It all depends on perspective I guess. I personally think IT will be able to look himself in the mirror and say with a straight face that 3/100 is a brinks truck. I think the Celtics will be willing to do something like that and he'll be in green for awhile. It's probably not a coincidence that we've gotten our two biggest FA signings in franchise history since he's been here, so for a half superstar he's done a helluva lot for this franchise's perception around the league. I don't think either Horford or Hayward is in green without IT on the team. Not bad for a half superstar.
First, half-a-superstar is not a pejorative, or diss, of IT. But I can understand if it rubs you the wrong way. It is, I think, a fair way to describe what he brings to the court, as well as an apt description of his size.
Second, I concur that IT has been an admirable representative of the team, especially in recruiting Horford, and that has been a real boon to the club. However, the biggest reason Horford and Heyward are Celtics is because of money. Would they be here without IT? I agree is doubtful, but I don't think that is at all a factor in considering what he should be paid going forward.
Third, I don't think anyone - myself included - is ungrateful for IT's contributions on and off the court these last couple years. But that doesn't mean giving him whatever he wants at the negotiating table. The fact is that he's going to be over 30 with a bad hip for most of the contract he does get. That matters a lot more than what he has done in the past. If he's willing to take 3 years, then SIGN ME UP. Terrific. That's ideal for the team. If he's not, and he wants "the max" - which is how I choose to interpret "Brinks truck" quotes - then, we have a problem. I'm interested in winning a title, and if IT can help with that, great. But more than 3 years, or a "max deal" is problematic for lots of reasons explained above.