Pierce refused an extension? Looking for maximum deal?

[Drucci]

Very interesting article from today's Herald (I put the most interesting nuggets in bold) :

Though he had yet to receive official notification this morning, Danny Ainge was not surprised by the news that Paul Pierce intends to opt out of the last year of his contract with the Celtics, and will leave $21.5 million on the table with the hope of securing a longer deal.

Ainge, whose attempts to negotiate an extension with agent Jeff Schwartz fell short in recent days, stressed this morning that team could still be the Celtics. The Celtics’ president of basketball operations will be the first to open negotiations with Schwartz tomorrow, but this time on Pierce’s far richer demand for a new maximum contract deal.

Pierce now has a chance to earn as much as $96 million in a four-year deal with the Celtics - $3 million more than he could earn from another team. Pierce can now also bargain for a no-trade clause under league guidelines.

But these are measures that clearly work against what Ainge is attempting to accomplish if he is to eventually re-tool this team around the rising star of Rajon Rondo. Should Pierce sign elsewhere, Ainge said that doesn’t mean the Celtics’ chances at another NBA title over the next two years would necessarily be aborted.

“There’s too many other things that factor in right now,’’ said Ainge. “Who else can we get? But it’s not all dependent on getting Paul back. I don’t think it all rests on his shoulders.’’

If the Celtics renounce their rights to re-sign Pierce and Rasheed Wallace follows through on his plan to retire, the team would have approximately $15 million to spend on free agents. Due to the fact they would be under the salary cap, they would not have access to the mid-level exception.

Ainge would rather negotiate with Pierce than renounce his rights, pointing to the fact that the Celtics general manager still believes that his captain still wants to return – albeit at a heavy cost that could tie up the team’s flexibility for four more years.
Schwartz, who has been gauging Pierce’s viability on the upcoming free agent market, clearly believes there will be takers for the Celtics captain – especially among the teams that are ultimately jilted by the summer’s big stars.

Should teams like the Clippers, Knicks and Nets lose out on players like LeBron James, Chris Bosh, Dwyane Wade and Joe Johnson, Pierce will be an interesting alternative.

He could be particularly intriguing to teams like Miami, Chicago and the Knicks that have room for two max contract players.
But that won’t deter Ainge in his attempt to bring Pierce back, though on terms that are conducive to the Celtics’ long-term future.

“We were negotiating an extension in good faith,’’ said Ainge. “He’s worked hard to become a free agent, but I still think that in his heart of hearts he still wants to stay in Boston.

“It’s all a negotiation,’’ he said. “Risk is involved in all of these things. But I’m telling him that we would like him to come back and make another run at a title.’’

Ainge now has to determine whether a repeat run is possible without the captain of his team.

It's unclear whether Pierce is actually asking for a max deal or if Mark Murphy is just noting how much a max contract would come to for Pierce, but, to me, the quotes from Danny and the fact that his attempts at an extension failed "in recent days" is a very bad sign about Pierce's future with the Celtics. It looks like Pierce will be asking too much and Danny won't (rightfully so) give him what he wants because he is not worth it and it would kill our flexibility in upcoming years.

Obviously there is a lot to be discussed in the coming days but it looks more and more like a realistic scenario that Pierce could bolt the Celtics and join another team.

[vinnie]

Paul Pierce is one of my favorite Celtis of all time. That said, he is worth nowhere near the max contract and if that is what he wants, I hope he finds it, but not with the C's.

[Jon]

Interesting, as I've said in other threads, I think this is all dependent on what other teams are willing to offer.  It's tricky with him.  If Miami got Bosh, but not LeBron, they might be willing to bring Pierce in for a few years.  But if you're a team looking for a fresh start like NY, I don't see the point in offering Pierce more than 1-year deal, and then only if you miss out on everyone else.  Why lock up an aging vet when you can just try again next summer?  

[LooseCannon]

But if you're a team looking for a fresh start like NY, I don't see the point in offering Pierce more than 1-year deal, and then only if you miss out on everyone else.  Why lock up an aging vet when you can just try again next summer?  

So, basically, your argument is that you can't ever see teams doing anything you consider stupid with a multi-million dollar decision?

I think the one thing that we can count on for this off-season is that some free agents are going to get overpaid with deals that we think teams were stupid to offer.

[the_Bird]

Ugh.  This is the first time it's seemed to me that Paul really might pack up and leave.  If he wants a max deal, Danny absolutely has to let him walk.  Love Paul, will root for him wherever he goes, but dude just is not a max player anymore (and won't be anywhere close to a max guy in two seasons).

If Pierce wants much more than a 3/$50M contract, I think he's got to go.

Going to be an interesting week.  Hopefully, we'll hear about Doc's future soon.  If Paul walks, no reason to bring Ray Allen back.

Crap, in a month we could go from "six minutes to a title" to a complete rebuild....  :mad:

[Mike-Dub]

I love Paul and he is my favorite player out of all the New England teams, but if he wants a max extension he can get it somewhere else.  We need our cap flexibility for 2012. 

I say let Paul walk if he wants a max deal and the tough thing is I believe that he can get it, because teams will be desperate after losing out on the big free-agents.

[35Lewis]

I think Paul is still capable of putting up big numbers and earning most of what he wants to get paid.  He battled a few injuries last year but was still productive in a system that isn't based on focusing on one star player. 

I still get excited about the play early in the year when Paul drove the lane and dunked on Chris Bosh.

I am a big Paul Pierce fan and know that he isn't the same and don't feel he is a max player anymore but I think his value is somewhat understated considering he plays in an offense that runs plays for several different players instead of one.

[misha]

I love Paul and he is my favorite player out of all the New England teams, but if he wants a max extension he can get it somewhere else.  We need our cap flexibility for 2012. 

I say let Paul walk if he wants a max deal and the tough thing is I believe that he can get it, because teams will be desperate after losing out on the big free-agents.

Agree. Paul is my favorite player for so long and I don't even want to think about him playing for another team.  Max deal is out of question and I hope a reasonable deal will be agreed.

[boscel33]

What if Paul is looking for a longer run and takes far less than what he can earn, allowing the C's to sign a top free agent?  According to Basketball Reference, he has earned over 120 million in his career.  Maybe this is a way for him to still get a 3-4 year deal, and be part of a championship team.

[More Banners]

This looks like confirmation that "the best player in the world" isn't ready--and perhaps never really was ready--to accept that he isn't really the leader of the team and hasn't been since KG got here, that the whole "captain" think is more honorary than actual, and that he isn't the marquee player for the franchise anymore (and perhaps was by default as much as by his ability-there wasn't much competition for the title).

I don't think his game will grow old gracefully; I suspect he'll drop off quickly.  I also don't think he'll accept that fact gracefully, either, and this contract negotiation might be an indication of that.

[the_Bird]

I think Paul is still capable of putting up big numbers and earning most of what he wants to get paid.  He battled a few injuries last year but was still productive in a system that isn't based on focusing on one star player.  

I still get excited about the play early in the year when Paul drove the lane and dunked on Chris Bosh.

I am a big Paul Pierce fan and know that he isn't the same and don't feel he is a max player anymore but I think his value is somewhat understated considering he plays in an offense that runs plays for several different players instead of one.

What if the Clippers offer him 4/$60?  I love Paul Pierce, too, but do I want the C's to be paying him $15M in four years' time?  Paul's still a [dang] good player, but he's absolutely a step behind the guys who are worth getting max contracts.  I know he's been injured, but that's a simple byproduct of how many games he's played, how many minutes he's played over the years; dude's been a warrior, and it's catching up to him.

I want the C's to take another run next season, but not if it means we can't start rebuilding until 2014.

EDIT: To a degree, I think Paul has been accepting of the mortality in his game.  We saw in the playoffs, especially against Cleveland, how he was keyed in on the defensive end, even as his scoring sputtered. 

But, defensive guys aren't worth $15M/per. 

The decline in Pierce's rebounding (dude used to be the best rebounding SF in the game), that as well I think you can attribute to Paul's losing a step.  He's never appeared uber-athletic, but he seems to have more trouble getting into the lane.  Used to get 10 free throws a game; now, more like six.

Again, some of that is him being slowed by injury...  but that's 100% expected, given the wear and tear on Paul's body. 

Can I blame O'bie for riding he and 'Toine into the ground? 

[ScoobyDoo]

If Doc comes back, you know Pierce is and his opting out is just a shell game to help Danny re-load.

1.  Maybe it will be helpful in us being able to sign at elast some guy at $4-5 million and then still be able to use our mid level to sign another decent vet.

2. Wouldn't suprise if after what happened in game seven, all these guys are willing to do whatever they have to, including taking some paycuts to let Danny reload, big time, adn try to raise #18. If Pierce gets a 3 year extension, which I expect, then he and KG will also have probably made an agreement to retire together. KG will sign another one year extension....

3. If Doc goes, I think Pierce will go, and KG will also be traded.

4. But what's going on "right now", is everyone plyaing team ball to do whatever is necessary for Danny to be able to reload in a major way.

They will all be back, but at the right contracts.

Pierce isn't going anywhere.

[slam]

Why couldn't we have just given him an extension at the maximum for 1 year.  That way, he's got some security, and his  $21 million at least just doubled (and he'd probably get close to what he would have with a 3 year deal, and maybe even a 4 year deal.  We're not getting under the cap under any scenario where he comes back, so what does it matter.  And most importantly, his contract would expire at the same time as KG's.

[Jon]

Why couldn't we have just given him an extension at the maximum for 1 year.  That way, he's got some security, and his  $21 million at least just doubled (and he'd probably get close to what he would have with a 3 year deal, and maybe even a 4 year deal.  We're not getting under the cap under any scenario where he comes back, so what does it matter.  And most importantly, his contract would expire at the same time as KG's.

I don't know.  That's what I would've liked to have happened. 

I guess he thinks he can get max bucks for 4 years from someone.  Time will tell. 

[the_Bird]

Why couldn't we have just given him an extension at the maximum for 1 year.  That way, he's got some security, and his  $21 million at least just doubled (and he'd probably get close to what he would have with a 3 year deal, and maybe even a 4 year deal.  We're not getting under the cap under any scenario where he comes back, so what does it matter.  And most importantly, his contract would expire at the same time as KG's.

I don't know.  That's what I would've liked to have happened. 

I guess he thinks he can get max bucks for 4 years from someone.  Time will tell. 

I wouldn't discount luxury tax concerns.  Ownership has proven that they are willing to pay for a winner...  but we're kind of in a weird transition right now.  If Pierce signs a 3/$50M deal, it'll save ownership some luxury tax dollars next year versus if Pierce just received a one-year, $20M extension.