If Isaiah Thomas Isn't Worth The Max Or Near Max ($25-30M/Year)...

[jay]

Say no trades happen and they go after Hayward (24 mil) and Noel (16 mil) in free agency.

Got 10 players coming back making around 62 or 63 mil.  Cut Zeller loose and all free agents.

If the cap is around 102 mil, we would have 3 spots left on the roster for our first round draft pick and 2 others (Zizic and Yabu im assuming)

So theres a small problem getting under the cap after signing two free agents. Will Bradley be traded away?

The next big problem is will ownership pay $30 mil to IT to go WAY over the cap in 2018? I hope they will - you have to shell out the big bucks for a championship team and they have been getting a bargain the last two years.

[Evantime34]

Isaiah is an MVP candidate, if you aren't giving him the max there are only a handful of guys who deserve the max.

Agree with Roy and Bo, this is a silly discussion.

Here are some stats about how good Isaiah is this year:
The Celtics have the most clutch wins in the NBA at 26. IT is a plus 28.8 per 48 minutes in clutch situations. That is better than LeBron James, Kevin Durant, Steph Curry, and James Harden. IT is one of the best clutch players in the game on the best clutch team in the NBA. Games are won and lost at the end, and IT is one of the best in that time.

People like to rag on his defense, but his otherwordly playing and general play in the clutch makes him not only worth the max but an elite player in the game.

[Tr1boy]

I think it's an absurd debate. To me, he's obviously going to get the max, and he's earned it.

He is limited defensively...

He has a near perfect supporting cast (with stretch bigs everywhere)... To get his game going

Instead of paying IT4 max, pay him similar money that horford is receiving and add one more play like these two

That is fair

It's not "fair", in that the NBA's market value is that very good players get the max.

Well life is not fair   

There is no reason why IT4 should make 35 million a season while Smart for example makes 15-18

Except that he's much more productive and his level of skill and talent is much more difficult to replace.

Smart is IT4 on the defensive end. Just as important

[TheSundanceKid]

- You can't build a contender if you have the public image of not paying your stars.
- Signing IT to the max does not impede our ability to pay guys later down the line
- There is no contender over the next few years without IT. Fultz or whoever may well become a superstar but it won't matter until maybe their 4th or 5th year in the league
- Every player has a limitation. For years Lebron had a weak jumper, Curry has been injury prone, Harden is a seive defensively. It doesn't stop them from being great and it doesn't stop them from getting the max
- It is abundantly clear that this team is on course to become a serious long term contender over the next few years. GMs know that confidence is a huge part of basketball. What kind of message does it send to the team if you decide your main guy isn't worth it? What does it say of your opinion of he rest of the team?
- IT deserves the max. By the time he signs it he will have played 3 years on a bargain contract. He shouldn't have to take a pay cut, that's not how this works. Hometown discounts don't happen on your first major contract, they happen to players after they have had their big pay day. You didn't see Lebron take a pay cut until he'd been in the league 8 years.
- IT has improved every season he's been here, who says this is his end game?

[PhoSita]

Smart is IT4 on the defensive end. Just as important

(a) No he isn't.

(b) Elite offensive players are much harder to replace than elite defenders.

[PhoSita]

He's worth it, absolutely.

The question is, will we give it to him? I'd say probably, but Danny will likely try to finagle some concessions or salary flexibility. I don't think we're enthused about paying him ~30 mill as he crosses over 30, but I don't see many other options; we're not likely to let him go elsewhere unless there's a major injury, he's much too popular.

He's much too popular and replacing him with an above average starting point guard, let alone a player of comparable value, will almost certainly not be an option, and even if it is, it will likely cost about the same amount of money with a similar level of long term risk.


Even if you could find a replacement -- let's say you trade for a guy like Goran Dragic, who makes under $20 million and provides a significant portion of Isaiah's production -- that won't get you closer to a championship unless you use the money you save to realize a net improvement in the talent level of the team.

If you get a guy like Dragic, perahps you can keep the team moving forward with a similar albeit lesser type of player at point guard.  But your chances of doing anything in the playoffs are much less, because marginal value at key positions is what gives teams an edge in the post-season.  Or in other words, talent wins.  You don't get extra points in the playoffs for filling your roster with bargain contracts.

So perhaps you save $15 million on the cap sheet, but the team will be over the cap in any case, and even if they weren't, you probably won't be able to spend that $15 million on a player who will more than make up for the loss of talent at the lead guard spot.


I suppose people may be thinking that we'll draft our next franchise guard this summer, which will allow the team to move on from Isaiah.  Even if Fultz or Ball is the pick and he turns into a superstar, that doesn't mean the team will have the opportunity to use the money that it saves by letting Isaiah go in free agency on a player at another position with a similar level of talent and productivity.


All of the above is why when you have a superstar player -- which IT absolutely is -- you don't let him go.  You do everything you can to keep him and then find complementary players to put around him.

[vjcsmoke]

IT deserves the max.

The extension talks should begin like this:

We love you Isaiah, we want you to retire a Celtic.

We believe you deserve the max.

However if you would consider taking slightly less than max, then here is who we could sign to help you win a ship, _______.

We fully respect you and value having you more than player ________, so if you don't believe he's worth it, we're fully prepared to offer you the max deal, but if you'd like a better chance at winning the ship, please consider this offer ________.

Something along those lines.  I think if you're honest with Isaiah and give him his full respect he would consider taking less than max even though he deserves max, as long as you could give him a really [dang] good reason to give up some money.

[Moranis]

Thomas won't sign a 5 year maximum contract until he is 30, which means you will be paying him close to 50 million dollars when he is 35 years old.  That is the problem with giving Thomas a full max deal.  Now if Thomas wants 3 years at full max, that is a different story, but a full 5 year maximum contract will be a gigantic albatross the last couple of years.  One that could easily cripple the franchise going forward. 

[PhoSita]

The Celts will be way over the cap after re-signing Isaiah whether they give him the max or something a bit under the max (e.g. $25 million per year).

So there really isn't anybody that they'd have the opportunity to sign if Isaiah takes $25 million per year that they wouldn't have been able to sign if he'd taken $30 million per year.

[Moranis]

The Celts will be way over the cap after re-signing Isaiah whether they give him the max or something a bit under the max (e.g. $25 million per year).

So there really isn't anybody that they'd have the opportunity to sign if Isaiah takes $25 million per year that they wouldn't have been able to sign if he'd taken $30 million per year.

Yeah, but then you start getting into luxury tax, which hampers what you can do. 

Assuming Boston is a contender, I'd have no issue with a 3 year max for Thomas, but I see no reason to give him 5 years given his age.  It would be pretty detrimental long term.

[CoachBo]

Smart is IT4 on the defensive end. Just as important

(a) No he isn't.

(b) Elite offensive players are much harder to replace than elite defenders.

Precisely on both points. We can replace Marcus Smart - if we have to.

TP.

[nickagneta]

I think it's an absurd debate. To me, he's obviously going to get the max, and he's earned it.

He is limited defensively...

He has a near perfect supporting cast (with stretch bigs everywhere)... To get his game going

Instead of paying IT4 max, pay him similar money that horford is receiving and add one more play like these two

That is fair

It's not "fair", in that the NBA's market value is that very good players get the max.

Well life is not fair   

There is no reason why IT4 should make 35 million a season while Smart for example makes 15-18

Except that IT has a lot more years of experience and hence has a much higher pay ceiling than Smart. When Smart gets to his third contract and if he shows he is an MVP candidate type player then maybe he gets the money IT will get in his next contract. So yeah, there is a reason why IT will get $30+ million per in his next contract and Smart will only get about $15+ million per in his.

[PhoSita]

Thomas won't sign a 5 year maximum contract until he is 30, which means you will be paying him close to 50 million dollars when he is 35 years old.  That is the problem with giving Thomas a full max deal.  Now if Thomas wants 3 years at full max, that is a different story, but a full 5 year maximum contract will be a gigantic albatross the last couple of years.  One that could easily cripple the franchise going forward.

Longevity is an issue of concern.

However, there are two main things that give me pause and hope there.

(1) Isaiah was drafted in 2011.  He doesn't have a lot of mileage on him.

(2) In this era of pace and space, it appears that players who have the ability to shoot and score in a variety of ways are able to extend their careers well into their 30s. 

There's no doubt that Isaiah will be significantly diminished once he loses his burst speed, but I think he will continue to be a very productive player.  The fact that he's turned himself into a superstar offensive player since going undrafted points to his ability to work hard and improve on various areas of his game.  I believe he'll age OK as long as he avoids major injury.  Knock on wood.

In a few years the Celts could be somewhat "taxed," so to speak, paying max dollar for post-prime production from both IT and Horford.  But that is why having all of these draft picks is so valuable.  Not just for greasing the wheels on big trades, but also for filling out the roster with cost-controlled young role players.  That is what gives you the ability to spend big $$ to keep your main guys.

[trickybilly]

I have to agree with the poster that said if we don't go DEEP in the playoffs both this year and next, it's a decision that becomes easier. I have a feeling we do go deep though.

[mmmmm]

As I mentioned he IS a max player, I just don't think he is the right max player for Boston.

1) He will be 30 by the time he signs his max deal. Ask yourself do we want a 5'9" (really 5'7") PG tying up our books until he is 35?

Trivia Q:  How old was Havlicek when he scored 20+ in 40+ games?

Looking at the aging profile of the (very few) similar 'comps' of small guys like Calvin Murphy, Tiny Archibald and others under 6', and taking into account that modern fitness, healthcare and nutrition is extending the careers of star players quite a bit, barring significant injury (which could happen to any player, regardless of height or age), Thomas should be able to play at an 'all star' level at least through the first 2 or 3 years of his next contract.   After that, his production will probably tail off, but his contract's share of cap should also tail off, assuming nominal cap rises.

He likely will finally be 'overpaid' over the last year or so of the contract, but that will finally pay him back for the massive $$ value he will have been underpaid by this franchise on his current contract.

Danny has always been very good about paying market value and I doubt he shies away from paying Thomas full market value.

The critical thing will be to secure one more 'star' player onto the roster before then.  If that is taken care of, going over the cap to pay Thomas won't be an issue, even if it does turn into an overpay in the final year or so.

At that point, he'd represent a tradable expiring contract anyway.