a defensive liability, but he is the offense. They are 14 points better per 100 with him out there, and while yes, they also give up 10 more points on defense, other than the Orlando game where all the guards were hitting their shots, they haven't shown the ability to sustain an offense with him out. Unless they get another primary scoring option, I think IT is here. The other half of this equation of course is where would you trade him and what would you get?

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

I suspect IT gets shopped this offseason.

The biggest decision DA will face. Is he going to try to extend him early and save some money, wait and give him a max contract or shop him like you and others contend.

Love IT4 but him on max money makes me nervous about roster construction.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

What remains puzzling is the whole idea that the Celtics weren't in on Boogie. Yes, maybe he is just that much of an epic colossal asshole, but his skills and age make him the perfect star for this team otherwise. He could help win this year and next, he doesn't displace any of the better players on the roster now, and if you build a new core around him because you aren't in on IT/AB long term he fits many different styles.

Obviously it could all be a front in terms of he's just such an asshole they weren't interested, but the "fact" that Stevens didn't really want him is making me wonder what the mid and long term plans are to upgrade the team. Which wraps into this discussion because sure you don't want to overpay KO, but I think any time Horford is off the floor, the offense will go into the shitter if you have a traditional post-up center.

I think the chances of dealing IT are pretty low right now. I understand all of the arguments about him as a defensive liability, but he is the offense. They are 14 points better per 100 with him out there, and while yes, they also give up 10 more points on defense, other than the Orlando game where all the guards were hitting their shots, they haven't shown the ability to sustain an offense with him out. Unless they get another primary scoring option, I think IT is here.

Isaiah has quickly become the face of the franchise. Wyc knows business and knows marketing.....Isaiah has revitalized interest in the Boston Celtics throughout New England. That is too valuable to ignore. Sure the player has flaws who doesn't? I mean Allan Crabbe has TWO NBA teams agree to pay him nearly $19m AAV to play for them.......I'm cool with Isaiah earning 25% more.

I feel the Boogie thing was pretty simple. He's a pure 5 having never played the 4. Horford is a pure 5 having never played the 4. The league has been trending toward wings for a while now and toward combo 1's over the past few years......having a pair of paint defenders out there together isn't a good fit for how we want to play. Horford never defended outside of the paint before the stretch-4 was a thing (Josh Smith defended the perimeter big)....I certainly don't want him doing it now on the other side of 30 when these players would have been big 3's when he was younger. Years ago the 4 and 5 were interchangeable in many cases but times have changed as there is now an enormous difference between the styles of the 4 and 5 on most teams.

 

[ALiveH]

IT4 probably gets extended then traded for a unrestricted 1st around his 30th birthday (PP/KG/Nets reprise).

I'm convinced Olynyk doesn't get extended. Neither does Amir. That's 40 MPG of big man production to replace. At most, Jerebko gets another 10 MPG, and I'd be nervous giving that many minutes to our unproven young'uns on a team with championship aspirations (Mickey, Zizic or Geurschon). Not that easy to find a veteran big who fits this system as it requires the bigs to shoot 3s, but Ainge probably tries to plug the whole with cheap veteran talent.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

IT4 probably gets extended then traded for a unrestricted 1st around his 30th birthday (PP/KG/Nets reprise).

I'm convinced Olynyk doesn't get extended. Neither does Amir. That's 40 MPG of big man production to replace. At most, Jerebko gets another 10 MPG, and I'd be nervous giving that many minutes to our unproven young'uns on a team with championship aspirations (Mickey, Zizic or Geurschon). Not that easy to find a veteran big who fits this system as it requires the bigs to shoot 3s, but Ainge probably tries to plug the whole with cheap veteran talent.

Obv I'm with you on Olynyk not being extended however I wouldn't count out Amir. I can see him signing a similar team friendly 1+1 team option deal he signed two years ago to give us the veteran big we will need anyway while giving Ainge the trade flexibility of an expiring contract that can help match up a larger deal for a star. This contract has been a staple of Ainge's rebuilding teams......LaFrentz, Ratliff, Amir, and Zeller this year. I can definitely see Amir returning.

 

[smastroyin]

The only thing I worry about with Amir is that his ankles continue to degrade and he can only give them 15-18 next year. Was recently reading an article where Stevens was explaining that with going to the playoffs they are limiting his minutes pretty heavily in order to keep him upright. I had previously thought it was just the way he was running out rotations.

 

[mauf]

Isaiah has quickly become the face of the franchise. Wyc knows business and knows marketing.....Isaiah has revitalized interest in the Boston Celtics throughout New England. That is too valuable to ignore. Sure the player has flaws who doesn't? I mean Allan Crabbe has TWO NBA teams agree to pay him nearly $19m AAV to play for them.......I'm cool with Isaiah earning 25% more.

The C's are revitalized because they're going to win something like 54 games, not because IT4 is a bankable star. I'll bet he can walk down Boylston Street without being recognized.

Danny needs to decide whether IT4 can continue to be worth 4 points per 100 possessions more than a mediocre fill-in. In the near term, I think the answer is clearly "yes," but he's not likely to be the sort of player who ages gracefully -- when he loses a step, it's going to be ugly. Forced to choose between re-upping IT4 and letting him walk for nothing, he would definitely re-up him, but if there's a third option where he can flip IT for a quality stretch 4 and go into next year with a starting five of AB/Smart/JC/TBD/Horford, with Brown as the 6th man and KO/Rookie/Rozier/Zizic on the bench, that's tempting, especially if the rookie is Fultz or Ball.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

The C's are revitalized because they're going to win something like 54 games, not because IT4 is a bankable star. I'll bet he can walk down Boylston Street without being recognized.

Danny needs to decide whether IT4 can continue to be worth 4 points per 100 possessions more than a mediocre fill-in. In the near term, I think the answer is clearly "yes," but he's not likely to be the sort of player who ages gracefully -- when he loses a step, it's going to be ugly. Forced to choose between re-upping IT4 and letting him walk for nothing, he would definitely re-up him, but if there's a third option where he can flip IT for a quality stretch 4 and go into next year with a starting five of AB/Smart/JC/TBD/Horford, with Brown as the 6th man and KO/Rookie/Rozier/Zizic on the bench, that's tempting, especially if the rookie is Fultz or Ball.

I couldn't disagree more with the initial statement. EVERYONE in Boston recognizes Isaiah. The primary reason why we are going to win 54 games is Isaiah Thomas and fans understand this. They go to the Garden to see Isaiah Thomas to chant "M-V-P" and watch him in the 4th quarter. This isn't 2015 anymore.

I find it unlikely to get anything close to fair value for what Isaiah brings to this team. Without him we are back to 2-3 years ago when we can't score down the stretch because we have no shot creators. His greatest value to the Celtics is his production not his trade value imo.

 

[gingerbreadmann]

The C's are revitalized because they're going to win something like 54 games, not because IT4 is a bankable star. I'll bet he can walk down Boylston Street without being recognized.

$25,000,000 to the Jimmy Fund?

I think your second paragraph is mostly accurate as well but this is just crazy talk. He is a star right now. It's beyond plus-minus at this point; trading IT4 within the next 6 months would cause a minor revolt.

 

[mauf]

$25,000,000 to the Jimmy Fund?

I think your second paragraph is mostly accurate as well but this is just crazy talk. He is a star right now. It's beyond plus-minus at this point; trading IT4 within the next 6 months would cause a minor revolt.

Even if they got someone like Paul Millsap back? I'm not suggesting they give IT4 away or let him walk after next season.

Yes, the C's wouldn't be as good next year, but the fan base wouldn't revolt.

 

[smastroyin]

The C's are revitalized because they're going to win something like 54 games, not because IT4 is a bankable star. I'll bet he can walk down Boylston Street without being recognized.

Danny needs to decide whether IT4 can continue to be worth 4 points per 100 possessions more than a mediocre fill-in. In the near term, I think the answer is clearly "yes," but he's not likely to be the sort of player who ages gracefully -- when he loses a step, it's going to be ugly. Forced to choose between re-upping IT4 and letting him walk for nothing, he would definitely re-up him, but if there's a third option where he can flip IT for a quality stretch 4 and go into next year with a starting five of AB/Smart/JC/TBD/Horford, with Brown as the 6th man and KO/Rookie/Rozier/Zizic on the bench, that's tempting, especially if the rookie is Fultz or Ball.

The two problems though, are:

1) Who is this stretch 4 that's available for IT4? I don't disagree with your premise, but I also don't think your 1-3 generate enough offense, so this stretch 4 needs offensive chops. Millsap would be good, but what's Atlanta's incentive?
2) Related, Smart has been something of a disaster this year as a starting PG. I think you need another initiator on the team if he's your PG (small sample yes).

I think if IT4 goes, you are reworking the way the team plays. So, it's part of a larger series of moves where a guy like Butler is coming here to be the focus of the offense.

 

[gingerbreadmann]

Even if they got someone like Paul Millsap back? I'm not suggesting they give IT4 away or let him walk after next season.


Yes, the C's wouldn't be as good next year, but the fan base wouldn't revolt.

I think they would in the immediate aftermath, which can partially be chalked up to standard fan behavior, but think about it – IT is in the midst of a meteoric rise which has coincided with a big rise in the team. He is *the* guy, and while I love Millsap, it takes a lot more nuanced appreciation of basketball to view him as a superstar. It’s a hard sell to thousands of people who come to the Garden to watch Thomas weave through defenders a foot taller than him for a reverse layup in crunch time, and it also (accurately or not) would send a message that the last few years have been meaningless in the eyes of the FO.

Someone said it earlier and I agree: His trade value is way higher to us than it is to any other team. I think because of that we can and should let it ride until he starts to plateau and a replacement scorer has been identified. I wouldn’t rule out that happening after next season, but until then, not even taking into account that he is the engine behind the entire offense, it doesn’t make sense to cut bait. Usually I am a cold-hearted numbers guy but in this situation it's hard to ignore context.

 

[NoXInNixon]

My dream offseason trade is IT plus the two remaining Brooklyn picks for Westbrook. OKC does it because they're going nowhere with Westbrook and the fanbase will understand after watching Durant leave for nothing. That was acceptable because the Thunder were contenders last year. Now they're not. Getting back IT gives their fans a reason to go to games while they rebuild, or if they'd rather go into full tank mode they flip him for someone else's unprotected first.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Even if they got someone like Paul Millsap back? I'm not suggesting they give IT4 away or let him walk after next season.

Yes, the C's wouldn't be as good next year, but the fan base wouldn't revolt.

Millsap is almost certainly opting out of his player option with Atlanta and hitting free agency so we wouldn't have to trade for him. He will be 32 next season and is presumably opting out of his $21.5m next year to sign his last long-term megadeal. I don't feel this is the direction Ainge will be going.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

My dream offseason trade is IT plus the two remaining Brooklyn picks for Westbrook. OKC does it because they're going nowhere with Westbrook and the fanbase will understand after watching Durant leave for nothing. That was acceptable because the Thunder were contenders last year. Now they're not. Getting back IT gives their fans a reason to go to games while they rebuild, or if they'd rather go into full tank mode they flip him for someone else's unprotected first.

As much as I'd love this scenario, Westbrook is going nowhere. He is the soon to be MVP and the heart of basketball in OKC.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

My dream offseason trade is IT plus the two remaining Brooklyn picks for Westbrook.

My dream scenario is that DA gets Fultz + Doncic turns out to the best prospect since LeBron and we get him too + IT4 is so excited to be playing with these guys, he takes a below market deal to stay with the Cs.

Westbrook may be the MVP this year but can a team win with him as its best player?

 

[the moops]

Westbrook may be the MVP this year but can a team win with him as its best player?

Of course.

 

[NoXInNixon]

If you swapped IT for Westbrook right now, I would consider the Celtics favorites to win the East. Do it next year, with Jaylen hopefully making The Leap, and I'd give them a chance to beat the Warriors.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

If you swapped IT for Westbrook right now, I would consider the Celtics favorites to win the East. Do it next year, with Jaylen hopefully making The Leap, and I'd give them a chance to beat the Warriors.

First statement seems a bit much. Maybe one of the stat meisters here can quantify it, but there would be a distinct culture clash between RW and the system Brad currently runs. Maybe Brad runs something else with RW in tow or RW changes his game but it's difficult for me to see how someone so ball dominant could raise the Cs level by that much.

YMMV

 

[NoXInNixon]

To avoid further thread drift, let's table trade talk until the offseason. Lots to talk about with the team as it is right now.

 

[Swedgin]

Assuming they cannot land a max free agent this summer and IT does not crater in the playoffs, my preference would be a renegotiate and extension if he's willing rather than giving the money to KO. The concern with IT is the years. Other than IT and his agent, no one is going to argue that a 33 year old IT on a max deal is going to be an asset. For his part, if the renegotiate and extension is close to the max, then IT would receive a massive pay increase next year. He would make more in 2017-2018 then he has in his entire career to date. For the Celts, under the CBA (as I understand it) the extension portion could only be for 3 years. In other words, the last year would be his age 31 season. That gives the Celts some protection against age related decline. Moreover, with the cap probably flattening and perhaps declining, expiring contracts will again have some value.

 

[Eddie Jurak]

If Kelly goes, I will miss the "bun or no bun" game that I play with my 7 year old daughter.