Poll: OK or Not Okay 3 Years 75 million for Thomas

[KG Living Legend]

 I think it's a good compromise on both sides. Thomas is rich for life if he's smart, with an opportunity for another contract at 29 years old.

 For the Celtics we lock up our offensive leader for at least two more years.

 We must be able to add one more 20 plus million dollar contract under the new cap.
I

[TheSundanceKid]

Are you talking about offering him an extension this summer, a la Westbrook? Or do you mean re-signing him to this in 2018?

If it's the former then we would not be able to sign another $20m+ guy as we'd need the cap space to extend IT. In that regard it is one or the other. I could see us extending IT and then trading for a star over the summer

[Alleyoopster]

We are coming close to beating good teams without him. We need a huge presence in the middle to turn the corner. His lack of height and defensive intensity will always haunt him.  If he were 5 inches taller I'd give it to him. Not saying he's not a great player. Just that 25 million/year is way too much.

There may be teams out there willing to pay him that much. But, I doubt there is a lot of them. It's possible he'd regret signing elsewhere for he may end up in a situation similar to what Evan Turner is in this year, i.e., he is making great money, but his usefulness has taken a big hit.

[CFAN38]

I voted No

As much as I love watching IT I do not think the Cs can compete deep in the playoffs with him as the #1 option on offense. As a 6th man he would be amazing but as the focal point it is to easy for teams to scheme against him in a 7 game series. His playoff shooting percentages clearly reflect this. With the lack of time between regular season games teams tend to stick to generic game plans from night to night. That changes in the playoffs. As Celts fans we used to see this with Rondo when teams would switch to having larger wings guard him and play off him daring him to shoot. IT also affects the defense as coaches are able to focus their offense on exploiting his size causing the Cs to have to game plan to protect him.

I ultimately think ITs next contract will be a big pay day somewhere else. He has earned it with his regular season play and a team looking for a quick way to become respectable (Nets) will likely jump on the opportunity. Even better lets see Seattle get an expansion team and make a 30 year old IT their first star.
   

[walker834]

I'd also say no.  It's too early to sign him to that.  I don't want to lose him though where he might get an extension and probably is the guy in line for one before his contract expires though.  I've heard worse.  He's worth quite a bit.  25 mil a year though for the little guy?  Horford is getting that so its not that out of line and it's a 3 year deal.  Seems fair.

If we signed him to that I'd be ok with it.  It would kill our cap situation though.  We'd still have room for one more guy but probably more via trade.

With the cap rising we may still have cap room.  I havent looked at the math. 

3 years makes sense where we can still extend smart and jaylen and guys like that i would imagine.

So Yes? But no.  Not quite yet.  I'd still want to have flexibility around the deadline and offseason to trade his ass if need be lol.

Let IT sweat it out a few more months.

[slamtheking]

no, too much $ for a player that scores and not a lot else.  I wouldn't pay that to a player that gets picked on on D by other teams that just post their PGs against him which is what has happened in the playoffs since joining the team.

[pearljammer10]

Someone will give it to him and with the current rates that might be fair. However it's too much for me. He's a fantastic scorer and it is quite an amazing joy to watch him play. But that's too much money tied up into a player who is very one dimensional.

Again, he is great, but if he's your team's best or second best player overall then you won't be doing much contending. We need to find the number one banana to play to to Horford's number two and ITs number 3. But when thats the case our third best player shouldn't be receiving 25 mil a year.

[Bobshot]

I would trade him for a big. There is some evidence they get better ball distribution without him. He's going to get his payday somewhere, but no sense in using their cap space with him.

He's a terrific player, but he's a 2, not a 1. He tends to hog the ball and try to take a game over by himself. The classic one on one guy. Plus his playing style and size are conducive to injury.

Trade him while he still has value. They need the cap space--Wyc isn't going over it. He made that clear after they won the last championship.

[PhoSita]

I think a 3 year deal, at whatever cost, would be a really solid outcome for the Celts re-signing Isaiah.

[SHAQATTACK]

I doubt it matter what we think 

[TrueFan]

I think there is a 50/50 chance IT is not a Celtic in 1.5 to 2.5 years from now. Especially if we draft Fultz. Trading IT for a top draft pick could come into play or a promising young big.

You have to consider his age and the position he plays and how heavily he relies on his athleticism. I don't think 31-33 year old IT is going to be nearly as effective as he is now.

If we do decide to keep him and his value goes down, he could play a 6th man role during his later years but the money has to be right.

[TrueFan]

I voted No

As much as I love watching IT I do not think the Cs can compete deep in the playoffs with him as the #1 option on offense. As a 6th man he would be amazing but as the focal point it is to easy for teams to scheme against him in a 7 game series. His playoff shooting percentages clearly reflect this. With the lack of time between regular season games teams tend to stick to generic game plans from night to night. That changes in the playoffs. As Celts fans we used to see this with Rondo when teams would switch to having larger wings guard him and play off him daring him to shoot. IT also affects the defense as coaches are able to focus their offense on exploiting his size causing the Cs to have to game plan to protect him.

I ultimately think ITs next contract will be a big pay day somewhere else. He has earned it with his regular season play and a team looking for a quick way to become respectable (Nets) will likely jump on the opportunity. Even better lets see Seattle get an expansion team and make a 30 year old IT their first star.
 

Great idea. Let's trade IT for the Nets unprotected first round picks from 2019 to 2021.

[Big333223]

I voted no, only because I think it would be an overpay of what the market will bare out.

The NBA is already loaded with PG's and next year's draft is supposed to be heavy in more PG's that teams will have committed themselves to. Add into that Thomas' size and well publicized defensive deficiencies (mostly due to his size) and it's hard for me to imagine the C's having any kind of bidding war on their hands.

Thomas will probably be able to be signed for less than $20 mil.

[vjcsmoke]

It really depends on our team makeup.

I would look to sign one premier free agent in the market first.

Then I would extend Thomas using his Bird Rights.

He really is that important for us.  He's easily worth 20m+

But I'd want the flexibility to sign one elite free agent first before we lock up IT.

Because as good as he is, he still needs help before we are real contenders.

1 more Star guys.

[jpotter33]

Someone will give it to him and with the current rates that might be fair. However it's too much for me. He's a fantastic scorer and it is quite an amazing joy to watch him play. But that's too much money tied up into a player who is very one dimensional.

Again, he is great, but if he's your team's best or second best player overall then you won't be doing much contending. We need to find the number one banana to play to to Horford's number two and ITs number 3. But when thats the case our third best player shouldn't be receiving 25 mil a year.

TP. Where I'm at. Seeing these numbers being thrown around for IT and AB are scary, let alone what Smart might get.