What would you pay IT4 for his next contract?

[SHAQATTACK]

Probably trade

[Neurotic Guy]

I think you have to project his value to a contender to determine what to offer.  If we were to pay him based on his value to the C's right now, he's the number 1 or number 2 guy.  If he played for GSW, Cleveland, San Antonio, I think he'd be number 4 or 5 on those teams.  You can't pay the 4th or 5th most valuable player on your team max dollars.   

Isaiah is an amazing talent, but his shortcomings really matter in this league.  I think he'll add vintage Jamal Crawford value to a contender, but not Steph Curry or Kawhi Leonard value.

Curious who would be ahead of him on the Spurs besides Aldridge and Kawaii. He really blows Mills, 38 year old Gasol and 34 year old Tony Parker our of the water. So thinking you could find two additional players on the Spurs better than him is a little mind blowing. I would grant you that Cleveland and Golden State have 3 guys that are clearly above him, but they are super teams. Just about any other team he is going to be the second or 3rd best player. You don't get to be an all star if you are not one of the top 30 players in the game. I am guessing he will be an all-star again this year if the injuries don't linger.

Well, you got me -- there isn't a single guy on the Spurs that I put ahead of IT outside of LMA and KL.   But the expensive 3-headed vet package of Manu, Parker and Gasol has value greater (IMO) than IT. But bottom line is you are correct and I was wrong. 

With GSW, he's #5. 

Don't lose my bigger point due to my ignorance -- IT isn't worth max dollars to a contender.  If C's fancy themselves a contender, they shouldn't pay IT max dollars.

[Csfan1984]

I'd get him for an extension this off season depending on draft and FA additions of course. (Ex. strike out on any big fish and  dont land Fultz) Would think an extension is a better choice than a four or five year deal for the team with him and AB.

22 milliln per for three year extensions for each guy. C's can just try to remain competitive and hope draft picks pan out in three years. Al, IT and AB get a 4 year run. Again only if we strike out.

If AB or IT balk I offer an opt out. And if they say no to that I offer Smart an extension and trade one or both if Smart accepts.

[celticsclay]

I think you have to project his value to a contender to determine what to offer.  If we were to pay him based on his value to the C's right now, he's the number 1 or number 2 guy.  If he played for GSW, Cleveland, San Antonio, I think he'd be number 4 or 5 on those teams.  You can't pay the 4th or 5th most valuable player on your team max dollars.   

Isaiah is an amazing talent, but his shortcomings really matter in this league.  I think he'll add vintage Jamal Crawford value to a contender, but not Steph Curry or Kawhi Leonard value.

Curious who would be ahead of him on the Spurs besides Aldridge and Kawaii. He really blows Mills, 38 year old Gasol and 34 year old Tony Parker our of the water. So thinking you could find two additional players on the Spurs better than him is a little mind blowing. I would grant you that Cleveland and Golden State have 3 guys that are clearly above him, but they are super teams. Just about any other team he is going to be the second or 3rd best player. You don't get to be an all star if you are not one of the top 30 players in the game. I am guessing he will be an all-star again this year if the injuries don't linger.

Well, you got me -- there isn't a single guy on the Spurs that I put ahead of IT outside of LMA and KL.   But the expensive 3-headed vet package of Manu, Parker and Gasol has value greater (IMO) than IT. But bottom line is you are correct and I was wrong. 

With GSW, he's #5. 

Don't lose my bigger point due to my ignorance -- IT isn't worth max dollars to a contender.  If C's fancy themselves a contender, they shouldn't pay IT max dollars.

I mean who is really a contender besides Cleveland and Golden State. From a talent perspective Golden State may be the best team assembled having 4 players in their prime that are on track for the hall of fame. (Plenty of teams have had 4 in the past but many of these teams featured at least 1 or 2 that were past their prime) If you look at the next level of teams beyond those two super teams we have already established he would be 3rd best on the Spurs. I would have to put him at 2nd best on the Rockets behind Harden. It is hard to say how he compared to Deandre Jordan so a team would really prefer him more or less based on what their team need is. He is probably the second best player on the Raptors at this point. He is probably the second best player on the Knicks and may be the best player on the Hornets. He would be the second best player on the Thunder.

I don't really see what pointing out that two assembled super teams have so much talent they don't need him really proves. 

[Rosco917]

I think you have to project his value to a contender to determine what to offer.  If we were to pay him based on his value to the C's right now, he's the number 1 or number 2 guy.  If he played for GSW, Cleveland, San Antonio, I think he'd be number 4 or 5 on those teams.  You can't pay the 4th or 5th most valuable player on your team max dollars.   

Isaiah is an amazing talent, but his shortcomings really matter in this league.  I think he'll add vintage Jamal Crawford value to a contender, but not Steph Curry or Kawhi Leonard value.

Curious who would be ahead of him on the Spurs besides Aldridge and Kawaii. He really blows Mills, 38 year old Gasol and 34 year old Tony Parker our of the water. So thinking you could find two additional players on the Spurs better than him is a little mind blowing. I would grant you that Cleveland and Golden State have 3 guys that are clearly above him, but they are super teams. Just about any other team he is going to be the second or 3rd best player. You don't get to be an all star if you are not one of the top 30 players in the game. I am guessing he will be an all-star again this year if the injuries don't linger.

Well, you got me -- there isn't a single guy on the Spurs that I put ahead of IT outside of LMA and KL.   But the expensive 3-headed vet package of Manu, Parker and Gasol has value greater (IMO) than IT. But bottom line is you are correct and I was wrong. 

With GSW, he's #5. 

Don't lose my bigger point due to my ignorance -- IT isn't worth max dollars to a contender.  If C's fancy themselves a contender, they shouldn't pay IT max dollars.

It's not about "putting ahead" anyone over anyone else. It's where will IT lead the team. Does he make other players around him better, does he distribute the ball effectively, is he an effective defender, or a defensive liability, what is his  net effect on team chemistry?

We're talking max money here, he'll be here to stay.

The Spurs were brought up, ok... would Pop want IT on his team. Would he start him? Would he build around him? 

[mr. dee]

17m / 4 years

[Ilikesports17]

Id give him 4x18 I think.

I imagine he will get more than that.

[Big333223]

Id give him 4x18 I think.

I imagine he will get more than that.

This is about what I was thinking. $18 mil a year is 3 times what he's making now.

The question is: How will the market, which is flush with PG's, value a 29 year old whose size/defensive deficiencies are well documented. It didn't go well for him the last time he hit free agency. I think it's very possible that, if the Celtics still want him around, he can be had at a very reasonable price.

[jambr380]

MAX for Thomas in a couple years will be around 33M.  I can't see any team offering him close to that.  I certainly hope Ainge doesn't. 

Yeah, that shouldn't happen, and if it does, there will be a lot of angry people on this forum.

The good news is that, since no other team can offer him five years, we won't need to either. I think 4/$80M is fair, but it's entirely possible he could push $25M+/yr. I really hope that we have a better idea of where this team is in another 1 1/2 years (did we acquire Cousins/George? Are Brown/Smart/Rozier future stars?). If we are still hovering at just above .500, then I don't see how giving IT $150M+ is a good idea.

[Fireworks_Boom!]

I'm not of the mindset of tying up anything north of $15m for IT. I just don't see him leading us to a championship. We need to get 3 real max players. Horford is player #1. We need 2 more. IT should not be one of them.

[jambr380]

I'm not of the mindset of tying up anything north of $15m for IT. I just don't see him leading us to a championship. We need to get 3 real max players. Horford is player #1. We need 2 more. IT should not be one of them.

If [and only if] we have a legit contending core in place, then I don't really care what we pay IT. It will be the decision of Wyc and Co. of how far they want to go into the luxury tax. We will be so far above the salary cap that having as much talent as possible will be key.

[Neurotic Guy]

I think you have to project his value to a contender to determine what to offer.  If we were to pay him based on his value to the C's right now, he's the number 1 or number 2 guy.  If he played for GSW, Cleveland, San Antonio, I think he'd be number 4 or 5 on those teams.  You can't pay the 4th or 5th most valuable player on your team max dollars.   

Isaiah is an amazing talent, but his shortcomings really matter in this league.  I think he'll add vintage Jamal Crawford value to a contender, but not Steph Curry or Kawhi Leonard value.

Curious who would be ahead of him on the Spurs besides Aldridge and Kawaii. He really blows Mills, 38 year old Gasol and 34 year old Tony Parker our of the water. So thinking you could find two additional players on the Spurs better than him is a little mind blowing. I would grant you that Cleveland and Golden State have 3 guys that are clearly above him, but they are super teams. Just about any other team he is going to be the second or 3rd best player. You don't get to be an all star if you are not one of the top 30 players in the game. I am guessing he will be an all-star again this year if the injuries don't linger.

Well, you got me -- there isn't a single guy on the Spurs that I put ahead of IT outside of LMA and KL.   But the expensive 3-headed vet package of Manu, Parker and Gasol has value greater (IMO) than IT. But bottom line is you are correct and I was wrong. 

With GSW, he's #5. 

Don't lose my bigger point due to my ignorance -- IT isn't worth max dollars to a contender.  If C's fancy themselves a contender, they shouldn't pay IT max dollars.

I mean who is really a contender besides Cleveland and Golden State. From a talent perspective Golden State may be the best team assembled having 4 players in their prime that are on track for the hall of fame. (Plenty of teams have had 4 in the past but many of these teams featured at least 1 or 2 that were past their prime) If you look at the next level of teams beyond those two super teams we have already established he would be 3rd best on the Spurs. I would have to put him at 2nd best on the Rockets behind Harden. It is hard to say how he compared to Deandre Jordan so a team would really prefer him more or less based on what their team need is. He is probably the second best player on the Raptors at this point. He is probably the second best player on the Knicks and may be the best player on the Hornets. He would be the second best player on the Thunder.

I don't really see what pointing out that two assembled super teams have so much talent they don't need him really proves.

The point I was making is that I don't think he's worth a max contract to a contender.  That doesn't mean I think a contender wouldn't want. Any contender would.  I just think at 15-18 million, not 25-30.

[SHAQATTACK]

I'm not of the mindset of tying up anything north of $15m for IT. I just don't see him leading us to a championship. We need to get 3 real max players. Horford is player #1. We need 2 more. IT should not be one of them.

I like this thought

[fantankerous]

I think you have to project his value to a contender to determine what to offer.  If we were to pay him based on his value to the C's right now, he's the number 1 or number 2 guy.  If he played for GSW, Cleveland, San Antonio, I think he'd be number 4 or 5 on those teams.  You can't pay the 4th or 5th most valuable player on your team max dollars.   

Isaiah is an amazing talent, but his shortcomings really matter in this league.  I think he'll add vintage Jamal Crawford value to a contender, but not Steph Curry or Kawhi Leonard value.

Curious who would be ahead of him on the Spurs besides Aldridge and Kawaii. He really blows Mills, 38 year old Gasol and 34 year old Tony Parker our of the water. So thinking you could find two additional players on the Spurs better than him is a little mind blowing. I would grant you that Cleveland and Golden State have 3 guys that are clearly above him, but they are super teams. Just about any other team he is going to be the second or 3rd best player. You don't get to be an all star if you are not one of the top 30 players in the game. I am guessing he will be an all-star again this year if the injuries don't linger.

Well, you got me -- there isn't a single guy on the Spurs that I put ahead of IT outside of LMA and KL.   But the expensive 3-headed vet package of Manu, Parker and Gasol has value greater (IMO) than IT. But bottom line is you are correct and I was wrong. 

With GSW, he's #5. 

Don't lose my bigger point due to my ignorance -- IT isn't worth max dollars to a contender.  If C's fancy themselves a contender, they shouldn't pay IT max dollars.

I mean who is really a contender besides Cleveland and Golden State. From a talent perspective Golden State may be the best team assembled having 4 players in their prime that are on track for the hall of fame. (Plenty of teams have had 4 in the past but many of these teams featured at least 1 or 2 that were past their prime) If you look at the next level of teams beyond those two super teams we have already established he would be 3rd best on the Spurs. I would have to put him at 2nd best on the Rockets behind Harden. It is hard to say how he compared to Deandre Jordan so a team would really prefer him more or less based on what their team need is. He is probably the second best player on the Raptors at this point. He is probably the second best player on the Knicks and may be the best player on the Hornets. He would be the second best player on the Thunder.

I don't really see what pointing out that two assembled super teams have so much talent they don't need him really proves.

The point I was making is that I don't think he's worth a max contract to a contender.  That doesn't mean I think a contender wouldn't want. Any contender would.  I just think at 15-18 million, not 25-30.

But is it because he's not worth a max or that a contender can't afford a max?

[Chris22]

Probably trade

Yes.