Really People... 1 Game And It's Already "Trade IT"???

[Vermont Green]

I think we should try to get someone like Monroe and make a run with IT, Horford, and Monroe (or whoever).  No need to trade IT.  i am not totally against it if it is a surprising good trade but I don't see it as very likely.

We aren't going to win a title with that team (assuming we add a Monroe type big) but we should win a round or two in the playoffs.  That is good business for the Celtics.  That could be our core team for 2016/17 and 2017/18.  It can be an entertaining run.  Along the way, if we get a shot at Paul George or some other big name, maybe we go all in.

At the end of 2018, assuming we haven't done an all in trade, we could still have Smart, Brown, Rozier, BKN-2017, Yabusele, Zizic, BKN-2018, and a few others.  We could trade Horford at that point for young players and start a reload.  That is not a bad position from which to start to rebuild.  Depending on how some picks work out, we could be a fringe playoff team.

[BitterJim]

Thomas over the course of a season is a great offensive player, but his size becomes a real problem in the playoffs, even offensively where he has had a precipitous drop in effectiveness during the playoffs.  When you couple that precipitous drop offensively with his already poor defense and he almost becomes a liability in the playoffs.  The only thing he has done well in the playoffs is get to the line.

First of all, we're talking about a 10 game sample here, so those playoff performances probably need to be taken with a grain of salt.

Also, I believe in both of those series, Isaiah was (a) dealing with an injury of some kind and (b) playing without much help on offense.


Even setting aside those issues, offensive players becoming less efficient / effective in the playoffs is hardly limited to IT.

Kyle Lowry, for example, struggled quite a bit in the playoffs last season, and in previous seasons.

Toronto fans aren't clamoring to move on from Kyle Lowry, are they?


Bottom line here, my aim is not to make Isaiah out to be a flawless player.  By no means.  But I think a lot of the time people have a much easier time seeing his flaws as a player because of his size.  And they tend to articulate their concerns about those flaws in a way that implies he could be easily replaced.

IT could not be easily replaced.  Let's be really clear about that.  I have some concerns about his longevity, and his ability to produce at the same level in the playoffs.

But what are our alternatives?

Surely the Celts have a better chance of competing at a high level in the future if they try to keep IT and add other talent, rather than trading IT simply because he's got flaws and hoping one of the younger guys takes his place.

My point is also that, by the same token, if IT were bigger, even if it didn't make one whit of difference in his effectiveness, he would be regarded as an NBA superstar who ought to be a fixture of the franchise for the foreseeable future.

of course numbers go down in the playoffs, you are playing better teams, my concern with IT is he took a pretty big shooting drop and he is already a terrible defensive player that the better teams abuse him even more.  IT can't take a huge fall offensively because he can't make up for it defensively.  That is the problem with IT in general.  And here's the thing, that 10 game sample was against Kyrie Irving and Jeff Teague.  We aren't exactly talking about superstar defenders.  Heck I think you might be nice if you called them both poor defenders, yet they significantly diminished IT's offensive output.  That is a real problem.

Kyrie wasn't usually covering IT, Shumpert was.  And against Teague his stats didn't really drop off at all, as I showed earlier.  His 3p% and assists dropped a bit, but that's not much of a surprise from a guy who was the #1 option on a team who's other top options (Sully, Crowder, and Bradley) were injured/hobbled, so Marcus "Can't Shoot" Smart, Kelly "Won't Shoot" Olynyk, and Evan "Can't Play Off The Ball" Turner were his best options (you could argue that Amir Johnson was one of his best offensive options, which is not a sentence that should exist).  Honestly, it's surprising that he kept his numbers where he did (he only really played poorly in game 5, though you could make an argument for game 2 as well)

[Smokeeye123]

My thing with IT is that if we aren't going to resign him (Which we CLEARLY are not) we should ship him to a team that would and get some assets in return.

[Ilikesports17]

My thing with IT is that if we aren't going to resign him (Which we CLEARLY are not) we should ship him to a team that would and get some assets in return.

I dont know why you are so confident we wont bring back IT.

[Tr1boy]

My thing with IT is that if we aren't going to resign him (Which we CLEARLY are not) we should ship him to a team that would and get some assets in return.

Its going to be an uncomfortable situation via trade deadline

Danny cant get anybody significant.... But gets offers for IT

[More Banners]

My thing with IT is that if we aren't going to resign him (Which we CLEARLY are not) we should ship him to a team that would and get some assets in return.

Makes sense since we're not going anywhere this season anyhow. I'd take rebounding help.

If we want to make a little push to his year I'd consider trading for a guy on an expiring deal, a Bogut or Milsap kinda player to test drive, and also see how the rest of the roster plays off of them.

[Donoghus]

Given his production, he is on a ridiculous reasonable contract through the end of next season.  Incredible bang for the buck.

Unless some godfather offer came to the table, I don't see why there's any necessity to move him this season. 

[GreenWarrior]

we're only going to go so far with IT.

[Tr1boy]

Boston Celtics point guard Isaiah Thomas (pulled groin) has ruled himself out of Friday night's matchup with the Toronto Raptors, but intends to travel on the ensuing road trip to Oklahoma City and San Antonio.

Lets see if yesterdays lineup was for real...

[PickNRoll]

Would you rather have IT or Kyrie?  Is it close?  That's the difference.

Honestly, with Kyrie's frequent injury concerns -- and considering that I just don't enjoy watching him play -- I wouldn't be particularly excited to trade IT for Kyrie.

I honestly don't think there's a huge difference in how valuable they are.  Kyrie seems to have a higher gear in the playoffs, but he gets to play next to LeBron, and IT has never had that luxury.

Until this year, Irving's best year was the year before Lebron arrived back in Cleveland.

Sure, but his team stunk and he never played in the playoffs until LeBron showed up.

How good would IT look in the playoffs if he played with Bron?

Probably better as he would get more open looks, but not nearly as good as Irving.  Irving is a better all around player than Thomas on both ends of the floor.

It's not close.  100% of NBA GM's would sign Kyrie to a max deal, no questions asked.  Remember what we gave up for IT? 

Kyrie is an A+, top-10(ish) player.  IT is a "B"/ fringe All-Star, maybe top 40 caliber, but his market value is much worse than that for reasons discussed in this thread.

[PickNRoll]

My thing with IT is that if we aren't going to resign him (Which we CLEARLY are not) we should ship him to a team that would and get some assets in return.

I dont know why you are so confident we wont bring back IT.

After next year, you've gotta replace or re-up Bradley, Jerebko, Amir, Zeller, Olynyk, James Young, and Gerald Green, with Smart and Mickey on the horizon.  I don't have a crystal ball, so who knows if any of these guys are still Celtics by then or what the cap looks like, but the picture is harder to solve if IT has a fat cap number.

You don't want to paint yourself into a corner a la Doc Rivers where you're forced to fill out your rotation with half of a mid-level exception.  And if you do, it better be for players like Chris Paul and DeAndre Jordan, not IT.

[green_bballers13]

I'm not sure how irrational it is to point out that he's not very good at defense.

John Wall, for instance, is 6'4, can get to the hoop, and is very good at defense.

People are irrationally quick to throw IT under the bus because of his size. 

If he were 6'3'' with literally the exact same stats and performance people would be clamoring for him to be an MVP candidate.  He'd be considered untouchable.

It's not wrong to criticize him for his defense, it's wrong to criticize him for his height.  The point is that a 6'3" Isaiah Thomas that was just as bad at defense would be regarded way better despite being the exact same player

I'm not so sure about that. Your hypothetical argument is that IT could be just as bad at D if he was 6'3. That doesn't seem germaine to the conversation, as I don't hear anyone complaining about his defensive effort. I think they are commenting on his inability to defend bigger guards effectively. Everyone knows its b/c he is 5'9.

If I was 6'3 instead of 5'10, I may have been a good high school player, instead of an undersized power forward. My coach didn't care that I wasn't tall enough. He cared that he had someone on the court that could defend other forwards 6'3 or taller....

You have to admit that there are players that are 6'3" that are just as bad, or worse, than IT on defense.  Guys like Lillard, Kyrie, and James Harden are just awful.  What I'm saying is that a 6'3" IT that was just as bad at defense (like the players mentioned previously, who are around that height and just as bad, if not worse, than IT on defense) would be criticized less even if he was just as good at O and D

Obviously, if IT were taller he could be better at defense, but that's not really relevant.  The point I'm making is that he is thought less of for his height outside of the effect it has on his defense.  If he were 6'3", but had the exact same struggles  on defense (still bad against bigger guards, still the weak link in the defense), he wouldn't be criticized as heavily as he is now

Do you have anyone in mind? I know that James Harden gets crushed for his defensive problems. He also is a top 5 scorer in the NBA. IT is a top 10 scorer right now.

[tstorey_97]

Ainge got Thomas for $8,000 in cash, $500 in NBA.com pro shop gift cards and a 2010 Corolla with 65,000 miles on it.

Those who take issue with our favorite Mormon, better watch out when speaking of this Brinks robbery grade steal. Thomas is going to, in turn, back up the same truck momentarily. This is the core of our debate.

Is IT worth $25M to the Celtics or more importantly, is Thomas a legit building block in salary cap land? His future salary PREVENTS Ainge from getting somebody else to go with the others who will raise the trophy.

So, Ainge gives Thomas the $25M. He is now our "offensive specialist." Ainge must, as he did a few years ago, build the rest of the line up around Mr. Thomas' shot making ability.

Will Ainge do it? Titles were won here with less production at the point. Is the "modern NBA" going to arrive at Causeway street with Thomas?

Now another thread I suppose. Who does Ainge trade him to? The Bulls? If a poster says "trade him" then back it up with a legit destination/fit.


 

[Tr1boy]

I'm not sure how irrational it is to point out that he's not very good at defense.

John Wall, for instance, is 6'4, can get to the hoop, and is very good at defense.

People are irrationally quick to throw IT under the bus because of his size. 

If he were 6'3'' with literally the exact same stats and performance people would be clamoring for him to be an MVP candidate.  He'd be considered untouchable.

It's not wrong to criticize him for his defense, it's wrong to criticize him for his height.  The point is that a 6'3" Isaiah Thomas that was just as bad at defense would be regarded way better despite being the exact same player

I'm not so sure about that. Your hypothetical argument is that IT could be just as bad at D if he was 6'3. That doesn't seem germaine to the conversation, as I don't hear anyone complaining about his defensive effort. I think they are commenting on his inability to defend bigger guards effectively. Everyone knows its b/c he is 5'9.

If I was 6'3 instead of 5'10, I may have been a good high school player, instead of an undersized power forward. My coach didn't care that I wasn't tall enough. He cared that he had someone on the court that could defend other forwards 6'3 or taller....

You have to admit that there are players that are 6'3" that are just as bad, or worse, than IT on defense.  Guys like Lillard, Kyrie, and James Harden are just awful.  What I'm saying is that a 6'3" IT that was just as bad at defense (like the players mentioned previously, who are around that height and just as bad, if not worse, than IT on defense) would be criticized less even if he was just as good at O and D

Obviously, if IT were taller he could be better at defense, but that's not really relevant.  The point I'm making is that he is thought less of for his height outside of the effect it has on his defense.  If he were 6'3", but had the exact same struggles  on defense (still bad against bigger guards, still the weak link in the defense), he wouldn't be criticized as heavily as he is now

Do you have anyone in mind? I know that James Harden gets crushed for his defensive problems. He also is a top 5 scorer in the NBA. IT is a top 10 scorer right now.

IT is not a top 10 scorer considering his efficiency and TSP

Lebron
Irving
Curry
Durant
Thompson
RW
Harden
Anthony davis
Cousins
Derozan
Butler
Wall
Leonard

for example are all better

[GratefulCs]

Am i correct in assuming that those of us who are okay with potentially trading IT are not "running him out of town"?

But rather, are open to he idea of trading IT if something reasonable comes along.


What if Dallas offers this year's pick and next years (but with a light protection on next year's pick)?

Would you do it? Marc cuban may be crazy enough to do it

I wouldn't turn that down