Trade IT if you want to build a long term contender

[EJPLAYA]

Lots of talk on here about trading the number one pick, or trading Smart or Bradley. If you really want to build a contender we should keep them all and trade IT. Rather than lock into a guy at Max money who is undersized, doesn't defend, and will have a shorter career span, trade him at his most valued time and get another high pick out of him. Maybe to Sacramento for the #5 pick?

Then you take Fultz to go with AB and Smart. Brown at the three, another lottery pick (maybe Makannen) from the IT trade... That also allows us to keep KO. That lineup keeps us in the discussion as a contender, plus should allow us to be dominant in 2-3 years when LeBron's declining game prevents them from dominating the east.

[LilRip]

I wouldn't hate the thought of trading IT, but I'd hate getting just an unproven rookie for him. The dude is 2nd All NBA team. He's worth more

[EJPLAYA]

I wouldn't hate the thought of trading IT, but I'd hate getting just an unproven rookie for him. The dude is 2nd All NBA team. He's worth more

In order to make the trade, you'll have to get a player back as well to match salaries. Cauley Stein and a player would do it.

[chilidawg]

My head says yes but my heart says no way.  I love the little guy.

[gouki88]

Why do so many on this board seem to think we have to go all in one way or the other, in terms of either trading our best player for a package like a lottery pick and WCS (dear God no), or we trade Fultz, the best guard prospect in years - a fact seemingly overlooked by a considerable portion of people - in a package for a guy like PG13, or Jimmy Butler.

The best approach, like Scal said in the other topic, is to try and be balanced and follow a route similar to that of the Spurs. Obviously not predicting Spurs like success, but constantly stringing together 50+ win seasons isn't a bad thing.

[Phantom255x]

I wouldn't hate the thought of trading IT, but I'd hate getting just an unproven rookie for him. The dude is 2nd All NBA team. He's worth more

In order to make the trade, you'll have to get a player back as well to match salaries. Cauley Stein and a player would do it.

Why in the world would SAC do WCS + #5 for Isaiah Thomas, especially with IT an expiring contract and Sacramento rebuilding.

[Phantom255x]

Isaiah isn't getting traded. He's the only real "bright spot" about the Celtics right now and is getting everyone (management, TD Garden) extra $$ and revenue.

If he gets traded, you ARE NOT adding Hayward.

There is no way that team is a contender the next 2-3 years, and Horford won't like seeing IT traded either.

Fultz has loved the idea of playing alongside IT.

I don't see him traded. You also won't get back fair value in any trade since IT4 is an expiring contract next season.

[gouki88]

I wouldn't hate the thought of trading IT, but I'd hate getting just an unproven rookie for him. The dude is 2nd All NBA team. He's worth more

In order to make the trade, you'll have to get a player back as well to match salaries. Cauley Stein and a player would do it.

Why in the world would SAC do WCS + #5 for Isaiah Thomas, especially with IT an expiring contract and Sacramento rebuilding.

That's probably a lose-lose scenario. They lose a top pick, and IT probably makes them decent-ish (ie, considerably better than the Phoenix's and the Brooklyn's and the Minny's), and would then walk for nothing.

Doubtful he would stick around, barring some miraculous turn around.

[Future Celtics Owner]

Why do so many on this board seem to think we have to go all in one way or the other, in terms of either trading our best player for a package like a lottery pick and WCS (dear God no), or we trade Fultz, the best guard prospect in years - a fact seemingly overlooked by a considerable portion of people - in a package for a guy like PG13, or Jimmy Butler.

The best approach, like Scal said in the other topic, is to try and be balanced and follow a route similar to that of the Spurs. Obviously not predicting Spurs like success, but constantly stringing together 50+ win seasons isn't a bad thing.

It is if we don't win championships.

Also DA has not drafted like the Spus: Manu. Tony Parker, KL, and gifted Tim Duncan after Robinson had an injury.

[Future Celtics Owner]

Isaiah isn't getting traded. He's the only real "bright spot" about the Celtics right now and is getting everyone (management, TD Garden) extra $$ and revenue.

If he gets traded, you ARE NOT adding Hayward.

There is no way that team is a contender the next 2-3 years, and Horford won't like seeing IT traded either.

Fultz has loved the idea of playing alongside IT.

I don't see him traded. You also won't get back fair value in any trade since IT4 is an expiring contract next season.

The exact same stuff was said on this forum about RR.

[Phantom255x]

Isaiah isn't getting traded. He's the only real "bright spot" about the Celtics right now and is getting everyone (management, TD Garden) extra $$ and revenue.

If he gets traded, you ARE NOT adding Hayward.

There is no way that team is a contender the next 2-3 years, and Horford won't like seeing IT traded either.

Fultz has loved the idea of playing alongside IT.

I don't see him traded. You also won't get back fair value in any trade since IT4 is an expiring contract next season.

The exact same stuff was said on this forum about RR.

I loved Rondo, but come on, IT is coming off an MVP-like season averaging 29/6 (done efficiently), and it's not like the C's are planning to go into "full tank mode" next season like the plan was during Rondo's final year - 2 years here.

Also, how many wins did the C's have the season before Rondo was traded away?

[jakeopp]

If we aren't going to pay him what he wants on the open market, then it makes sense to get what we can in a trade. Same for Avery.

[Rakulp]

I realize we have to talk about something until the draft later this month, but really.  Do you have any idea where the Celtics would have been this year without IT?  He has done everything for this organization, including playing through the death of his sister and losing a tooth in the playoffs!

For my money, IT can RETIRE a Celtic...if he deserves big money, you pay him big money.  His presence on the team does more for us than his absence and a replacement ever could...IMHO.

Rak

[incoherent]

Hold up.

The most valuable thing IT is bringing to the Celtics next year is a deep run in the playoffs giving Fultz and Brown invaluable experience.

Trading IT for a pick or a prospect isn't worth taking away deep playoff experience for Fultz.

Anyone disagree?

Also, if anything thinks we go deep in playoffs without IT next year, then you are just bonkers.

[Roy H.]

I wouldn't trad IT, period, but how is this an argument?

trade him at his most valued time

That would have been at last trade deadline. Currently, he's injured, which doesn't seem like peak value.

Also, no IT means no Hayward or other win-now free agent. I'm not sure what building around AB, Smart and KO does for us without IT and Hayward.