Boston Celtics 2016-17 Season Discussion

It isn't just Celtics fans talking about letting Isaah walk either. Heard this quote from NBA radio last night-

"Isaah had a bad night yesterday, do you really think the Celtics are considering giving Isaah close to 40 million a year when they could be bringing Fultz in? Look Isaah is going to get his max deal, but it might not be from Boston now."

This is a real topic and it isn't just the homer crowd talking about it.

Isaiah did not have a bad game by any measure in game 7.

If Isaah wants a max deal at one year, I'd love to do that but the guy will probably want 5 and will get it from somewhere. Paying Isaah at 30+ million a year in his 30's isn't ideal, especially considering you have a cheaper in house option that could possibly replace him.

You act like a sports nut, but just like with Smart being a RFA you don't know what you're​ talking about.  Only one team can give Thomas 5 years and that's us.  Every other team can only give him 4 years.  So if we don't give it to him, he won't get 5 years.

Guards do tend to have a steeper aging curve than other positions. See, e.g., here:
I couldn't quickly find any good research on this, but I'd expect the trend to be especially true for undersized point guards, for a few reasons. Offensively, those guys need every little bit of lift to get their shots off against longer defenders and rely on their speed/quickness to get around guys that they can't shoot over. Once that athleticism declines, it's tough for them to keep up. Defensively, guys at other positions can move down the defensive spectrum as they age. Think KG moving from PF to C, Joe Johnson moving from SG to SF to small-ball PF, Jason Kidd guarding SGs rather than PGs as he ages, etc. But Thomas' size means he can't really have that opportunity.

If they have nowhere else to use their cap dollars, I'm not necessary opposed to re-signing Thomas, even at the max. But it's not as much of a slam-dunk as ya'll are making it out to be. 

NBA and NFL aren't even close to the same thing. For one we got a comp pick for letting Revis walk. Second in football guys decline faster due to how physical game is. Also you can find players like Butler as undrafted free agents easily. In the NBA getting star level players is about the hardest thing to do and Thomas is one!

At the very least you trade him, you don't just let him walk away for nothing! After these Playoffs you most likely keep him. He has shown me a lot this year. I might have traded him 3 months ago, now I keep him and pay him. I would try and only do a 4 year deal, but would go 5 if I had to.

If my numbers are correct, the C's will likely head into the offseason with $19.88 Mn in Cap Space. Getting their requires these simple steps:

1. Drop Cap Holds for Johnson, Jerebko, Green and Young
2. Drop Non-Guaranteed contracts for Zeller and Mickey.

After securing the #1 pick, the next keys to the offseason are:

1. Does Hayward want to sign here? If so, you need to clear another $10.5Mn in salary.

2. KO - How much does Danny want to extend himself for Olynyk. Earlier on it seemed as though the most likely route was to retain KO's hold as a Restricted Free Agent. That was bc his hold is pretty reasonable at $7Mn. But, as UMass pointed out, he may have raised his value to the point where re-signing him doesn't make fiscal sense. If Danny agrees and KNOWS he isn't going to re-sign him, does dropping the hold (in an effort to get that $10.5Mn) make sense?

3. Guard/Wing logjam - if Fultz is the guy and Hayward is the FA signing, what do you do with the logjam. You already have Thomas, Bradley, Crowder covering the starting Ballhandler and Wing/Swing positions (1, 2 and 3 if you prefer the standard lineup descriptions) with Smart, Rozier and Brown all being rotational pieces. Add Fultz to the mix and before you even add Hayward, you are running out of minutes. Of course, adding Hayward REQUIRES someone to go, but who is it? Do more than 1 get moved given likely redundancies and needs for both cap space and more rebounding/rim protection.

4. Butler/George - I'm adding them here bc their names WILL come up this offseason. They are back on the list bc of I'm not sure how much they make sense. George, for sure, as a 1-yr rental (who has expressed interest in signing with LAL) doesn't make sense if the #1 is part of the demand. While I've heard folks mention the idea of Boston having enough assets to sign Hayward AND trading for Butler, it just doesn't make sense. They'd have to gut the depth (see the pre-deadline discussion we had) and you'd be putting all of your chips into the Guard/Small Forward position. Now if there was an attainable star big man available, a monster package might make sense. Otherwise, I would think smaller trades to fill the role next Horford and obtain cap space is more likely.

If making room for Hayward, Crowder is likely gone. Brown could easily fill in as back up (as he does today - he's shown signs of very good things but he's not a lock as a starting caliber wing yet).

It's not going to be 1 player off the current roster to make room anyway (and it's likely to be 2 from the Bradley/Smart/Rozier/Crowder group so I think there will still be minutes for Hayward and Brown)

It'll be fair value next year when the cap goes up again.

I like Crowder too but he's really a bench player who's best served played 15-25 mins a night on a true contender. When he's at home and he catcher fire with his shot he's a much different player. I think his defense has slipped quite a bit. He seems to have a problem accepting what he is as a player and when he's not scoring the rest of his game seems to fall off too.

There's ways around that, like sign and trade options. No you don't know what you're talking about. Anyone but Fultz at number one? Please.

Also these one year and opt out seems to be the new trend in the NBA in order to get that max deal, don't you agree?