Pierce willing to restructure the last year of his deal.

[greenwise]

Pierce can stay as long as he wants to. After all the dark years he's lived here he deserves to retire as a Celtic. So if he wants to restructure his contract, then give him more years with a little less money and that's all. I believe Paul can play 5 more years or so

[Bahku]

Pierce can stay as long as he wants to. After all the dark years he's lived here he deserves to retire as a Celtic. So if he wants to restructure his contract, then give him more years with a little less money and that's all. I believe Paul can play 5 more years or so

Absolutely (TP) ... this city owes this guy, big time, and the least we can do is do whatever is needed to keep him here for the rest of his career, and let him retire in the place he helped build ... especially if he's willing to compromise like this. Just one more way that he's shown what a complete class-act he is ... and it should be rewarded.

[Roy Hobbs]

Pierce can stay as long as he wants to. After all the dark years he's lived here he deserves to retire as a Celtic. So if he wants to restructure his contract, then give him more years with a little less money and that's all. I believe Paul can play 5 more years or so

That's basically how I see it.  Yes, I wouldn't continue to give him a max contract every year, but I'd be fine handing him a three year extension tomorrow.  I'm of the personal belief that you should be a little sentimental with your career-long Celtics.  That's why there's no way I would have traded Larry or McHale -- despite it making sense -- and there's no way I'd ever gently kick Pierce to the curb.  Until his skills have eroded to the point of not helping the team, I'd like Pierce to stay in green.

[Fan from VT]

Pierce can stay as long as he wants to. After all the dark years he's lived here he deserves to retire as a Celtic. So if he wants to restructure his contract, then give him more years with a little less money and that's all. I believe Paul can play 5 more years or so

That's basically how I see it.  Yes, I wouldn't continue to give him a max contract every year, but I'd be fine handing him a three year extension tomorrow.  I'm of the personal belief that you should be a little sentimental with your career-long Celtics.  That's why there's no way I would have traded Larry or McHale -- despite it making sense -- and there's no way I'd ever gently kick Pierce to the curb.  Until his skills have eroded to the point of not helping the team, I'd like Pierce to stay in green.

Question: If this is our stance, do we as fans then forfeit the right to complain about how long it's taking for the team to get good again? I'm not sure you can do both in a salary cap league.

[Ed Teach]

Every one is acting like the only reason that the Celtics were bad after the big three retired was that they held onto the big 3 and it hampered there ability to build the team.  I do not agree.

I think that losing 2 legit all-stars in their prime, terrible draft decisions, and a bad coaching hire have much more to do with the bad teams.  Rewarding our Celtic superstars from the championship teams did not hurt the team, if anything it has helped lure players to the Celtics.   I for one do not want to be known as a team that eats its own.

[Roy Hobbs]

Pierce can stay as long as he wants to. After all the dark years he's lived here he deserves to retire as a Celtic. So if he wants to restructure his contract, then give him more years with a little less money and that's all. I believe Paul can play 5 more years or so

That's basically how I see it.  Yes, I wouldn't continue to give him a max contract every year, but I'd be fine handing him a three year extension tomorrow.  I'm of the personal belief that you should be a little sentimental with your career-long Celtics.  That's why there's no way I would have traded Larry or McHale -- despite it making sense -- and there's no way I'd ever gently kick Pierce to the curb.  Until his skills have eroded to the point of not helping the team, I'd like Pierce to stay in green.

Question: If this is our stance, do we as fans then forfeit the right to complain about how long it's taking for the team to get good again? I'm not sure you can do both in a salary cap league.

I'm personally okay with a couple of down seasons while the team sticks with its stars too long.  I'd rather see Pierce in green, rather than Laker purple.

[JSD]

Every one is acting like the only reason that the Celtics were bad after the big three retired was that they held onto the big 3 and it hampered there ability to build the team.  I do not agree.

I think that losing 2 legit all-stars in their prime, terrible draft decisions, and a bad coaching hire have much more to do with the bad teams.  Rewarding our Celtic superstars from the championship teams did not hurt the team, if anything it has helped lure players to the Celtics.   I for one do not want to be known as a team that eats its own.

Right, but the #1 reason was bad ownership... F Paul Gaston.

[billysan]

I think we should take seriously what Paul Pierce recently said about staying and playing on a 15 win team in the future. I want to keep him around indefinitley, I think the size, length and type of contract he signs from here on out is going to based on what happens next year with Ray Allen and the KG the next. He was pretty specific about not wanting to be here if those two and Sheed were not part of the picture. That equates to a two year extention after his 21 million option next year, if he is a man of his word.

[KungPoweChicken]

That is a true player that loves winning and his team...

we've got a couple of true players around here

In all seriousness, I hope to see Paul never compared to Tom again, seeing how Paul can't even hold Tom's jock.


Tom Brady is at a Michael Jordan level. To make a Pierce comparison is just flat out disrespectful.

[xmuscularghandix]

That is a true player that loves winning and his team...

we've got a couple of true players around here

In all seriousness, I hope to see Paul never compared to Tom again, seeing how Paul can't even hold Tom's jock.


Tom Brady is at a Michael Jordan level. To make a Pierce comparison is just flat out disrespectful.

Disrespectful? What are you even talking about? Tom restructured his money to allow the patriots to sign better players, thats why i posted him. Read the thread.

And to be completely real, Tom Brady is a great quarterback who doesn't put up all the unreal numbers that other superstars do, but in the fourth quarter he's put on some of the best performances of all-time.

I'm pretty sure PP's done that, the only difference is championships.

[JSD]

That is a true player that loves winning and his team...

we've got a couple of true players around here

In all seriousness, I hope to see Paul never compared to Tom again, seeing how Paul can't even hold Tom's jock.


Tom Brady is at a Michael Jordan level. To make a Pierce comparison is just flat out disrespectful.

Disrespectful? What are you even talking about? Tom restructured his money to allow the patriots to sign better players, thats why i posted him. Read the thread.

And to be completely real, Tom Brady is a great quarterback who doesn't put up all the unreal numbers that other superstars do, but in the fourth quarter he's put on some of the best performances of all-time.

I'm pretty sure PP's done that, the only difference is championships.

Didn't Brady set every QB record possible in 2007? Combine that with 3 Super bowls, 4 AFC titles, and an undefeated regular season and you've got yourself an all-time great QB. That said, I understood your referencing Tom brady's contract situation and willingness to restructure his deal... Although Pierce will not be taking a discount as Brady has in the past and neither will Brady going forward.

[xmuscularghandix]

That is a true player that loves winning and his team...

we've got a couple of true players around here

In all seriousness, I hope to see Paul never compared to Tom again, seeing how Paul can't even hold Tom's jock.


Tom Brady is at a Michael Jordan level. To make a Pierce comparison is just flat out disrespectful.

Disrespectful? What are you even talking about? Tom restructured his money to allow the patriots to sign better players, thats why i posted him. Read the thread.

And to be completely real, Tom Brady is a great quarterback who doesn't put up all the unreal numbers that other superstars do, but in the fourth quarter he's put on some of the best performances of all-time.

I'm pretty sure PP's done that, the only difference is championships.

Didn't Brady set every QB record possible in 2007? Combine that with 3 Super bowls, 4 AFC titles, and an undefeated regular season and you've got yourself an all-time great QB. That said, I understood your referencing Tom brady's contract situation and willingness to restructure his deal... Although Pierce will not be taking a discount as Brady has in the past and neither will Brady going forward.

first of all the two sports are in no way comparable. second of all Tom Brady will do that becuase he can mess with his contract whenever, Tom gave back enough money to resign Moss, then this offseason Moss gave back enough to get Taylor on the books.

And when Pierce says that he is willing to restructure thats taking a discount, he may be getting a longer contract becuase of it but in 2010 he'll be making less to keep/acquire better players.

[ForexPirate]

with pp opting out of his last year to re-do his deal, and ray expiring but also wanting to re-sign, rondo up for a new deal - how much will we be under the cap and do you think it will be enough to sign d. wade.    I think re-signing ray and rondo will end up being a wash - ray takes less and rondo makes more.  PP takes less money / year over a longer term.  - yeak we'll be way over the cap but we will be an amazing team.

[Jon]

Pierce can stay as long as he wants to. After all the dark years he's lived here he deserves to retire as a Celtic. So if he wants to restructure his contract, then give him more years with a little less money and that's all. I believe Paul can play 5 more years or so

That's basically how I see it.  Yes, I wouldn't continue to give him a max contract every year, but I'd be fine handing him a three year extension tomorrow.  I'm of the personal belief that you should be a little sentimental with your career-long Celtics.  That's why there's no way I would have traded Larry or McHale -- despite it making sense -- and there's no way I'd ever gently kick Pierce to the curb.  Until his skills have eroded to the point of not helping the team, I'd like Pierce to stay in green.

I see that, and don't necessarily disagree with it.  However, I'd rather overpay him and have the flexibility of one year contracts than get locked into him long term.  I think if he does the year by year approach (kind of like Jordan), Pierce will eventually hang them up or decide to go elsewhere if it becomes apparent the team is rebuilding after Garnett's contract is done.  However, the last thing we need is him being disgruntled as he plays through the last year or two of a deal just to get the money.