The Little Guy has to

[Darío SpanishFan]

So we're the #1 seed...more realistically the #2 seed and you guys want to wait another 2-3 years? Well why did we sign Horford? Why did we go after Durant? We've had the same team for 2 years, it's time to pay up.

We signed Horford to aggresively chase Durant. And we weren't far from signing him. That was a very savvy movement.

[Rosco917]

IT would be a legendary 6th man on a championship team. Instant offense sitting on the bench is hard to find.

His defense wouldn't be anywhere near as concerning as a 6th man playing against mostly backup players. He could be taken out of the game when opposing teams adjust for him. Unfortunately we have no player that could be considered a starting caliber PG. (Our hope could be in the 2017 draft) 

But him as a starter, being keyed on during playoffs...his short comings are very apparent. Opposing players are swarming all around him, cutting his field of vision, and then playing passing lanes, causing disruption and turnovers. They're making it necessary that the C's get the ball out of his hands.

On D, the Celtics are forced to continually switch, and rotate to help him. It's just not good, it's a sure  formula for mediocrity.

[tarheelsxxiii]

Wait, who are we getting to dump IT? LOL

If we get PG13 and Hayward. My question would be where have they got their teams as the leaders of the teams?

I'm just saying if you're going to dump IT, it better be for someone better...not on the same level but proven to be better. IT can't help it that his teammates can't shoot and don't have his toughness.

You don't necessarily have to "dump" IT for somebody better. I think you dump him for the better of the team. Realistically the NBA will be Cavs vs. Warriors for the next 2-3 years. There is nothing we can that even puts us in the same sentence as either of those teams. So what is the best strategy in that case?
To me it’s have the most money available in 2-3 years and the best young talent to build around. Jaylen has potential, we could possibly have Fultz, and Brooklyn is looking like they have a strong chance of being a last place team next season. We also have potential impact players oversees. In 2-3 years you also have Horford and IT off the books, and need to begin considering if it’s time to pay these youngsters.
I just don’t see what having IT on this team for the next 6 years at a max does for us. When the Warriors start to lost guys because they can’t afford them, and the cavs age, what do we have in response? A 32 year old 5’9” PG who doesn’t play defense and lost a step at a max deal for 3 more years.. This team is getting fans in the seats, that’s all Ainge and the owners want. I truly believe Ainge knows that our future is with the youth and not with the current core. I also don't think trading IT will be as easy as people think it is if he is on a max deal. You let him walk after next season.

Then this franchise is in a boatload of trouble ...

But if we draft Fultz and sign IT, is that not a boatload of trouble.

I agree. Just pointing out this thread's tilt back to the "perpetual rebuild" and the misplaced, fictional faith in Ainge's draft record.

Right. I've questioned Ainge's draft record too, but that aside, there's no way he would make decisions that would regress the quality of the team.  I actually believe the Celtics' earning the #1 seed places significantly more pressure on him to make major upgrades this summer.  Yeah, it may entice FAs to come to Boston more than in the past (though I doubt it), but it'd be a very bad look to be lead by a young core and fall out of the playoffs in the near future.

I understand IT's contract is a sticky situation.  I've have some reservations about signing him to a max contract, and hope his deal can be renegotiated at a more reasonable price and/or backloaded, etc.  But the "IT has to go" camp have failed to acknowledge that championships are expensive -- the Cavs are 30+ million over the cap this year, so if the Celtics want to contend anytime soon, they're going to need to shell out money.  If that's the goal, for all he provides I think IT should be one of multiple all-stars on the roster.

[CoachBo]

Wait, who are we getting to dump IT? LOL

If we get PG13 and Hayward. My question would be where have they got their teams as the leaders of the teams?

I'm just saying if you're going to dump IT, it better be for someone better...not on the same level but proven to be better. IT can't help it that his teammates can't shoot and don't have his toughness.

You don't necessarily have to "dump" IT for somebody better. I think you dump him for the better of the team. Realistically the NBA will be Cavs vs. Warriors for the next 2-3 years. There is nothing we can that even puts us in the same sentence as either of those teams. So what is the best strategy in that case?
To me it’s have the most money available in 2-3 years and the best young talent to build around. Jaylen has potential, we could possibly have Fultz, and Brooklyn is looking like they have a strong chance of being a last place team next season. We also have potential impact players oversees. In 2-3 years you also have Horford and IT off the books, and need to begin considering if it’s time to pay these youngsters.
I just don’t see what having IT on this team for the next 6 years at a max does for us. When the Warriors start to lost guys because they can’t afford them, and the cavs age, what do we have in response? A 32 year old 5’9” PG who doesn’t play defense and lost a step at a max deal for 3 more years.. This team is getting fans in the seats, that’s all Ainge and the owners want. I truly believe Ainge knows that our future is with the youth and not with the current core. I also don't think trading IT will be as easy as people think it is if he is on a max deal. You let him walk after next season.

Then this franchise is in a boatload of trouble ...

But if we draft Fultz and sign IT, is that not a boatload of trouble.

I agree. Just pointing out this thread's tilt back to the "perpetual rebuild" and the misplaced, fictional faith in Ainge's draft record.

Right. I've questioned Ainge's draft record too, but that aside, there's no way he would make decisions that would regress the quality of the team.  I actually believe the Celtics' earning the #1 seed places significantly more pressure on him to make major upgrades this summer.  Yeah, it may entice FAs to come to Boston more than in the past (though I doubt it), but it'd be a very bad look to be lead by a young core and fall out of the playoffs in the near future.

I understand IT's contract is a sticky situation.  I've have some reservations about signing him to a max contract, and hope his deal can be renegotiated at a more reasonable price and/or backloaded, etc.  But the "IT has to go" camp have failed to acknowledge that championships are expensive -- the Cavs are 30+ million over the cap this year, so if the Celtics want to contend anytime soon, they're going to need to shell out money.  If that's the goal, for all he provides I think IT should be one of multiple all-stars on the roster.

No argument here. I think the ship has finally sailed on the perpetual rebuild some fans are so fond of.

[Future Celtics Owner]

Wait, who are we getting to dump IT? LOL

If we get PG13 and Hayward. My question would be where have they got their teams as the leaders of the teams?

I'm just saying if you're going to dump IT, it better be for someone better...not on the same level but proven to be better. IT can't help it that his teammates can't shoot and don't have his toughness.

You don't necessarily have to "dump" IT for somebody better. I think you dump him for the better of the team. Realistically the NBA will be Cavs vs. Warriors for the next 2-3 years. There is nothing we can that even puts us in the same sentence as either of those teams. So what is the best strategy in that case?
To me it’s have the most money available in 2-3 years and the best young talent to build around. Jaylen has potential, we could possibly have Fultz, and Brooklyn is looking like they have a strong chance of being a last place team next season. We also have potential impact players oversees. In 2-3 years you also have Horford and IT off the books, and need to begin considering if it’s time to pay these youngsters.
I just don’t see what having IT on this team for the next 6 years at a max does for us. When the Warriors start to lost guys because they can’t afford them, and the cavs age, what do we have in response? A 32 year old 5’9” PG who doesn’t play defense and lost a step at a max deal for 3 more years.. This team is getting fans in the seats, that’s all Ainge and the owners want. I truly believe Ainge knows that our future is with the youth and not with the current core. I also don't think trading IT will be as easy as people think it is if he is on a max deal. You let him walk after next season.

Then this franchise is in a boatload of trouble ...

But if we draft Fultz and sign IT, is that not a boatload of trouble.

I agree. Just pointing out this thread's tilt back to the "perpetual rebuild" and the misplaced, fictional faith in Ainge's draft record.

Right. I've questioned Ainge's draft record too, but that aside, there's no way he would make decisions that would regress the quality of the team.  I actually believe the Celtics' earning the #1 seed places significantly more pressure on him to make major upgrades this summer.  Yeah, it may entice FAs to come to Boston more than in the past (though I doubt it), but it'd be a very bad look to be lead by a young core and fall out of the playoffs in the near future.

I understand IT's contract is a sticky situation.  I've have some reservations about signing him to a max contract, and hope his deal can be renegotiated at a more reasonable price and/or backloaded, etc.  But the "IT has to go" camp have failed to acknowledge that championships are expensive -- the Cavs are 30+ million over the cap this year, so if the Celtics want to contend anytime soon, they're going to need to shell out money.  If that's the goal, for all he provides I think IT should be one of multiple all-stars on the roster.

It's not about being cheap but smart. Defense wins championships IT only plays 50% of the game in a playoff series and NEEDS to be hidden on defense. If we needed to pick up a scoring 6th man type player we could always do a Lou Williams type deal. By all means if you want to have a good regular season team and mortgage our future with a guy that is a glorified 6th man then that is your opinion. But with the new NBA style of play IT can not defend in the postseason adequately enough for us to win a championship......and why would we pay him max money if we end up drafting the next STAR and 2 way player in Fultz.

I'm not saying it is a forgon conclusion that we get the #1 overall pick but if we do and we draft Fultz he should be our starting pg and we should take a different path IMO.

With Fultz and Jaylen we would have a super long backcourt...no hiding on defense.

[mmmmm]

Wait, who are we getting to dump IT? LOL

If we get PG13 and Hayward. My question would be where have they got their teams as the leaders of the teams?

I'm just saying if you're going to dump IT, it better be for someone better...not on the same level but proven to be better. IT can't help it that his teammates can't shoot and don't have his toughness.

You don't necessarily have to "dump" IT for somebody better. I think you dump him for the better of the team. Realistically the NBA will be Cavs vs. Warriors for the next 2-3 years. There is nothing we can that even puts us in the same sentence as either of those teams. So what is the best strategy in that case?
To me it’s have the most money available in 2-3 years and the best young talent to build around. Jaylen has potential, we could possibly have Fultz, and Brooklyn is looking like they have a strong chance of being a last place team next season. We also have potential impact players oversees. In 2-3 years you also have Horford and IT off the books, and need to begin considering if it’s time to pay these youngsters.
I just don’t see what having IT on this team for the next 6 years at a max does for us. When the Warriors start to lost guys because they can’t afford them, and the cavs age, what do we have in response? A 32 year old 5’9” PG who doesn’t play defense and lost a step at a max deal for 3 more years.. This team is getting fans in the seats, that’s all Ainge and the owners want. I truly believe Ainge knows that our future is with the youth and not with the current core. I also don't think trading IT will be as easy as people think it is if he is on a max deal. You let him walk after next season.

Then this franchise is in a boatload of trouble ...

But if we draft Fultz and sign IT, is that not a boatload of trouble.

I agree. Just pointing out this thread's tilt back to the "perpetual rebuild" and the misplaced, fictional faith in Ainge's draft record.

Right. I've questioned Ainge's draft record too, but that aside, there's no way he would make decisions that would regress the quality of the team.  I actually believe the Celtics' earning the #1 seed places significantly more pressure on him to make major upgrades this summer.  Yeah, it may entice FAs to come to Boston more than in the past (though I doubt it), but it'd be a very bad look to be lead by a young core and fall out of the playoffs in the near future.

I understand IT's contract is a sticky situation.  I've have some reservations about signing him to a max contract, and hope his deal can be renegotiated at a more reasonable price and/or backloaded, etc.  But the "IT has to go" camp have failed to acknowledge that championships are expensive -- the Cavs are 30+ million over the cap this year, so if the Celtics want to contend anytime soon, they're going to need to shell out money.  If that's the goal, for all he provides I think IT should be one of multiple all-stars on the roster.

It's not about being cheap but smart. Defense wins championships IT only plays 50% of the game in a playoff series and NEEDS to be hidden on defense. If we needed to pick up a scoring 6th man type player we could always do a Lou Williams type deal. By all means if you want to have a good regular season team and mortgage our future with a guy that is a glorified 6th man then that is your opinion. But with the new NBA style of play IT can not defend in the postseason adequately enough for us to win a championship......and why would we pay him max money if we end up drafting the next STAR and 2 way player in Fultz.

I'm not saying it is a forgon conclusion that we get the #1 overall pick but if we do and we draft Fultz he should be our starting pg and we should take a different path IMO.

With Fultz and Jaylen we would have a super long backcourt...no hiding on defense.

Outscoring your opponent wins championships.

Recent championships have featured such stellar defensive players such as an old Tony Parker, Steph Curry, Kyrie Irving and Kevin Love ...

Jesus, Mario Chalmers earned a ring as a 'starter'.

The whole narrative that Thomas "can't be the starter on a championship team" is getting tired.

No player can be a player on a championship team until they are on a _team_ that is championship quality.   And then, suddenly there they are.   Michael Jordan played 6 years in the league before he finally had a team around him good enough to win it.   Lebron didn't win it all until he changed teams to go join his SuperFriends.   Whether a player like Thomas ever gets there will depend on the team around him, just like it does with every player.

Tiny Archibald has a ring.  There is no rule in the NBA preventing small point guards from being the starter on a title team.   Iverson came darn close.   Jesus - Tony Parker is a little taller, but probably doesn't weigh much more (if any) than Isaiah Thomas.  He's got a pocketful of rings.

You talk about "the new NBA style of play".   Isaiah Thomas is pretty much designed and built to be the perfect point guard for the "new NBA style of play".  He has exactly the set of skills that, per the modern NBA's rules and trends, are so difficult to stop.  In the modern NBA, the rules totally are in favor of quick, attacking guard/wings who can both create points off the dribble and shoot the three ball.  Any team that wants to be able to score points in the NBA needs to have one of these guys.  Every elite team has someone who can do that.   And only a couple of players were better at it than Thomas this year.

I like Fultz.  A lot.  So does Thomas.   IT thinks Fultz should be the #1 pick, knowing full well that the highest probability is to his own team.   Picking Fultz would have no bearing on whether we keep Thomas.  (Other than to maybe convince him to want to stay and play with him.  They are friends.)

For one thing, Fultz would not be ready to start and lead a playoff contending team for at least a few years.    This is the NBA, not Summer League.  The NBA is veteran-dominated.  Especially the playoffs.  Young players get eaten alive.   There are only three rookies left on playoff rosters right now (Jaylen, Dejounte Murray (Spurs) and Damian Jones (Warriors).  Only Jaylen of them gets more than a tiny handful of minutes.  So any fantasy that Fultz is going to come right in and immediately become the starting PG and make Thomas irrelevant is just that.  Fantasy.   Fultz is amazing, and will likely rise to the level of actually being relevant in the playoffs faster than the typical kid, but let's keep the expectations real here.

Second of all, once Fultz DOES mature into a relevant player, it's not like he and Thomas wouldn't be able to co-exist.  Fultz, like Thomas, is marvelous both on and off the ball.   Offensively, they would be perfect together in this offense.   And defensively, Fultz is more than big enough to play the 2.

Sometimes, it seems as if some folks are so busy making unproven assertions about what Thomas and the Celtics can't possibly do, that I think they are missing watching what Thomas and this team are already doing.

[mobilija]

Mmmmm, always so delicious. TP for you, your wisdom and reasonableness. Please post mmmmore!!

[Ilikesports17]

Kevin Love saw a major role reduction in the Finals and Thompson (who defends really well) was clearly their #1 big.

Kyrie Irving doesn't try on defense but when he locks in he might even be above average. Irving has shown an ability to lock in like this in the playoffs in the past. Isaiah Thomas isn't capable of such locking in.

Tony Parker isn't particularly good but he's better than thomas

Steph isn't great but he's nowhere near the defensive liability that Isaiah is.

Mario Chalmers was a good defender.

I agree with your point tho, just don't like the examples.

On Fultz I also agree. Fultz is miles better than any rookie who played this year so you can't really use them as a standard. Also I can't remember the last time a rookie of his quality when to a team of our quality, so there's not a ton to base this off if.

I would expect Fultz to crate a log jam of him, Rozier Bradley and Smart that eventually necessitates a trade of Smart or Bradley.

[The Oracle]

Wait, who are we getting to dump IT? LOL

If we get PG13 and Hayward. My question would be where have they got their teams as the leaders of the teams?

I'm just saying if you're going to dump IT, it better be for someone better...not on the same level but proven to be better. IT can't help it that his teammates can't shoot and don't have his toughness.

You don't necessarily have to "dump" IT for somebody better. I think you dump him for the better of the team. Realistically the NBA will be Cavs vs. Warriors for the next 2-3 years. There is nothing we can that even puts us in the same sentence as either of those teams. So what is the best strategy in that case?
To me it’s have the most money available in 2-3 years and the best young talent to build around. Jaylen has potential, we could possibly have Fultz, and Brooklyn is looking like they have a strong chance of being a last place team next season. We also have potential impact players oversees. In 2-3 years you also have Horford and IT off the books, and need to begin considering if it’s time to pay these youngsters.
I just don’t see what having IT on this team for the next 6 years at a max does for us. When the Warriors start to lost guys because they can’t afford them, and the cavs age, what do we have in response? A 32 year old 5’9” PG who doesn’t play defense and lost a step at a max deal for 3 more years.. This team is getting fans in the seats, that’s all Ainge and the owners want. I truly believe Ainge knows that our future is with the youth and not with the current core. I also don't think trading IT will be as easy as people think it is if he is on a max deal. You let him walk after next season.

Then this franchise is in a boatload of trouble ...

But if we draft Fultz and sign IT, is that not a boatload of trouble.

I agree. Just pointing out this thread's tilt back to the "perpetual rebuild" and the misplaced, fictional faith in Ainge's draft record.

Right. I've questioned Ainge's draft record too, but that aside, there's no way he would make decisions that would regress the quality of the team.  I actually believe the Celtics' earning the #1 seed places significantly more pressure on him to make major upgrades this summer.  Yeah, it may entice FAs to come to Boston more than in the past (though I doubt it), but it'd be a very bad look to be lead by a young core and fall out of the playoffs in the near future.

I understand IT's contract is a sticky situation.  I've have some reservations about signing him to a max contract, and hope his deal can be renegotiated at a more reasonable price and/or backloaded, etc.  But the "IT has to go" camp have failed to acknowledge that championships are expensive -- the Cavs are 30+ million over the cap this year, so if the Celtics want to contend anytime soon, they're going to need to shell out money.  If that's the goal, for all he provides I think IT should be one of multiple all-stars on the roster.

It's not about being cheap but smart. Defense wins championships IT only plays 50% of the game in a playoff series and NEEDS to be hidden on defense. If we needed to pick up a scoring 6th man type player we could always do a Lou Williams type deal. By all means if you want to have a good regular season team and mortgage our future with a guy that is a glorified 6th man then that is your opinion. But with the new NBA style of play IT can not defend in the postseason adequately enough for us to win a championship......and why would we pay him max money if we end up drafting the next STAR and 2 way player in Fultz.

I'm not saying it is a forgon conclusion that we get the #1 overall pick but if we do and we draft Fultz he should be our starting pg and we should take a different path IMO.

With Fultz and Jaylen we would have a super long backcourt...no hiding on defense.

Outscoring your opponent wins championships.

Recent championships have featured such stellar defensive players such as an old Tony Parker, Steph Curry, Kyrie Irving and Kevin Love ...

Jesus, Mario Chalmers earned a ring as a 'starter'.

The whole narrative that Thomas "can't be the starter on a championship team" is getting tired.

No player can be a player on a championship team until they are on a _team_ that is championship quality.   And then, suddenly there they are.   Michael Jordan played 6 years in the league before he finally had a team around him good enough to win it.   Lebron didn't win it all until he changed teams to go join his SuperFriends.   Whether a player like Thomas ever gets there will depend on the team around him, just like it does with every player.

Tiny Archibald has a ring.  There is no rule in the NBA preventing small point guards from being the starter on a title team.   Iverson came darn close.   Jesus - Tony Parker is a little taller, but probably doesn't weigh much more (if any) than Isaiah Thomas.  He's got a pocketful of rings.

You talk about "the new NBA style of play".   Isaiah Thomas is pretty much designed and built to be the perfect point guard for the "new NBA style of play".  He has exactly the set of skills that, per the modern NBA's rules and trends, are so difficult to stop.  In the modern NBA, the rules totally are in favor of quick, attacking guard/wings who can both create points off the dribble and shoot the three ball.  Any team that wants to be able to score points in the NBA needs to have one of these guys.  Every elite team has someone who can do that.   And only a couple of players were better at it than Thomas this year.

I like Fultz.  A lot.  So does Thomas.   IT thinks Fultz should be the #1 pick, knowing full well that the highest probability is to his own team.   Picking Fultz would have no bearing on whether we keep Thomas.  (Other than to maybe convince him to want to stay and play with him.  They are friends.)

For one thing, Fultz would not be ready to start and lead a playoff contending team for at least a few years.    This is the NBA, not Summer League.  The NBA is veteran-dominated.  Especially the playoffs.  Young players get eaten alive.   There are only three rookies left on playoff rosters right now (Jaylen, Dejounte Murray (Spurs) and Damian Jones (Warriors).  Only Jaylen of them gets more than a tiny handful of minutes.  So any fantasy that Fultz is going to come right in and immediately become the starting PG and make Thomas irrelevant is just that.  Fantasy.   Fultz is amazing, and will likely rise to the level of actually being relevant in the playoffs faster than the typical kid, but let's keep the expectations real here.

Second of all, once Fultz DOES mature into a relevant player, it's not like he and Thomas wouldn't be able to co-exist.  Fultz, like Thomas, is marvelous both on and off the ball.   Offensively, they would be perfect together in this offense.   And defensively, Fultz is more than big enough to play the 2.

Sometimes, it seems as if some folks are so busy making unproven assertions about what Thomas and the Celtics can't possibly do, that I think they are missing watching what Thomas and this team are already doing.

Championships are won by creating scoring margins that are greater than your opponents.  With I.T. on the floor your ability to create a large enough scoring margin is severely hampered simply because you do not have the defensive ability to create it.  The C's currently have a defensive rating of 109.1 in the post season with I.T. on the floor (98.5 with him off).  You will never be able to generate an offense that is good enough to compensate for the poor quality defense to compete with Cleveland, G.S. or any other up and comers in the foreseeable future.

There is no real good way to hide him and get better defensively.  Teams in the playoffs key in on him and can target him in a ton of different ways.  The game is just to spread out now and the help defense just can't compensate.

As an example.  If you replace I.T. with a solid 2 way PG the C's could then have a near league best defense and still have a high powered offense.  It is then much much easier to create that scoring margin. 

I really like I.T. but the logistics of trying to build a title capable team around him are just not likely there.  With that said you will always have a punchers chance as long as you have a high powered offense in this league.  That is what the C's currently have or are very close to, a punchers chance and that might very well be the ceiling with I.T. because of the poor defense.

[Future Celtics Owner]

Wait, who are we getting to dump IT? LOL

If we get PG13 and Hayward. My question would be where have they got their teams as the leaders of the teams?

I'm just saying if you're going to dump IT, it better be for someone better...not on the same level but proven to be better. IT can't help it that his teammates can't shoot and don't have his toughness.

You don't necessarily have to "dump" IT for somebody better. I think you dump him for the better of the team. Realistically the NBA will be Cavs vs. Warriors for the next 2-3 years. There is nothing we can that even puts us in the same sentence as either of those teams. So what is the best strategy in that case?
To me it’s have the most money available in 2-3 years and the best young talent to build around. Jaylen has potential, we could possibly have Fultz, and Brooklyn is looking like they have a strong chance of being a last place team next season. We also have potential impact players oversees. In 2-3 years you also have Horford and IT off the books, and need to begin considering if it’s time to pay these youngsters.
I just don’t see what having IT on this team for the next 6 years at a max does for us. When the Warriors start to lost guys because they can’t afford them, and the cavs age, what do we have in response? A 32 year old 5’9” PG who doesn’t play defense and lost a step at a max deal for 3 more years.. This team is getting fans in the seats, that’s all Ainge and the owners want. I truly believe Ainge knows that our future is with the youth and not with the current core. I also don't think trading IT will be as easy as people think it is if he is on a max deal. You let him walk after next season.

Then this franchise is in a boatload of trouble ...

But if we draft Fultz and sign IT, is that not a boatload of trouble.

I agree. Just pointing out this thread's tilt back to the "perpetual rebuild" and the misplaced, fictional faith in Ainge's draft record.

Right. I've questioned Ainge's draft record too, but that aside, there's no way he would make decisions that would regress the quality of the team.  I actually believe the Celtics' earning the #1 seed places significantly more pressure on him to make major upgrades this summer.  Yeah, it may entice FAs to come to Boston more than in the past (though I doubt it), but it'd be a very bad look to be lead by a young core and fall out of the playoffs in the near future.

I understand IT's contract is a sticky situation.  I've have some reservations about signing him to a max contract, and hope his deal can be renegotiated at a more reasonable price and/or backloaded, etc.  But the "IT has to go" camp have failed to acknowledge that championships are expensive -- the Cavs are 30+ million over the cap this year, so if the Celtics want to contend anytime soon, they're going to need to shell out money.  If that's the goal, for all he provides I think IT should be one of multiple all-stars on the roster.

It's not about being cheap but smart. Defense wins championships IT only plays 50% of the game in a playoff series and NEEDS to be hidden on defense. If we needed to pick up a scoring 6th man type player we could always do a Lou Williams type deal. By all means if you want to have a good regular season team and mortgage our future with a guy that is a glorified 6th man then that is your opinion. But with the new NBA style of play IT can not defend in the postseason adequately enough for us to win a championship......and why would we pay him max money if we end up drafting the next STAR and 2 way player in Fultz.

I'm not saying it is a forgon conclusion that we get the #1 overall pick but if we do and we draft Fultz he should be our starting pg and we should take a different path IMO.

With Fultz and Jaylen we would have a super long backcourt...no hiding on defense.

Outscoring your opponent wins championships.

Recent championships have featured such stellar defensive players such as an old Tony Parker, Steph Curry, Kyrie Irving and Kevin Love ...

Jesus, Mario Chalmers earned a ring as a 'starter'.

The whole narrative that Thomas "can't be the starter on a championship team" is getting tired.

No player can be a player on a championship team until they are on a _team_ that is championship quality.   And then, suddenly there they are.   Michael Jordan played 6 years in the league before he finally had a team around him good enough to win it.   Lebron didn't win it all until he changed teams to go join his SuperFriends.   Whether a player like Thomas ever gets there will depend on the team around him, just like it does with every player.

Tiny Archibald has a ring.  There is no rule in the NBA preventing small point guards from being the starter on a title team.   Iverson came darn close.   Jesus - Tony Parker is a little taller, but probably doesn't weigh much more (if any) than Isaiah Thomas.  He's got a pocketful of rings.

You talk about "the new NBA style of play".   Isaiah Thomas is pretty much designed and built to be the perfect point guard for the "new NBA style of play".  He has exactly the set of skills that, per the modern NBA's rules and trends, are so difficult to stop.  In the modern NBA, the rules totally are in favor of quick, attacking guard/wings who can both create points off the dribble and shoot the three ball.  Any team that wants to be able to score points in the NBA needs to have one of these guys.  Every elite team has someone who can do that.   And only a couple of players were better at it than Thomas this year.

I like Fultz.  A lot.  So does Thomas.   IT thinks Fultz should be the #1 pick, knowing full well that the highest probability is to his own team.   Picking Fultz would have no bearing on whether we keep Thomas.  (Other than to maybe convince him to want to stay and play with him.  They are friends.)

For one thing, Fultz would not be ready to start and lead a playoff contending team for at least a few years.    This is the NBA, not Summer League.  The NBA is veteran-dominated.  Especially the playoffs.  Young players get eaten alive.   There are only three rookies left on playoff rosters right now (Jaylen, Dejounte Murray (Spurs) and Damian Jones (Warriors).  Only Jaylen of them gets more than a tiny handful of minutes.  So any fantasy that Fultz is going to come right in and immediately become the starting PG and make Thomas irrelevant is just that.  Fantasy.   Fultz is amazing, and will likely rise to the level of actually being relevant in the playoffs faster than the typical kid, but let's keep the expectations real here.

Second of all, once Fultz DOES mature into a relevant player, it's not like he and Thomas wouldn't be able to co-exist.  Fultz, like Thomas, is marvelous both on and off the ball.   Offensively, they would be perfect together in this offense.   And defensively, Fultz is more than big enough to play the 2.

Sometimes, it seems as if some folks are so busy making unproven assertions about what Thomas and the Celtics can't possibly do, that I think they are missing watching what Thomas and this team are already doing.

It's posts like that that actually hurt the diversity of thought on CB.

I thought it was pretty evident that my post was an OPINION. Your post not only included a couple cheap shots, but the overall theme seemed to be the poster's affinity for highlighting himself as a major C's fan with significant NBA insight.

[nickagneta]

Wait, who are we getting to dump IT? LOL

If we get PG13 and Hayward. My question would be where have they got their teams as the leaders of the teams?

I'm just saying if you're going to dump IT, it better be for someone better...not on the same level but proven to be better. IT can't help it that his teammates can't shoot and don't have his toughness.

You don't necessarily have to "dump" IT for somebody better. I think you dump him for the better of the team. Realistically the NBA will be Cavs vs. Warriors for the next 2-3 years. There is nothing we can that even puts us in the same sentence as either of those teams. So what is the best strategy in that case?
To me it’s have the most money available in 2-3 years and the best young talent to build around. Jaylen has potential, we could possibly have Fultz, and Brooklyn is looking like they have a strong chance of being a last place team next season. We also have potential impact players oversees. In 2-3 years you also have Horford and IT off the books, and need to begin considering if it’s time to pay these youngsters.
I just don’t see what having IT on this team for the next 6 years at a max does for us. When the Warriors start to lost guys because they can’t afford them, and the cavs age, what do we have in response? A 32 year old 5’9” PG who doesn’t play defense and lost a step at a max deal for 3 more years.. This team is getting fans in the seats, that’s all Ainge and the owners want. I truly believe Ainge knows that our future is with the youth and not with the current core. I also don't think trading IT will be as easy as people think it is if he is on a max deal. You let him walk after next season.

Then this franchise is in a boatload of trouble ...

But if we draft Fultz and sign IT, is that not a boatload of trouble.

No

[Greenback]

You can't win in the playoffs with one very good offensive player, a center that plays like a SF, and 4 undersized guards.  IT is the only reason we made even made the playoffs. 

Mods, can this thread be locked? There has to be some level of quality control here.

Dude had an opinion that is different than yours. Don't be an elitist fascist snob. He should be allowed to express it in the non-offensive manner that celtics blog allows. You sound whiny, calling for mommy to step in because you don't like the game another child is playing.

Fascist? That's an interesting take, but couched within rubbish.

I'd appreciate some evidence to back-up this claim. Provide statistical evidence or qualitative information to support the notion that IT is the reason we've been outplayed by the Wizards.

Comparing IT to Eddie House detracts from the quality of the forum. Call me the Erdoğan of CsBlog, but I believe the quality of that comment warrants locking the thread.  I won't stoop beneath that by slinging mud as you have.

I didn't make the claim about IT being the reason we are loosing to the wizards. I think he's amazing and has been the heart and soul of this Celtic season. Inspirational even. However, There are big questions about how to proceed forward with him and it is a legitimate topic. I would be eager to hear people's opinions whether they are backed up with facts and stats or merely opinion.


So, I'm calling you out for thinking the OPs opinion is not up to snuff w your lofty standards of celtics blog. Sorry if the "mud slinging" hurt your feelings, but it got your attention...  what right do you have to censor people expressing their opinions on a public forum? If you don't want to read this thread then don't. But you have no right to censor it and keep the rest of us from exploring and engaging.   Elitist, snobby, whiny and yes possibly even fascist; yup that's my interesting take of rubbish on your need to control this topic because the OP's take wasn't high enough quality.

I think my feelings will be okay. For the record, I haven't baited you into breaking forum rules either. 

I've read the countless threads blaming IT for our struggles, labeling him trade-bait, even moving him to the bench.  I'm sure I've shared my opinion in a few, too, w/in forum rules.  Like ilikesports commented above, I can also acknowledge that his contract situation will be a tricky one.  But I have a hard time believing any poster that compares IT to Eddie House is not trolling.

The fine line of insulting other posters...
I apologize if the mods feel my posts cross the line of name calling but aren't you in a sense being just as insulting to the OP for asking to lock his thread? His opinion isn't good enough do he should be censored?

 I sensed nothing trollish about it. Maybe a poorly thought out comparison, yes.

Inflammatory and derogatory comments?

[mobilija]

You can't win in the playoffs with one very good offensive player, a center that plays like a SF, and 4 undersized guards.  IT is the only reason we made even made the playoffs. 

Mods, can this thread be locked? There has to be some level of quality control here.

Dude had an opinion that is different than yours. Don't be an elitist fascist snob. He should be allowed to express it in the non-offensive manner that celtics blog allows. You sound whiny, calling for mommy to step in because you don't like the game another child is playing.

Fascist? That's an interesting take, but couched within rubbish.

I'd appreciate some evidence to back-up this claim. Provide statistical evidence or qualitative information to support the notion that IT is the reason we've been outplayed by the Wizards.

Comparing IT to Eddie House detracts from the quality of the forum. Call me the Erdoğan of CsBlog, but I believe the quality of that comment warrants locking the thread.  I won't stoop beneath that by slinging mud as you have.

I didn't make the claim about IT being the reason we are loosing to the wizards. I think he's amazing and has been the heart and soul of this Celtic season. Inspirational even. However, There are big questions about how to proceed forward with him and it is a legitimate topic. I would be eager to hear people's opinions whether they are backed up with facts and stats or merely opinion.


So, I'm calling you out for thinking the OPs opinion is not up to snuff w your lofty standards of celtics blog. Sorry if the "mud slinging" hurt your feelings, but it got your attention...  what right do you have to censor people expressing their opinions on a public forum? If you don't want to read this thread then don't. But you have no right to censor it and keep the rest of us from exploring and engaging.   Elitist, snobby, whiny and yes possibly even fascist; yup that's my interesting take of rubbish on your need to control this topic because the OP's take wasn't high enough quality.

I think my feelings will be okay. For the record, I haven't baited you into breaking forum rules either. 

I've read the countless threads blaming IT for our struggles, labeling him trade-bait, even moving him to the bench.  I'm sure I've shared my opinion in a few, too, w/in forum rules.  Like ilikesports commented above, I can also acknowledge that his contract situation will be a tricky one.  But I have a hard time believing any poster that compares IT to Eddie House is not trolling.

The fine line of insulting other posters...
I apologize if the mods feel my posts cross the line of name calling but aren't you in a sense being just as insulting to the OP for asking to lock his thread? His opinion isn't good enough do he should be censored?

 I sensed nothing trollish about it. Maybe a poorly thought out comparison, yes.

Inflammatory and derogatory comments?

HaHaHaHa! nice find! TP!

We've all had our fair share of "blog moments". Thanks for bringing that one back from the grave.... I still stand by my stance that guy was being high and mighty for wanting to lock a thread for the OP starting it with comparing IT to Eddie House. Maybe I crossed a line... didn't get MODed for it tho... no censor.

My question to you was legitimate. We can all look in the mirror. Didn't mean any disrespect and wasn't judging. I know I've learned to be more respectful and understanding of others opinions. I think there are several posters here that share similar values to yours that don't get edited. Personally, I appreciate and learn from a diversity of opinions so don't change your message, just learn how to frame it within the frame work of this very fine blog dictatorship that we all enjoy.