Pierce's New Contract-How does that affect the Cap?

[MBunge]

With all due respect, your claim about whether the Celtics can win in years 3 and 4 of Pierce's contract seems like a red herring.  The critical thing is the *delay* in rebuilding.

Put it this way - are you willing to trade a *decline* in the Celtics performance from this year to next year (which realistically is the most likely outcome - it's really hard to make the finals) in exchange for delaying the *beginning* of rebuilding the Celtics until 2014-2015.

You can't think that far ahead.  That's how you end up like the Knicks, who might have sucked so long and so hard to only end up with Amare and some other dude who really doesn't deserve a max deal.

Boston had only two choices.  Resign Pierce and Ray or let both walk are try to rebuild right now.  With no Pierce and Ray, there's no way Wade or LeBron comes to Boston for the available cap space.  So, the choice are really resign Pierce and Ray, give a max deal to someone who doesn't really deserve it (like Bosh or Boozer) and be stuck with that deal as you try to rebuild OR write off the next two years until KG's deal expires.

Realistically, this is the best move for Boston in all realistic circumstances.

Mike

[Green Pride]

It's not necessarily delaying rebuilding.

Option 1: renounce pierce and allen, start rebuilding, and sign who exactly? The second tier FAs are getting widely overpayed -- would you really prefer to have Rudy Gay (if we could have gotten him) at $80 mil over 5 years? That's the best case scenario for rebuilding, and it's not that good.

Option 2: resign pierce, allen, go for it in 2010-11 with the mle. Now if they look worse and are visibly aging, you trade Garnett's expiring in 2011-12, Allen's expiring in 12-13, and potentially Pierce's expiring in 13-14. They could still be competitive in any of those years, depending on who they can bring back, which depends on things which are currently unforseeable, like which teams want to unload superstars and rebuild. But it certainly seems plausible that someone will value the cap space over the players, and that we can rebuild on the fly.

[Greenbean]

Bottom line reasons why I am happy regardless of cap implications:

1. We get to contend for another title this year if we retool a little with MLE and some savvy vet min. signings.

2. We lock up Pierce to retire in Green which is awesome.

3. We ARENT rebuilding right now just for the sake of doing so. This is great news. Rebuilding can sometimes take decades. Look at the Clippers. Actually...look at the Bulls. They lost their best players overnight as well and it has been 12 years. Now they are banking on a Free Agent to sign there. If he doesn't they are still a 500 team. Even if we get an entertaining playoff run that ends in the ECF, it is better that watching a 30 win team.

4. Ultimately, I believe you need some luck to stay successful. We had a decade plus of bad luck. I really things are turning around for us! Who knows, Avery Bradley could be a Super Super version of Monta Ellis. Rondo could learn how to shoot. KG could recover some of his lift.Maybe the Knicks will feel bad and facilitate a S&T for David Lee.

Think about it, if the Pats turned everything around with a 6th round draft pick! Luck!!!

I feel GREAT about being a Celtics fan this morning. Anyone else?

[TheBig3]

I can't complain too much about year 4, especially since it may not be guaranteed.

As for delaying rebuilding, I'm 100% cool with that.  I saw rebuilding.  It stunk.  I'm not looking forward to years of tanking for draft picks or talking about the next Gerald Green as a savior.  I'd much rather compete for a title in the short term, even if the chances are fairly slim.  I'm convinced that, as slim as those chances may be, they're a heck of a lot better than they will be in three years if we turn into the Clippers East.

I agree....besides it seems the new rebuilding involves having most of your high contracts go away the same year and then signing 2-3 super stars!

[BballTim]

With all due respect, your claim about whether the Celtics can win in years 3 and 4 of Pierce's contract seems like a red herring.  The critical thing is the *delay* in rebuilding.

Put it this way - are you willing to trade a *decline* in the Celtics performance from this year to next year (which realistically is the most likely outcome - it's really hard to make the finals) in exchange for delaying the *beginning* of rebuilding the Celtics until 2014-2015.

And say that process takes 3 years, which is laughably short and requires a lot of luck.

So now it is 2017-2018.

Is that really worth it? 

  If we begin rebuilding a year or two sooner, how long will it take for us to be as close to contending for a title as we will be next year? 3 years? 6 years? 20?

  Does starting to rebuild sooner even guarantee that we'll be good sooner? How much time did Chicago, for example, shave off of their rebuilding process by getting rid of their entire team in the late 90s instead of trying to win for another year or two?