Have these last 7 games changed your opinion on IT?

[CoachBo]

For the general debate, in how many teams would a player like Isaiah score 25+ points per game while the team being successful? We have a brilliant coaching staff and a master front office, not only a star player has taken us to this level. Let's not forget it.

I'm not even sure what this is supposed to mean, other than being a largely hollow exercise in rhetoric. But I'll play.

The "brilliant coaching staff" looked largely lost before the team acquired Isaiah Thomas, and only half-lost until they figured out that he's too talented to ride the pine. Unsurprisingly, this coincided with the team taking off.

... for the sake of argument, you should also look up Allen Iverson's supporting cast in 1999-2000.

Man, what did we have when Stevens came here? A mess, like 30 players in that season and a half. We were playing Joel Anthony, MarShon Brooks, Chris Johnson, Phil Pressey, etc.

Your comment is absolutely unfair to our coaching staff.

Less so than the level of unfairness you display in your errant comments about Thomas.

[JohnBoy65]

  We wouldn't come close to making the playoffs without Isaiah. He's a top 8 player in the NBA maybe higher. Anyone who thinks Isaiah shouldn't be a starter on this team, should pick a sport that they know something about, because it's obvious they don't know basketball.

1. He may be a top-8 player OFFENSIVELY, but the game (that you seem to know so much) is two-sided, and he is not a top-25 player overall.
2. You, and many others, tend to underrate players such as Bradley, Crowder and Horford. They deserve much more respect, they are top-10 players in their positions (yes, defense also counts a lot). This team is not Isaiah and rubbish, as sentences like the bold one may suggest. But it's obvious you know a lot about this sport...

For the general debate, in how many teams would a player like Isaiah score 25+ points per game while the team being successful? We have a brilliant coaching staff and a master front office, not only a star player has taken us to this level. Let's not forget it.

You're just not correct in the part I bolded. IT will be on an all NBA team. That identifies him as a top 15 player in the league this year. I'm going to guess he's going to be on the 2nd team, so you might be able to make an argument for top 10, but when you're debating spots 15-10 you could have different arguments and be correct.

[Tr1boy]

  We wouldn't come close to making the playoffs without Isaiah. He's a top 8 player in the NBA maybe higher. Anyone who thinks Isaiah shouldn't be a starter on this team, should pick a sport that they know something about, because it's obvious they don't know basketball.

1. He may be a top-8 player OFFENSIVELY, but the game (that you seem to know so much) is two-sided, and he is not a top-25 player overall.
2. You, and many others, tend to underrate players such as Bradley, Crowder and Horford. They deserve much more respect, they are top-10 players in their positions (yes, defense also counts a lot). This team is not Isaiah and rubbish, as sentences like the bold one may suggest. But it's obvious you know a lot about this sport...

For the general debate, in how many teams would a player like Isaiah score 25+ points per game while the team being successful? We have a brilliant coaching staff and a master front office, not only a star player has taken us to this level. Let's not forget it.

You're just not correct in the part I bolded. IT will be on an all NBA team. That identifies him as a top 15 player in the league this year. I'm going to guess he's going to be on the 2nd team, so you might be able to make an argument for top 10, but when you're debating spots 15-10 you could have different arguments and be correct.

3rd team is my guess

Curry, rw, harden, wall

And it might not be a shoe in

[guava_wrench]

My opinion will change if we beat Clev or one of the top teams out west. Beating Chicago or Washington isn't going to change my opinion. I already like the guy. I just worry about what our ceiling will be if he gets a max deal.

[JohnBoy65]

  We wouldn't come close to making the playoffs without Isaiah. He's a top 8 player in the NBA maybe higher. Anyone who thinks Isaiah shouldn't be a starter on this team, should pick a sport that they know something about, because it's obvious they don't know basketball.

1. He may be a top-8 player OFFENSIVELY, but the game (that you seem to know so much) is two-sided, and he is not a top-25 player overall.
2. You, and many others, tend to underrate players such as Bradley, Crowder and Horford. They deserve much more respect, they are top-10 players in their positions (yes, defense also counts a lot). This team is not Isaiah and rubbish, as sentences like the bold one may suggest. But it's obvious you know a lot about this sport...

For the general debate, in how many teams would a player like Isaiah score 25+ points per game while the team being successful? We have a brilliant coaching staff and a master front office, not only a star player has taken us to this level. Let's not forget it.

You're just not correct in the part I bolded. IT will be on an all NBA team. That identifies him as a top 15 player in the league this year. I'm going to guess he's going to be on the 2nd team, so you might be able to make an argument for top 10, but when you're debating spots 15-10 you could have different arguments and be correct.

3rd team is my guess

Curry, rw, harden, wall

And it might not be a shoe in

I personally think he should be on the 2nd team over Wall, but again, when you're talking about players like this I can make an argument that's correct about IT, and you can make one about IT. Regardless, I think we can both agree it's absurd to call IT not a tope 25 player as Dario suggests.

[guava_wrench]

  We wouldn't come close to making the playoffs without Isaiah. He's a top 8 player in the NBA maybe higher. Anyone who thinks Isaiah shouldn't be a starter on this team, should pick a sport that they know something about, because it's obvious they don't know basketball.

1. He may be a top-8 player OFFENSIVELY, but the game (that you seem to know so much) is two-sided, and he is not a top-25 player overall.
2. You, and many others, tend to underrate players such as Bradley, Crowder and Horford. They deserve much more respect, they are top-10 players in their positions (yes, defense also counts a lot). This team is not Isaiah and rubbish, as sentences like the bold one may suggest. But it's obvious you know a lot about this sport...

For the general debate, in how many teams would a player like Isaiah score 25+ points per game while the team being successful? We have a brilliant coaching staff and a master front office, not only a star player has taken us to this level. Let's not forget it.

Sac didn't have a brilliant coaching staff and they didn't even focus on IT but he scored 20.3 PPG in his 3rd season. Not surprising his PPG returned to trending upwards after he got free of the 3 guard failure in Phoenix.

Thing is, IT is scoring a ton efficiently and while his team is winning. Hypotheticals are not very convincing counter arguments.

This whole "top x" player thing is a bit pointless. Melo probably reached top 10 status and was a top scorer, but was never going to lead a team to a title due to the flaws in his game. We could argue all day over who the top 10 players in the league are and then our opinions will likely change next season.

[CoachBo]

For the general debate, in how many teams would a player like Isaiah score 25+ points per game while the team being successful? We have a brilliant coaching staff and a master front office, not only a star player has taken us to this level. Let's not forget it.

I'm not even sure what this is supposed to mean, other than being a largely hollow exercise in rhetoric. But I'll play.

The "brilliant coaching staff" looked largely lost before the team acquired Isaiah Thomas, and only half-lost until they figured out that he's too talented to ride the pine. Unsurprisingly, this coincided with the team taking off.

... for the sake of argument, you should also look up Allen Iverson's supporting cast in 1999-2000.

Man, what did we have when Stevens came here? A mess, like 30 players in that season and a half. We were playing Joel Anthony, MarShon Brooks, Chris Johnson, Phil Pressey, etc.

Your comment is absolutely unfair to our coaching staff.

Less so than the level of unfairness you display in your errant comments about Thomas.

Errant, your nickname 

22 years says you're wrong about this one, as you are wildly wrong about Thomas.

[johnnygreen]

I don't think Isaiah is a max player in the open market, however, he probably does deserve to be paid as a max player in Boston. It is one of those things where he is more valuable to Boston than any other team. A good example of this would be Carmelo Anthony in New York. And just like Carmelo, once Boston gives Thomas a max deal, he most likely becomes untradeable.

Maybe I missed the memo, but other than Chris Paul, how many starting PG's actually play defense? Yes he's only 5'9", but I don't recall seeing too many times where someone tries to post him up. It is pretty much a scoring point guard league now, and more often than not, Thomas is on the positive side in the scoring department versus his opponent. On offense, he's constantly putting pressure on the defense by attacking the basket and putting the opposing team in the penalty. And he is also a [dang] good shooter from deep, mid range, pull ups, and the free throw line, which makes him an offensive nightmare.

Thomas has so much good will from his teammates and the fans, that it would be almost impossible to just let him walk. Some may disagree, but I believe leadership matters, and Thomas just oozes that quality, especially since it seems as if his teammates believe in him.

[Roy H.]

I still don't get the "IT isn't a max player" argument.

Is he in the same category as Beal, Lillard, Conley, Horford, Parsons, H. Barnes, etc.?

Those guys are "max" guys. I don't think any of them elevates this team more than IT. Our options are pay IT, or let him walk and then hope to sign a "max" player who probably isn't as good as IT in a few years.

[GratefulCs]

i'm a believer now

[CoachBo]

I still don't get the "IT isn't a max player" argument.

Is he in the same category as Beal, Lillard, Conley, Horford, Parsons, H. Barnes, etc.?

Those guys are "max" guys. I don't think any of them elevates this team more than IT. Our options are pay IT, or let him walk and then hope to sign a "max" player who probably isn't as good as IT in a few years.

Ditto. I haven't seen a cogent argument offered yet.

[tankcity!]

They have changed my mind to a certain extent, but I would still offer up IT for a top 3 pick in 2017's draft. I know I'm insane, but he doesn't fit our window to win a ring. And I don't want to give a max to an undersized player who relies on athleticism and speed.

[Donoghus]

They have changed my mind to a certain extent, but I would still offer up IT for a top 3 pick in 2017's draft. I know I'm insane, but he doesn't fit our window to win a ring. And I don't want to give a max to an undersized player who relies on athleticism and speed.

No one is giving up a top 3 pick in this draft for IT.

[Darío SpanishFan]

I still don't get the "IT isn't a max player" argument.

Is he in the same category as Beal, Lillard, Conley, Horford, Parsons, H. Barnes, etc.?

Those guys are "max" guys. I don't think any of them elevates this team more than IT. Our options are pay IT, or let him walk and then hope to sign a "max" player who probably isn't as good as IT in a few years.

IT is a max guy. Period. I don't think anyone can be against it. The question is... a max guy in a contender?

[nickagneta]

I still don't get the "IT isn't a max player" argument.

Is he in the same category as Beal, Lillard, Conley, Horford, Parsons, H. Barnes, etc.?

Those guys are "max" guys. I don't think any of them elevates this team more than IT. Our options are pay IT, or let him walk and then hope to sign a "max" player who probably isn't as good as IT in a few years.

Agree 100%, Roy. Don't understand the "IT isn't a max guy" or "IT needs to come off the bench" comments and thoughts. It's almost as if people aren't watching what has transpired on this team the last two years and how much IT starting at PG and being the leader of this team is responsible for it.

And the idea that Fultz or Ball would come right in and be at IT's level so we can't pay IT or have him on the team while they are on the team is absurd. Anyone drafted this year probably won't be ready to be a leader and top producer on a playoff team that could be headed to the ECF for 4-6 years, or in other words, after ITs prime and max contract is over.