Poll

What To Do With Isaiah Thomas?

Keep Him (Just Pay Him Near Max/Max) - We NEED Him
26 (63.4%)
Trade Him Even If Not For Much (Don't Need Him And His Contract After 2018)
15 (36.6%)

Total Members Voted: 40

Author Topic: To The "Trade IT" Crowd. What Are We Trading Him FOR?  (Read 12382 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: To The "Trade IT" Crowd. What Are We Trading Him FOR?
« Reply #75 on: March 27, 2017, 08:42:51 AM »

Offline Jvalin

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3737
  • Tommy Points: 737
I wouldn't trade IT for just picks (he is a top-3 scorer and drafting means unproven players), but a package of Saric + a high pick would be a tempting option, besides the Myles Turner one.

However, I think that IT's being traded depends strongly on two factors:
1. The lottery. If we have a top-2 pick and so the option to select Fultz or Ball, the trade can be closer.
2. Play-off performance. If we get into the NBA finals, for example, with a very good IT, the pressure for not trading IT would be gigantic. Anyway, we know Ainge and he could get the sell-high route.
If we go all the way to the Finals, I bet the farm that IT signs the max and goes nowhere. The whole idea behind trading him is that he can't make us true contenders. If we do become true contenders with him leading the way, why on earth would we trade him?

Having said that, I don't believe we are going to the Finals this year (or the year after that for that matter) :(
This.  I'm not enamored with IT's game but I'm not blind to the fact he's having a phenomenal year scoring.  I have no qualms with trading him for someone better --> better PG that is capable scorer/better passer/better defender.  I don't believe we will be contenders if he's our best player and I'm concerned his ego has grown where he cannot/will not play second fiddle to someone else.

Having said that, if the C's get to the ECF against Cleveland and make a series of it or better yet get to the finals, I'd happily reconsider my attitude towards IT and trading him vs signing him to a max deal.  I don't like signing a less-than-complete player to a deal of that high cost but if he shows he can put this team on his back and carry it through the playoffs then he is indeed the type of player you pay that kind of money to.
It's not just that. IT gives us 30 points and 6 assists per game. In order for him to score 30 points he has to take 20 shots per game. If we sign a second star via the free agency, it's only logical to assume that IT would take less shots (let's say 16-17 shots). If we had a legit big 3 he would take even less than that (let's say 12-13). Would you play him 35 minutes per game in order for him to take 12 shots and give us a few assists? Because that's pretty much everything he does. He is a score-first point guard, his defense is abysmal and he can't rebound the ball.

In other words, IT has to be the go-to guy otherwise he won't be a net positive any more. Problem is, with IT as our go-to guy we ll never win a championship. It's a vicious cycle. You can't win with him leading the way, you can't win with him as a 2nd-3rd option either. That's the number one reason I want him traded.

Re: To The "Trade IT" Crowd. What Are We Trading Him FOR?
« Reply #76 on: March 27, 2017, 09:55:53 AM »

Offline jr_3421

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 861
  • Tommy Points: 81
I don't think there's much of a market for IT so I think if you're going to trade for him, it's going to be for a flawed young player that you think can develop. I think Aaron Gordon would fit this bill. I'm not saying I would do this trade, just saying this is the type of trade you would have to make.
"In the 4th quarter I'm whole different player"

-Paul Pierce

Re: To The "Trade IT" Crowd. What Are We Trading Him FOR?
« Reply #77 on: March 27, 2017, 11:11:22 AM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31869
  • Tommy Points: 10047
I wouldn't trade IT for just picks (he is a top-3 scorer and drafting means unproven players), but a package of Saric + a high pick would be a tempting option, besides the Myles Turner one.

However, I think that IT's being traded depends strongly on two factors:
1. The lottery. If we have a top-2 pick and so the option to select Fultz or Ball, the trade can be closer.
2. Play-off performance. If we get into the NBA finals, for example, with a very good IT, the pressure for not trading IT would be gigantic. Anyway, we know Ainge and he could get the sell-high route.
If we go all the way to the Finals, I bet the farm that IT signs the max and goes nowhere. The whole idea behind trading him is that he can't make us true contenders. If we do become true contenders with him leading the way, why on earth would we trade him?

Having said that, I don't believe we are going to the Finals this year (or the year after that for that matter) :(
This.  I'm not enamored with IT's game but I'm not blind to the fact he's having a phenomenal year scoring.  I have no qualms with trading him for someone better --> better PG that is capable scorer/better passer/better defender.  I don't believe we will be contenders if he's our best player and I'm concerned his ego has grown where he cannot/will not play second fiddle to someone else.

Having said that, if the C's get to the ECF against Cleveland and make a series of it or better yet get to the finals, I'd happily reconsider my attitude towards IT and trading him vs signing him to a max deal.  I don't like signing a less-than-complete player to a deal of that high cost but if he shows he can put this team on his back and carry it through the playoffs then he is indeed the type of player you pay that kind of money to.
It's not just that. IT gives us 30 points and 6 assists per game. In order for him to score 30 points he has to take 20 shots per game. If we sign a second star via the free agency, it's only logical to assume that IT would take less shots (let's say 16-17 shots). If we had a legit big 3 he would take even less than that (let's say 12-13). Would you play him 35 minutes per game in order for him to take 12 shots and give us a few assists? Because that's pretty much everything he does. He is a score-first point guard, his defense is abysmal and he can't rebound the ball.

In other words, IT has to be the go-to guy otherwise he won't be a net positive any more. Problem is, with IT as our go-to guy we ll never win a championship. It's a vicious cycle. You can't win with him leading the way, you can't win with him as a 2nd-3rd option either. That's the number one reason I want him traded.
I don't disagree with most of what you're saying.  the one provision I'm throwing in is that I want to see what happens this year in the playoffs before going full bore on the trade-IT train.  If this team can make it to the ECF and make that a competitive series, it will mean something was done to prevent other teams from shutting down IT's offense as well as something being done about IT's defense to either improve the defensive schemes to make him less of a liability OR his D miraculously improves where he's not a liability.  depending on what steps were taken, we should be able to make a better determination if it's something that shows IT is someone to continue building with or someone who's limiting how far this team can go. 

Last night's game is a prime example of Brad changing the defensive scheme at the end of a close game to make IT less of a defensive liability.  Sadly, this scheme was to take IT completely off the floor in an offense/defense substitution pattern.  This is what I suspect we'll be seeing in the playoffs for close games because the past 2 years in the playoffs the opposing coaches were smart enough to put their PGs in the post against IT and shoot or pass right over him.  IT's defensive issues are not due to a lack of effort but due to his size.  Effort can be overcome by applying more effort.  Height is something IT cannot apply more of no matter how much he may try.

I don't like score-first PG's as a rule.  never have.  to me it's what a PG isn't supposed to be.  competent scorers, absolutely, but not the primary scorer.  unfortunately, this team as constructed doesn't have anyone that can assume that scoring workload. 

Re: To The "Trade IT" Crowd. What Are We Trading Him FOR?
« Reply #78 on: March 27, 2017, 11:16:23 AM »

Offline CoachBo

  • NCE
  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6069
  • Tommy Points: 336
I wouldn't trade IT for just picks (he is a top-3 scorer and drafting means unproven players), but a package of Saric + a high pick would be a tempting option, besides the Myles Turner one.

However, I think that IT's being traded depends strongly on two factors:
1. The lottery. If we have a top-2 pick and so the option to select Fultz or Ball, the trade can be closer.
2. Play-off performance. If we get into the NBA finals, for example, with a very good IT, the pressure for not trading IT would be gigantic. Anyway, we know Ainge and he could get the sell-high route.
If we go all the way to the Finals, I bet the farm that IT signs the max and goes nowhere. The whole idea behind trading him is that he can't make us true contenders. If we do become true contenders with him leading the way, why on earth would we trade him?

Having said that, I don't believe we are going to the Finals this year (or the year after that for that matter) :(
This.  I'm not enamored with IT's game but I'm not blind to the fact he's having a phenomenal year scoring.  I have no qualms with trading him for someone better --> better PG that is capable scorer/better passer/better defender.  I don't believe we will be contenders if he's our best player and I'm concerned his ego has grown where he cannot/will not play second fiddle to someone else.

Having said that, if the C's get to the ECF against Cleveland and make a series of it or better yet get to the finals, I'd happily reconsider my attitude towards IT and trading him vs signing him to a max deal. I don't like signing a less-than-complete player to a deal of that high cost but if he shows he can put this team on his back and carry it through the playoffs then he is indeed the type of player you pay that kind of money to.
It's not just that. IT gives us 30 points and 6 assists per game. In order for him to score 30 points he has to take 20 shots per game. If we sign a second star via the free agency, it's only logical to assume that IT would take less shots (let's say 16-17 shots). If we had a legit big 3 he would take even less than that (let's say 12-13). Would you play him 35 minutes per game in order for him to take 12 shots and give us a few assists? Because that's pretty much everything he does. He is a score-first point guard, his defense is abysmal and he can't rebound the ball.

In other words, IT has to be the go-to guy otherwise he won't be a net positive any more. Problem is, with IT as our go-to guy we ll never win a championship. It's a vicious cycle. You can't win with him leading the way, you can't win with him as a 2nd-3rd option either. That's the number one reason I want him traded.
I don't disagree with most of what you're saying.  the one provision I'm throwing in is that I want to see what happens this year in the playoffs before going full bore on the trade-IT train.  If this team can make it to the ECF and make that a competitive series, it will mean something was done about IT's defense to either improve the defensive schemes to make him less of a liability OR his D miraculously improves where he's not a liability.  depending on what steps were taken, we should be able to make a better determination if it's something that shows IT is someone to continue building with or someone who's limiting how far this team can go. 

Last night's game is a prime example of Brad changing the defensive scheme at the end of a close game to make IT less of a defensive liability.  Sadly, this scheme was to take IT completely off the floor in an offense/defense substitution pattern.  This is what I suspect we'll be seeing in the playoffs for close games because the past 2 years in the playoffs the opposing coaches were smart enough to put their PGs in the post against IT and shoot or pass right over him.  IT's defensive issues are not due to a lack of effort but due to his size.  Effort can be overcome by applying more effort.  Height is something IT cannot apply more of no matter how much he may try.

I don't like score-first PG's as a rule.  never have.  to me it's what a PG isn't supposed to be.  competent scorers, absolutely, but not the primary scorer.  unfortunately, this team as constructed doesn't have anyone that can assume that scoring workload.

The idea that Thomas and Thomas alone, let alone his warts, will determine whether we make the ECF is one of the more absurd things I've read recently on this board - in an almost-daily fusillade of absurd things.

I'd be more worried about wing defense and rebounding myself, along with the ever-present injury problems of 'Ol Aches and Pains, Avery Bradley, and our buddy Horford.
Coined the CelticsBlog term, "Euromistake."

Re: To The "Trade IT" Crowd. What Are We Trading Him FOR?
« Reply #79 on: March 27, 2017, 11:38:20 AM »

Offline RockinRyA

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5572
  • Tommy Points: 699
I wouldn't trade IT for just picks (he is a top-3 scorer and drafting means unproven players), but a package of Saric + a high pick would be a tempting option, besides the Myles Turner one.

However, I think that IT's being traded depends strongly on two factors:
1. The lottery. If we have a top-2 pick and so the option to select Fultz or Ball, the trade can be closer.
2. Play-off performance. If we get into the NBA finals, for example, with a very good IT, the pressure for not trading IT would be gigantic. Anyway, we know Ainge and he could get the sell-high route.
If we go all the way to the Finals, I bet the farm that IT signs the max and goes nowhere. The whole idea behind trading him is that he can't make us true contenders. If we do become true contenders with him leading the way, why on earth would we trade him?

Having said that, I don't believe we are going to the Finals this year (or the year after that for that matter) :(
This.  I'm not enamored with IT's game but I'm not blind to the fact he's having a phenomenal year scoring.  I have no qualms with trading him for someone better --> better PG that is capable scorer/better passer/better defender.  I don't believe we will be contenders if he's our best player and I'm concerned his ego has grown where he cannot/will not play second fiddle to someone else.

Having said that, if the C's get to the ECF against Cleveland and make a series of it or better yet get to the finals, I'd happily reconsider my attitude towards IT and trading him vs signing him to a max deal.  I don't like signing a less-than-complete player to a deal of that high cost but if he shows he can put this team on his back and carry it through the playoffs then he is indeed the type of player you pay that kind of money to.
It's not just that. IT gives us 30 points and 6 assists per game. In order for him to score 30 points he has to take 20 shots per game. If we sign a second star via the free agency, it's only logical to assume that IT would take less shots (let's say 16-17 shots). If we had a legit big 3 he would take even less than that (let's say 12-13). Would you play him 35 minutes per game in order for him to take 12 shots and give us a few assists? Because that's pretty much everything he does. He is a score-first point guard, his defense is abysmal and he can't rebound the ball.

In other words, IT has to be the go-to guy otherwise he won't be a net positive any more. Problem is, with IT as our go-to guy we ll never win a championship. It's a vicious cycle. You can't win with him leading the way, you can't win with him as a 2nd-3rd option either. That's the number one reason I want him traded.

If we sign two other stars, most of their shots wont come from Thomas touches, but from guys like Smart, Crowder, Amir etc. Thomas would drop by around 6 shots at the most, most likely around 4.

Curry became a secondary option after acquiring Durant, yet his shot attempts only dropped by 2, factoring in Durant's absence isnt enough to lower that significantly. Durant's attempts were reduced by 3. This is arguably the two best offensive players of the league mind you. The players we would be able to add are nowhere near the scoring capability of Kevin Durant. Certainly none of them is a better scorer than Thomas. So unless the guys coming here would be Russel Westbrook, James Harden, Kawhi Leonard and Lebron James, I dont think Thomas tocuhes would lower significantly.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2017, 11:46:07 AM by RockinRyA »

Re: To The "Trade IT" Crowd. What Are We Trading Him FOR?
« Reply #80 on: March 27, 2017, 11:58:25 AM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31869
  • Tommy Points: 10047
I wouldn't trade IT for just picks (he is a top-3 scorer and drafting means unproven players), but a package of Saric + a high pick would be a tempting option, besides the Myles Turner one.

However, I think that IT's being traded depends strongly on two factors:
1. The lottery. If we have a top-2 pick and so the option to select Fultz or Ball, the trade can be closer.
2. Play-off performance. If we get into the NBA finals, for example, with a very good IT, the pressure for not trading IT would be gigantic. Anyway, we know Ainge and he could get the sell-high route.
If we go all the way to the Finals, I bet the farm that IT signs the max and goes nowhere. The whole idea behind trading him is that he can't make us true contenders. If we do become true contenders with him leading the way, why on earth would we trade him?

Having said that, I don't believe we are going to the Finals this year (or the year after that for that matter) :(
This.  I'm not enamored with IT's game but I'm not blind to the fact he's having a phenomenal year scoring.  I have no qualms with trading him for someone better --> better PG that is capable scorer/better passer/better defender.  I don't believe we will be contenders if he's our best player and I'm concerned his ego has grown where he cannot/will not play second fiddle to someone else.

Having said that, if the C's get to the ECF against Cleveland and make a series of it or better yet get to the finals, I'd happily reconsider my attitude towards IT and trading him vs signing him to a max deal. I don't like signing a less-than-complete player to a deal of that high cost but if he shows he can put this team on his back and carry it through the playoffs then he is indeed the type of player you pay that kind of money to.
It's not just that. IT gives us 30 points and 6 assists per game. In order for him to score 30 points he has to take 20 shots per game. If we sign a second star via the free agency, it's only logical to assume that IT would take less shots (let's say 16-17 shots). If we had a legit big 3 he would take even less than that (let's say 12-13). Would you play him 35 minutes per game in order for him to take 12 shots and give us a few assists? Because that's pretty much everything he does. He is a score-first point guard, his defense is abysmal and he can't rebound the ball.

In other words, IT has to be the go-to guy otherwise he won't be a net positive any more. Problem is, with IT as our go-to guy we ll never win a championship. It's a vicious cycle. You can't win with him leading the way, you can't win with him as a 2nd-3rd option either. That's the number one reason I want him traded.
I don't disagree with most of what you're saying.  the one provision I'm throwing in is that I want to see what happens this year in the playoffs before going full bore on the trade-IT train.  If this team can make it to the ECF and make that a competitive series, it will mean something was done about IT's defense to either improve the defensive schemes to make him less of a liability OR his D miraculously improves where he's not a liability.  depending on what steps were taken, we should be able to make a better determination if it's something that shows IT is someone to continue building with or someone who's limiting how far this team can go. 

Last night's game is a prime example of Brad changing the defensive scheme at the end of a close game to make IT less of a defensive liability.  Sadly, this scheme was to take IT completely off the floor in an offense/defense substitution pattern.  This is what I suspect we'll be seeing in the playoffs for close games because the past 2 years in the playoffs the opposing coaches were smart enough to put their PGs in the post against IT and shoot or pass right over him.  IT's defensive issues are not due to a lack of effort but due to his size.  Effort can be overcome by applying more effort.  Height is something IT cannot apply more of no matter how much he may try.

I don't like score-first PG's as a rule.  never have.  to me it's what a PG isn't supposed to be.  competent scorers, absolutely, but not the primary scorer.  unfortunately, this team as constructed doesn't have anyone that can assume that scoring workload.

The idea that Thomas and Thomas alone, let alone his warts, will determine whether we make the ECF is one of the more absurd things I've read recently on this board - in an almost-daily fusillade of absurd things.

I'd be more worried about wing defense and rebounding myself, along with the ever-present injury problems of 'Ol Aches and Pains, Avery Bradley, and our buddy Horford.
as usual you chime in with snark and miss the point.  The point is in reference to whether he's someone to build with and give a max deal to or trade because his limitations cannot be overcome.

if all you're worried about is wing defense (wing defense is actually pretty solid this year) and rebounding (who isn't) you haven't been paying attention to our performance in the playoffs the past 2 years when other teams shut down the offense by focussing on IT and pushing other players to step up (which they didn't) as well as taking IT out of the game by running their offense through IT's man making him a liability on the floor.  My point is that we have to see if something's changed in the schemes this year to counteract what's happened the past 2 years.

Re: To The "Trade IT" Crowd. What Are We Trading Him FOR?
« Reply #81 on: March 27, 2017, 12:11:59 PM »

Offline Darío SpanishFan

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 981
  • Tommy Points: 141
The idea that Thomas and Thomas alone, let alone his warts, will determine whether we make the ECF is one of the more absurd things I've read recently on this board - in an almost-daily fusillade of absurd things.

When you point your finger 'cause your plan fell through
You got three more fingers pointing back at you

Solid Rock (Dire Straits)

Re: To The "Trade IT" Crowd. What Are We Trading Him FOR?
« Reply #82 on: March 27, 2017, 12:18:55 PM »

Offline CoachBo

  • NCE
  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6069
  • Tommy Points: 336
I wouldn't trade IT for just picks (he is a top-3 scorer and drafting means unproven players), but a package of Saric + a high pick would be a tempting option, besides the Myles Turner one.

However, I think that IT's being traded depends strongly on two factors:
1. The lottery. If we have a top-2 pick and so the option to select Fultz or Ball, the trade can be closer.
2. Play-off performance. If we get into the NBA finals, for example, with a very good IT, the pressure for not trading IT would be gigantic. Anyway, we know Ainge and he could get the sell-high route.
If we go all the way to the Finals, I bet the farm that IT signs the max and goes nowhere. The whole idea behind trading him is that he can't make us true contenders. If we do become true contenders with him leading the way, why on earth would we trade him?

Having said that, I don't believe we are going to the Finals this year (or the year after that for that matter) :(
This.  I'm not enamored with IT's game but I'm not blind to the fact he's having a phenomenal year scoring.  I have no qualms with trading him for someone better --> better PG that is capable scorer/better passer/better defender.  I don't believe we will be contenders if he's our best player and I'm concerned his ego has grown where he cannot/will not play second fiddle to someone else.

Having said that, if the C's get to the ECF against Cleveland and make a series of it or better yet get to the finals, I'd happily reconsider my attitude towards IT and trading him vs signing him to a max deal. I don't like signing a less-than-complete player to a deal of that high cost but if he shows he can put this team on his back and carry it through the playoffs then he is indeed the type of player you pay that kind of money to.
It's not just that. IT gives us 30 points and 6 assists per game. In order for him to score 30 points he has to take 20 shots per game. If we sign a second star via the free agency, it's only logical to assume that IT would take less shots (let's say 16-17 shots). If we had a legit big 3 he would take even less than that (let's say 12-13). Would you play him 35 minutes per game in order for him to take 12 shots and give us a few assists? Because that's pretty much everything he does. He is a score-first point guard, his defense is abysmal and he can't rebound the ball.

In other words, IT has to be the go-to guy otherwise he won't be a net positive any more. Problem is, with IT as our go-to guy we ll never win a championship. It's a vicious cycle. You can't win with him leading the way, you can't win with him as a 2nd-3rd option either. That's the number one reason I want him traded.
I don't disagree with most of what you're saying.  the one provision I'm throwing in is that I want to see what happens this year in the playoffs before going full bore on the trade-IT train.  If this team can make it to the ECF and make that a competitive series, it will mean something was done about IT's defense to either improve the defensive schemes to make him less of a liability OR his D miraculously improves where he's not a liability.  depending on what steps were taken, we should be able to make a better determination if it's something that shows IT is someone to continue building with or someone who's limiting how far this team can go. 

Last night's game is a prime example of Brad changing the defensive scheme at the end of a close game to make IT less of a defensive liability.  Sadly, this scheme was to take IT completely off the floor in an offense/defense substitution pattern.  This is what I suspect we'll be seeing in the playoffs for close games because the past 2 years in the playoffs the opposing coaches were smart enough to put their PGs in the post against IT and shoot or pass right over him.  IT's defensive issues are not due to a lack of effort but due to his size.  Effort can be overcome by applying more effort.  Height is something IT cannot apply more of no matter how much he may try.

I don't like score-first PG's as a rule.  never have.  to me it's what a PG isn't supposed to be.  competent scorers, absolutely, but not the primary scorer.  unfortunately, this team as constructed doesn't have anyone that can assume that scoring workload.

The idea that Thomas and Thomas alone, let alone his warts, will determine whether we make the ECF is one of the more absurd things I've read recently on this board - in an almost-daily fusillade of absurd things.

I'd be more worried about wing defense and rebounding myself, along with the ever-present injury problems of 'Ol Aches and Pains, Avery Bradley, and our buddy Horford.
as usual you chime in with snark and miss the point.  The point is in reference to whether he's someone to build with and give a max deal to or trade because his limitations cannot be overcome.

if all you're worried about is wing defense (wing defense is actually pretty solid this year) and rebounding (who isn't) you haven't been paying attention to our performance in the playoffs the past 2 years when other teams shut down the offense by focussing on IT and pushing other players to step up (which they didn't) as well as taking IT out of the game by running their offense through IT's man making him a liability on the floor.  My point is that we have to see if something's changed in the schemes this year to counteract what's happened the past 2 years.

Devin Booker says hello.

It's pretty easy to blame everything on Thomas - and avoid binkys like Smart, Crowder, The Legend of Jaylen Brown, etc. - as this board reminds me every day. Reminds me of someone on the East Coast who's in the news every day.

Thomas is the best player on this squad - and it isn't close. Once you realize that there isn't a player on this roster without "limitations," you'll get the point. Players you love have zero to do with anything.

He should be maxed, and he will be maxed. Anything less would be malfeasance on the part of Celtics management.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2017, 12:24:54 PM by CoachBo »
Coined the CelticsBlog term, "Euromistake."

Re: To The "Trade IT" Crowd. What Are We Trading Him FOR?
« Reply #83 on: March 27, 2017, 12:28:12 PM »

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182
I'm not worried about IT getting his, even in the playoffs.  The spacing on the floor is much better this year so long as Bradley, Crowder, and Horford are healthy.

My concerns would be:

(a) Preventing bigger guards from roasting us alive.  Derozan, Lowry, Dragic, Waiters, TJ, Wall, Beal ... there are plenty of guys in the East that can give this team problems.

(b) Getting beasted on the boards.  While the Cavs, Raps, and Wizards aren't great rebounding teams by the overall numbers, they have players that can give the Celts problems.  Gortat, Thompson, Valanciunas, etc, not to mention bigger wings (Bron, Tucker, Carroll, Porter, Oubre, etc).  Then there are the teams lower in the bracket -- the Bucks are huge, the Hawks have Dwight, and the Heat have Whiteside.
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain

Re: To The "Trade IT" Crowd. What Are We Trading Him FOR?
« Reply #84 on: March 27, 2017, 12:35:09 PM »

Offline Big333223

  • NCE
  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7489
  • Tommy Points: 741
It's pretty easy to blame everything on Thomas - and avoid binkys like Smart, Crowder, The Legend of Jaylen Brown, etc. - as this board reminds me every day. Reminds me of someone on the East Coast who's in the news every day.

Thomas is the best player on this squad - and it isn't close. Once you realize that there isn't a player on this roster without "limitations," you'll get the point. Players you love have zero to do with anything.

He should be maxed, and he will be maxed. Anything less would be malfeasance on the part of Celtics management.
I'm going to keep harping on 3 things:

1. The cap is leveling off and fewer teams are going to have max cap room when IT is a FA.
2. All of the reservations that C's fans have about Thomas (size, age, etc.) are the same reservations other GM's are going to have about him when it comes time to hand out checks.
3. Point Guard is the deepest position in the league by far and there are likely 5 PG's going in the top 10 of this summer's draft. What team is going to need a PG let alone be willing to give Isaiah $40 million in year 4?

I remain unconvinced that IT is a lock to get a max deal, even as he's made his way into the MVP conversation this year.
1957, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1968, 1969, 1974, 1976, 1981, 1984, 1986, 2008

Re: To The "Trade IT" Crowd. What Are We Trading Him FOR?
« Reply #85 on: March 27, 2017, 12:35:14 PM »

Offline CoachBo

  • NCE
  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6069
  • Tommy Points: 336
I'm not worried about IT getting his, even in the playoffs.  The spacing on the floor is much better this year so long as Bradley, Crowder, and Horford are healthy.

My concerns would be:

(a) Preventing bigger guards from roasting us alive.  Derozan, Lowry, Dragic, Waiters, TJ, Wall, Beal ... there are plenty of guys in the East that can give this team problems.

(b) Getting beasted on the boards.  While the Cavs, Raps, and Wizards aren't great rebounding teams by the overall numbers, they have players that can give the Celts problems.  Gortat, Thompson, Valanciunas, etc, not to mention bigger wings (Bron, Tucker, Carroll, Porter, Oubre, etc).  Then there are the teams lower in the bracket -- the Bucks are huge, the Hawks have Dwight, and the Heat have Whiteside.

Excellent take. TP.
Coined the CelticsBlog term, "Euromistake."

Re: To The "Trade IT" Crowd. What Are We Trading Him FOR?
« Reply #86 on: March 27, 2017, 12:37:41 PM »

Offline CoachBo

  • NCE
  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6069
  • Tommy Points: 336
It's pretty easy to blame everything on Thomas - and avoid binkys like Smart, Crowder, The Legend of Jaylen Brown, etc. - as this board reminds me every day. Reminds me of someone on the East Coast who's in the news every day.

Thomas is the best player on this squad - and it isn't close. Once you realize that there isn't a player on this roster without "limitations," you'll get the point. Players you love have zero to do with anything.

He should be maxed, and he will be maxed. Anything less would be malfeasance on the part of Celtics management.
I'm going to keep harping on 3 things:

1. The cap is leveling off and fewer teams are going to have max cap room when IT is a FA.
2. All of the reservations that C's fans have about Thomas (size, age, etc.) are the same reservations other GM's are going to have about him when it comes time to hand out checks.
3. Point Guard is the deepest position in the league by far and there are likely 5 PG's going in the top 10 of this summer's draft. What team is going to need a PG let alone be willing to give Isaiah $40 million in year 4?

I remain unconvinced that IT is a lock to get a max deal, even as he's made his way into the MVP conversation this year.

If he'll sign a friendly deal, certainly you do that.

However, you don't EVER walk away from a transcendant scorer just because you think his size makes it impossible for him to guard.

As we saw the other night, there are plenty of people on this roster who struggle to guard.

They just happen to be a particular poster's favorite player, so they escape the vitriol saved for the only legitimate scorer we have on this roster.

Not a credible argument. Not even close.
Coined the CelticsBlog term, "Euromistake."

Re: To The "Trade IT" Crowd. What Are We Trading Him FOR?
« Reply #87 on: March 27, 2017, 12:47:11 PM »

Offline chilidawg

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2009
  • Tommy Points: 261
It's pretty easy to blame everything on Thomas - and avoid binkys like Smart, Crowder, The Legend of Jaylen Brown, etc. - as this board reminds me every day. Reminds me of someone on the East Coast who's in the news every day.

Thomas is the best player on this squad - and it isn't close. Once you realize that there isn't a player on this roster without "limitations," you'll get the point. Players you love have zero to do with anything.

He should be maxed, and he will be maxed. Anything less would be malfeasance on the part of Celtics management.
I'm going to keep harping on 3 things:

1. The cap is leveling off and fewer teams are going to have max cap room when IT is a FA.
2. All of the reservations that C's fans have about Thomas (size, age, etc.) are the same reservations other GM's are going to have about him when it comes time to hand out checks.
3. Point Guard is the deepest position in the league by far and there are likely 5 PG's going in the top 10 of this summer's draft. What team is going to need a PG let alone be willing to give Isaiah $40 million in year 4?

I remain unconvinced that IT is a lock to get a max deal, even as he's made his way into the MVP conversation this year.

If he'll sign a friendly deal, certainly you do that.

However, you don't EVER walk away from a transcendant scorer just because you think his size makes it impossible for him to guard.

As we saw the other night, there are plenty of people on this roster who struggle to guard.

They just happen to be a particular poster's favorite player, so they escape the vitriol saved for the only legitimate scorer we have on this roster.

Not a credible argument. Not even close.

You apparently have missed the KO, Smart, and Horford threads.  Lots of "vitriol" for different players.  I'd say this thread is mild in comparison to the Olynyk threads.

Re: To The "Trade IT" Crowd. What Are We Trading Him FOR?
« Reply #88 on: March 27, 2017, 01:05:26 PM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31869
  • Tommy Points: 10047
I wouldn't trade IT for just picks (he is a top-3 scorer and drafting means unproven players), but a package of Saric + a high pick would be a tempting option, besides the Myles Turner one.

However, I think that IT's being traded depends strongly on two factors:
1. The lottery. If we have a top-2 pick and so the option to select Fultz or Ball, the trade can be closer.
2. Play-off performance. If we get into the NBA finals, for example, with a very good IT, the pressure for not trading IT would be gigantic. Anyway, we know Ainge and he could get the sell-high route.
If we go all the way to the Finals, I bet the farm that IT signs the max and goes nowhere. The whole idea behind trading him is that he can't make us true contenders. If we do become true contenders with him leading the way, why on earth would we trade him?

Having said that, I don't believe we are going to the Finals this year (or the year after that for that matter) :(
This.  I'm not enamored with IT's game but I'm not blind to the fact he's having a phenomenal year scoring.  I have no qualms with trading him for someone better --> better PG that is capable scorer/better passer/better defender.  I don't believe we will be contenders if he's our best player and I'm concerned his ego has grown where he cannot/will not play second fiddle to someone else.

Having said that, if the C's get to the ECF against Cleveland and make a series of it or better yet get to the finals, I'd happily reconsider my attitude towards IT and trading him vs signing him to a max deal. I don't like signing a less-than-complete player to a deal of that high cost but if he shows he can put this team on his back and carry it through the playoffs then he is indeed the type of player you pay that kind of money to.
It's not just that. IT gives us 30 points and 6 assists per game. In order for him to score 30 points he has to take 20 shots per game. If we sign a second star via the free agency, it's only logical to assume that IT would take less shots (let's say 16-17 shots). If we had a legit big 3 he would take even less than that (let's say 12-13). Would you play him 35 minutes per game in order for him to take 12 shots and give us a few assists? Because that's pretty much everything he does. He is a score-first point guard, his defense is abysmal and he can't rebound the ball.

In other words, IT has to be the go-to guy otherwise he won't be a net positive any more. Problem is, with IT as our go-to guy we ll never win a championship. It's a vicious cycle. You can't win with him leading the way, you can't win with him as a 2nd-3rd option either. That's the number one reason I want him traded.
I don't disagree with most of what you're saying.  the one provision I'm throwing in is that I want to see what happens this year in the playoffs before going full bore on the trade-IT train.  If this team can make it to the ECF and make that a competitive series, it will mean something was done about IT's defense to either improve the defensive schemes to make him less of a liability OR his D miraculously improves where he's not a liability.  depending on what steps were taken, we should be able to make a better determination if it's something that shows IT is someone to continue building with or someone who's limiting how far this team can go. 

Last night's game is a prime example of Brad changing the defensive scheme at the end of a close game to make IT less of a defensive liability.  Sadly, this scheme was to take IT completely off the floor in an offense/defense substitution pattern.  This is what I suspect we'll be seeing in the playoffs for close games because the past 2 years in the playoffs the opposing coaches were smart enough to put their PGs in the post against IT and shoot or pass right over him.  IT's defensive issues are not due to a lack of effort but due to his size.  Effort can be overcome by applying more effort.  Height is something IT cannot apply more of no matter how much he may try.

I don't like score-first PG's as a rule.  never have.  to me it's what a PG isn't supposed to be.  competent scorers, absolutely, but not the primary scorer.  unfortunately, this team as constructed doesn't have anyone that can assume that scoring workload.

The idea that Thomas and Thomas alone, let alone his warts, will determine whether we make the ECF is one of the more absurd things I've read recently on this board - in an almost-daily fusillade of absurd things.

I'd be more worried about wing defense and rebounding myself, along with the ever-present injury problems of 'Ol Aches and Pains, Avery Bradley, and our buddy Horford.
as usual you chime in with snark and miss the point.  The point is in reference to whether he's someone to build with and give a max deal to or trade because his limitations cannot be overcome.

if all you're worried about is wing defense (wing defense is actually pretty solid this year) and rebounding (who isn't) you haven't been paying attention to our performance in the playoffs the past 2 years when other teams shut down the offense by focussing on IT and pushing other players to step up (which they didn't) as well as taking IT out of the game by running their offense through IT's man making him a liability on the floor.  My point is that we have to see if something's changed in the schemes this year to counteract what's happened the past 2 years.

Devin Booker says hello.

It's pretty easy to blame everything on Thomas - and avoid binkys like Smart, Crowder, The Legend of Jaylen Brown, etc. - as this board reminds me every day. Reminds me of someone on the East Coast who's in the news every day.

Thomas is the best player on this squad - and it isn't close. Once you realize that there isn't a player on this roster without "limitations," you'll get the point. Players you love have zero to do with anything.

He should be maxed, and he will be maxed. Anything less would be malfeasance on the part of Celtics management.
missed the point again by trying to redirect to your favorite points of condescension. 

nothing in my post suggests anyone is a 'binky' or that other players don't have flaws.  The issue remains whether to trade IT for someone who's better or to keep him realizing that will likely require a max deal.  I've stated what my standard for a max deal would be.  let's see what happens in the playoffs.  I'd love nothing better than for him to show he's worth that kind of money.

Re: To The "Trade IT" Crowd. What Are We Trading Him FOR?
« Reply #89 on: March 27, 2017, 02:01:27 PM »

Offline cltc5

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7054
  • Tommy Points: 445
He'll get figured out and he'll get older.  Get what you can for him now