Pierce WILL opt out! (Personal Opinion)

[Jeff]

my brain hurts - please fast forward me to July 1

[Brendan]

what about a four year extension at <10 million and going down?

I think Pierce has three years at current level, so worst case one bad Pierce year... on the other hand - cap space.

What's the price point (if any) the third year salary has to be for it to be worthwhile?

[Chris]

OK, thinking about this some more, I think it might make a lot of sense for Pierce to opt out, and sign a 2 year/$36 million deal, with the second year at a player option.  

Now, this is going to ask him to give up the chance at really cashing in this summer, but I think he may consider that.  He has made plenty of money, and a deal like this would allow him to be a ring chaser in 2012 and beyond (which I think he would love), rather than being stuck on a lottery team with an untradable contract (which he would hate).

Money-wise, this deal would save the C's about $6 million this season, while costing Paul $3 million.  But Paul would likely make that up next season.  He wouldn't get the longterm money he wants, but he may be OK with that.

The player option also allows him to walk next summer in case things go south this year, and Danny decides to blow it up.

The biggest risk in this for Pierce is that there is a lockout in 2011, and he basically gave up $3 million for nothing.  But ultimately, he might take that chance.

I still think he is more likely to pick up his option for next season, but if he doesn't, I think this scenario could play out.  

I think Pierce will want a contract longer than 2 years, especially considering his age and the likelihood of major changes to the next CBA.

I'd be shocked if he agreed to a new contract of fewer than 3 years, guaranteed or with player options.

In that case, i don't think he will be a Celtic anymore.

Really? I don't know, I don't think the 3rd year is going to be a deal-killer. Remember, Wyc loves Pierce. It's his money.

I think the new CBA and KG coming off the books make it a deal breaker. 

[testy]

I will try this  again. PP and RA are qualify for the over 36 rule. this allows them to take less money upfront and not play in the final year of their contract and receive a pay check.

[JSD]

OK, thinking about this some more, I think it might make a lot of sense for Pierce to opt out, and sign a 2 year/$36 million deal, with the second year at a player option.  

Now, this is going to ask him to give up the chance at really cashing in this summer, but I think he may consider that.  He has made plenty of money, and a deal like this would allow him to be a ring chaser in 2012 and beyond (which I think he would love), rather than being stuck on a lottery team with an untradable contract (which he would hate).

Money-wise, this deal would save the C's about $6 million this season, while costing Paul $3 million.  But Paul would likely make that up next season.  He wouldn't get the longterm money he wants, but he may be OK with that.

The player option also allows him to walk next summer in case things go south this year, and Danny decides to blow it up.

The biggest risk in this for Pierce is that there is a lockout in 2011, and he basically gave up $3 million for nothing.  But ultimately, he might take that chance.

I still think he is more likely to pick up his option for next season, but if he doesn't, I think this scenario could play out.  

I think Pierce will want a contract longer than 2 years, especially considering his age and the likelihood of major changes to the next CBA.

I'd be shocked if he agreed to a new contract of fewer than 3 years, guaranteed or with player options.

In that case, i don't think he will be a Celtic anymore.

Really? I don't know, I don't think the 3rd year is going to be a deal-killer. Remember, Wyc loves Pierce. It's his money.

I think the new CBA and KG coming off the books make it a deal breaker. 

So how about 2 years for $36 million? It free's up $3 million for the Celtics this off-season and gives Paul an extra $15 million for insurance heading into next year. Paul would probably prefer a 3 or 4 year deal if he opts out though...

[testy]

A 4 or 5 year deal would be more appropiate maybe 9,10,11,12,13. If we can't get a max contract this does not make much sense. Rudy Gay anybody ?

[Chris]

OK, thinking about this some more, I think it might make a lot of sense for Pierce to opt out, and sign a 2 year/$36 million deal, with the second year at a player option.  

Now, this is going to ask him to give up the chance at really cashing in this summer, but I think he may consider that.  He has made plenty of money, and a deal like this would allow him to be a ring chaser in 2012 and beyond (which I think he would love), rather than being stuck on a lottery team with an untradable contract (which he would hate).

Money-wise, this deal would save the C's about $6 million this season, while costing Paul $3 million.  But Paul would likely make that up next season.  He wouldn't get the longterm money he wants, but he may be OK with that.

The player option also allows him to walk next summer in case things go south this year, and Danny decides to blow it up.

The biggest risk in this for Pierce is that there is a lockout in 2011, and he basically gave up $3 million for nothing.  But ultimately, he might take that chance.

I still think he is more likely to pick up his option for next season, but if he doesn't, I think this scenario could play out.  

I think Pierce will want a contract longer than 2 years, especially considering his age and the likelihood of major changes to the next CBA.

I'd be shocked if he agreed to a new contract of fewer than 3 years, guaranteed or with player options.

In that case, i don't think he will be a Celtic anymore.

Really? I don't know, I don't think the 3rd year is going to be a deal-killer. Remember, Wyc loves Pierce. It's his money.

I think the new CBA and KG coming off the books make it a deal breaker. 

So how about 2 years for $36 million? It free's up $3 million for the Celtics this off-season and gives Paul an extra $15 million for insurance heading into next year. Paul would probably prefer a 3 or 4 year deal if he opts out though...

That's the exact deal I came up with.  It would take Pierce sacrificing the long term deal, but under the assumption he would rather have the opportunity to chase rings after two more big payday years, rather than rotting on a lottery team as an albatross contract, this deal seems to work both for him and the team. 

[Neurotic Guy]

I have been out of the loop for a while -- recovering from the disappointing end to an unbelievable run. So, sorry if this has been discussed and refuted already (as I suspect it has been) in other threads:

If Pierce opts out, the C's would be at about 36 Million in salary with Sheed's 6 come off the books.    Doesn't that put the C's enough under the cap to be competetive in grabbing one of the bigger name free agents?

Then can't Pierce, with Bird rights (and Ray, too), be signed following the signing of a free agent?   Is this possible?

Example: 
Amare signs at $18 Million
Then Pierce at 18 and Ray at 10

Salary total would push $85 million, but would make them very competetive for 2 years even if Miami or Chicago pull off something crazy with Lebron and Bosh. 

[Chris]

I have been out of the loop for a while -- recovering from the disappointing end to an unbelievable run. So, sorry if this has been discussed and refuted already (as I suspect it has been) in other threads:

If Pierce opts out, the C's would be at about 36 Million in salary with Sheed's 6 come off the books.    Doesn't that put the C's enough under the cap to be competetive in grabbing one of the bigger name free agents?

Then can't Pierce, with Bird rights (and Ray, too), be signed following the signing of a free agent?   Is this possible?

Example: 
Amare signs at $18 Million
Then Pierce at 18 and Ray at 10

Salary total would push $85 million, but would make them very competetive for 2 years even if Miami or Chicago pull off something crazy with Lebron and Bosh. 

First, lets clarify that the C's would be at closer to $41 million after cap holds for minimum roster spots.  So they wouldn't be able to fit a full max contract in there...but they would be able to go after someone like Gay, Lee, or Johnson. 

Here is the problem.  In order to get the cap space, they have to renounce all of their free agents, which means they no longer have Bird rights on them.  That means, once they used that cap space, they cannot sign anyone (including Pierce or Allen) to anything more than the league minimum. 

So, if Pierce did opt out, and the C's went after a near max player, their roster would look like this:

Rondo, Bradley
Vet minimum, Vet minimum
Rudy Gay, Vet minimum
KG, Big Baby
Perk, Vet minimum

I am guessing that is not the team you had in mind...

[Neurotic Guy]

I have been out of the loop for a while -- recovering from the disappointing end to an unbelievable run. So, sorry if this has been discussed and refuted already (as I suspect it has been) in other threads:

If Pierce opts out, the C's would be at about 36 Million in salary with Sheed's 6 come off the books.    Doesn't that put the C's enough under the cap to be competetive in grabbing one of the bigger name free agents?

Then can't Pierce, with Bird rights (and Ray, too), be signed following the signing of a free agent?   Is this possible?

Example: 
Amare signs at $18 Million
Then Pierce at 18 and Ray at 10

Salary total would push $85 million, but would make them very competetive for 2 years even if Miami or Chicago pull off something crazy with Lebron and Bosh. 

First, lets clarify that the C's would be at closer to $41 million after cap holds for minimum roster spots.  So they wouldn't be able to fit a full max contract in there...but they would be able to go after someone like Gay, Lee, or Johnson. 

Here is the problem.  In order to get the cap space, they have to renounce all of their free agents, which means they no longer have Bird rights on them.  That means, once they used that cap space, they cannot sign anyone (including Pierce or Allen) to anything more than the league minimum. 

So, if Pierce did opt out, and the C's went after a near max player, their roster would look like this:

Rondo, Bradley
Vet minimum, Vet minimum
Rudy Gay, Vet minimum
KG, Big Baby
Perk, Vet minimum

I am guessing that is not the team you had in mind...

Thanks Chris -- clarified perfectly. I didn't realize they'd have to renounce their free agents. 

[RockinRyA]

how about 4yrs 35m, frontloaded?

[JSD]

how about 4yrs 35m, frontloaded?

That's unrealistic. It's like Pierce signing a 3 year, $14 million extention...

[thedawg]

I dont want to give Pierce more than 2 years extention and the second year needs to 30-35% less than his next year´s contract is. I dont see it in C´s favour to overpay players who are definitely going into the twilight of their careers.

Ray should be bagged for around 24m/2 years while Pierce would get 38m/2 years. It should give us some room to go for Mike Miller (preferably to Brad Miller) and/or Tyrus Thomas with the latter someone I would like to see at C´s. This will be interesting to see and hopefully we get a help like lakers got from the Grizzlies few years back (Pau Gasol xmas gift).

[Dchuck]

Wow...the title for this forum topic is incredibly misleading.  You have 'will' in all caps and have 'speculation' in parenthesis which led me to believe that it was offical speculation through actual reporting...not just your speculation.

Sheesh.

Like I said.....Pierce will opt out.