Pierce WILL opt out! (Personal Opinion)

[Dchuck]

At least that's my take.

He has to.  With a possible lockout for the 2011-12 season (his first UFA year), he will never get close to anything he'ld be looking for.  Who is going to pay a 35 year old (at that time) big money?

He'll either opt out and sign an extension (most likely) or opt out and get a better offer.... from say the Clippers to join his homeboy B. Davis...that he can't refuse.

[Chris]

Well, it all depends on whether he thinks that extension is out there...and I am not positive it is.  I personally think the C's are not going to be interested in giving him a huge extension.  If he is willing to take 3/$45 million, sure...but I don't know if that is what he has in mind.

And I am also not positive there will be that money on the open market either. 

It may happen, but I certainly don't think its a given.  Of course, i also thought there was no way Sheed would walk away from all that money this summer, so what do I know?

[Who]

Pierce should just look for an extension to his current contract. No need to opt out.

[Bankshot]

Pierce should just look for an extension to his current contract. No need to opt out.

[Dchuck]

Well, it all depends on whether he thinks that extension is out there...and I am not positive it is.  I personally think the C's are not going to be interested in giving him a huge extension.  If he is willing to take 3/$45 million, sure...but I don't know if that is what he has in mind.

And I am also not positive there will be that money on the open market either. 

It may happen, but I certainly don't think its a given.  Of course, i also thought there was no way Sheed would walk away from all that money this summer, so what do I know?

I agree that would be all he would get from the C's.  That might be enough. It would probably be better to take that than to try to get a contract at 35.

And with all the talk about who the winners of free agency will be, there will certainly be some losers.  An issue that is not getting the attention it deserves.  There will be teams with money left over that MAY be forced to get something so they don't look like they're standing there with their pants down.

Mark my words, someone will overpay for someone.  Heck the NY Times stated Joe Johnson will be offered a max contract.  I like him, but hes not a max guy.

[Chris]

Pierce should just look for an extension to his current contract. No need to opt out.

Why would the C's give him that though?

The only reason they would sign him to a long term deal if he opts out, is because it would save them millions of dollars in luxury taxes this summer.  The C's have no motivation to sign him to an extension if he is not giving up the immediate money, since it would completely tie their hands, in case the oppotunity to go in another direction presents itself this season.

[lon3lytoaster]

.... from say the Clippers to join his homeboy B. Davis...that he can't refuse.

lol

[Who]

Pierce should just look for an extension to his current contract. No need to opt out.

Why would the C's give him that though?

The only reason they would sign him to a long term deal if he opts out, is because it would save them millions of dollars in luxury taxes this summer.  The C's have no motivation to sign him to an extension if he is not giving up the immediate money, since it would completely tie their hands, in case the oppotunity to go in another direction presents itself this season.

I agree there is less incentive, but I think the foundation of the deal is whether Boston is willing or wanting to re-sign Pierce for further years.

If they want to keep him past next season and let him finish out his career here in Boston, then I think they'll sign him to an extension regardless. They just get their savings in another way. Instead of lower luxury tax payments they get improved cap flexibility in later years.

[Birdbrain]

At least that's my take.

He has to.  With a possible lockout for the 2011-12 season (his first UFA year), he will never get close to anything he'ld be looking for.  Who is going to pay a 35 year old (at that time) big money?

He'll either opt out and sign an extension (most likely) or opt out and get a better offer.... from say the Clippers to join his homeboy B. Davis...that he can't refuse.

Either way he's more than likely staying in Boston.  I mean let's see.. stay and compete for another championship or leave and you may end up on a loser... He's not very big on losing so the prospects of him heading out West to LA are about -1%.

This is about as close to lock as there is in sports.

[Jon]

Honestly, I'd rather he didn't opt out.  I know everyone wants to see him retire in Green, but I'm not sure it's best for everyone.  I'd rather him just play next year and let him and the team sit down next summer and evaluate the future. 

Is Paul at 15+ million a year for 3-4 more years really conducive to rebuilding?  Is rebuilding really what Paul wants to be a part of?  Maybe the answers to these questions is yes; however, I think it's too early to tell at this point.   

[Chris]

Pierce should just look for an extension to his current contract. No need to opt out.

Why would the C's give him that though?

The only reason they would sign him to a long term deal if he opts out, is because it would save them millions of dollars in luxury taxes this summer.  The C's have no motivation to sign him to an extension if he is not giving up the immediate money, since it would completely tie their hands, in case the oppotunity to go in another direction presents itself this season.

I agree there is less incentive, but I think the foundation of the deal is whether Boston is willing or wanting to re-sign Pierce for further years.

If they want to keep him past next season and let him finish out his career here in Boston, then I think they'll sign him to an extension regardless. They just get their savings in another way. Instead of lower luxury tax payments they get improved cap flexibility in later years.

How is that improved cap flexibility?  According to most pundits, salary's are going to be going way down in the new CBA.  So if they resign Pierce right now, it will be for almost certainly more than if they signed him next summer (when they would still have Bird rights, giving them the inside track on resigning him).  By waiting until next summer, they have the flexibility of letting him walk, or signing him to a deal likely smaller than what he would get right now.

If they want to resign him to a longterm deal, it only makes sense to do it, if he is opting out, and saving the C's on the luxury tax this year.

[Who]

Pierce should just look for an extension to his current contract. No need to opt out.

Why would the C's give him that though?

The only reason they would sign him to a long term deal if he opts out, is because it would save them millions of dollars in luxury taxes this summer.  The C's have no motivation to sign him to an extension if he is not giving up the immediate money, since it would completely tie their hands, in case the oppotunity to go in another direction presents itself this season.

I agree there is less incentive, but I think the foundation of the deal is whether Boston is willing or wanting to re-sign Pierce for further years.

If they want to keep him past next season and let him finish out his career here in Boston, then I think they'll sign him to an extension regardless. They just get their savings in another way. Instead of lower luxury tax payments they get improved cap flexibility in later years.

How is that improved cap flexibility?  According to most pundits, salary's are going to be going way down in the new CBA.  So if they resign Pierce right now, it will be for almost certainly more than if they signed him next summer (when they would still have Bird rights, giving them the inside track on resigning him).  By waiting until next summer, they have the flexibility of letting him walk, or signing him to a deal likely smaller than what he would get right now.

If they want to resign him to a longterm deal, it only makes sense to do it, if he is opting out, and saving the C's on the luxury tax this year.

If Pierce agreed to a lower number than he'd want in order to have guaranteed money ahead of him.

Same reason why some players coming off of rookie scale contracts agree to lower contract extensions after their third season than they could get by waiting another year. Guaranteed money versus risk of poor performance or injury.

If Pierce is unwilling to give up any money, in his demands, for that guaranteed money ... then there is no point in signing him.

[Brendan]

If he opts out, could he be an alternative for guys that don't get a shot? Let's say Miami picks up Amare and resigns Wade, but they cannot get another top guy. Why not through Pierce in at the SF spot for three years. Wade would do a lot to lessen Pierce's load. And Pierce would get a lot of three point opps as the 2.5  option.

Second question:
Would anyone do Pierce for 5 years for 10 per? I mean you'd be over paying last couple years, but that would keep his number low against the cap.

[Jon]

If he opts out, could he be an alternative for guys that don't get a shot? Let's say Miami picks up Amare and resigns Wade, but they cannot get another top guy. Why not through Pierce in at the SF spot for three years. Wade would do a lot to lessen Pierce's load. And Pierce would get a lot of three point opps as the 2.5  option.

Second question:
Would anyone do Pierce for 5 years for 10 per? I mean you'd be over paying last couple years, but that would keep his number low against the cap.

But even 10 million per year wouldn't put us under the cap this year.  So what would be the point?  And if we bring back Ray for two years, we wouldn't be under the cap until after he and KG come off the books, which is the situation now. 

Furthermore, I'm not sure I want PP here beyond two more years, let alone 5 more.  It could really hinder Danny's rebuilding plans. 

[Who]

Second question:
Would anyone do Pierce for 5 years for 10 per? I mean you'd be over paying last couple years, but that would keep his number low against the cap.

I wouldn't resign Paul Pierce. Full stop. No way, no how.

Keeping Paul on a substantial contract will hurt the C's ability to build another contender around Rajon Rondo.

If he opts out, could he be an alternative for guys that don't get a shot? Let's say Miami picks up Amare and resigns Wade, but they cannot get another top guy. Why not through Pierce in at the SF spot for three years. Wade would do a lot to lessen Pierce's load. And Pierce would get a lot of three point opps as the 2.5  option.

Definitely. Pierce will be on a similar level to someone like Rudy Gay except only teams on the verge of contending for a title will be interested in adding Pierce.