What's the lowest pick you ​would accept for IT

[Jvalin]

Facts:

He is not a top 10 player.
He is barely a top 10 PG in a league rich with them.
Our incoming franchise player plays his position.

Those are stark facts that lead to an obvious conclusion.

He just combined scoring + effiency in a way that only six players in the history of the NBA have. All are current of future HOFers. The only guard to ever score as many points with as high a TS% is Steph Curry.

So what?  The regular season really doesn't matter.  In the playoffs against better teams, IT's offense becomes less effective and his defense becomes more of a liability.  The question is can we build a true contender with IT and Horford using nearly 60% of cap.  I don't think just adding Hayward, George or Butler would get us there.  I think we'd need to add one of them and Cousins (with all the risks involved) to get us there.  If Ainge can't see a path for us to be a contender with IT, he needs to trade IT or just let him walk after next season.

It's not just that. IT gives us 29 points and 6 assists per game. In order for him to score 29 points he has to take 19.5 shots per game. If we sign a second star via free agency, it's only logical to assume that IT will be taking less shots (let's say 16-17 shots). If we had a legit big 3 he would be taking even less than that (let's say 13-14). Would you play him 34-35 minutes per game in order for him to take 13 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.

[Ilikesports17]

Trading IT means no Hayward. It's that black and white.

Not sure why it means this. If Hayward is coming here because of Stevens he's still coming here because of Stevens.

I think trading Thomas for a competent big man and the chance to draft Fox makes us every bit as good in the present and more stocked in the future.

Strongly disagree. No way we win 53 games with a "competent big" instead of Thomas.

Furthermore, there's 0% chance you can get a competent big and a chance to draft Fox for An injured expiring Isaiah Thomas

I think I was pretty clear that my floor for trading him is a pick that can fetch us Fox and a starting-caliber big. Wasn't that the question here?

The word you used was competent.

I dont see your confusion. If you think that trading Thomas for a "competent big" and a rookie Fox  isnt a downgrade in the present then I dont know what to tell you.

[Roy H.]

Facts:

He is not a top 10 player.
He is barely a top 10 PG in a league rich with them.
Our incoming franchise player plays his position.

Those are stark facts that lead to an obvious conclusion.

He just combined scoring + effiency in a way that only six players in the history of the NBA have. All are current of future HOFers. The only guard to ever score as many points with as high a TS% is Steph Curry.

So what?  The regular season really doesn't matter.  In the playoffs against better teams, IT's offense becomes less effective and his defense becomes more of a liability.  The question is can we build a true contender with IT and Horford using nearly 60% of cap.  I don't think just adding Hayward, George or Butler would get us there.  I think we'd need to add one of them and Cousins (with all the risks involved) to get us there.  If Ainge can't see a path for us to be a contender with IT, he needs to trade IT or just let him walk after next season.

It's not just that. IT gives us 29 points and 6 assists per game. In order for him to score 29 points he has to take 19.5 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 13-14). Would you play him 34-35 minutes per game in order for him to take 13 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.

Doesn't this same flawed analysis apply to Kyrie?

[Ilikesports17]

Facts:

He is not a top 10 player.
He is barely a top 10 PG in a league rich with them.
Our incoming franchise player plays his position.

Those are stark facts that lead to an obvious conclusion.

He just combined scoring + effiency in a way that only six players in the history of the NBA have. All are current of future HOFers. The only guard to ever score as many points with as high a TS% is Steph Curry.

So what?  The regular season really doesn't matter.  In the playoffs against better teams, IT's offense becomes less effective and his defense becomes more of a liability.  The question is can we build a true contender with IT and Horford using nearly 60% of cap.  I don't think just adding Hayward, George or Butler would get us there.  I think we'd need to add one of them and Cousins (with all the risks involved) to get us there.  If Ainge can't see a path for us to be a contender with IT, he needs to trade IT or just let him walk after next season.

It's not just that. IT gives us 29 points and 6 assists per game. In order for him to score 29 points he has to take 19.5 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 13-14). Would you play him 34-35 minutes per game in order for him to take 13 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.

Its entirely possible that Isaiah could continue to take a high volume of shots even with additionally stars surrounding him.

Steph took 20 shots a game last year and added the best offensive player in the world. This year Steph took 18 shots a game.

I think you make a good point but its not as black and white as you present it.

Isaiah maxed out his value this year in my opinion. However, Isaiah added MVP-type value to this team. He can be less valuable than he was this year and still be a top 3 piece on a contender.

He can be your 3rd best player in a big 3 and still be the best or second best scorer and thus get his touches and shots.

[Jvalin]

Facts:

He is not a top 10 player.
He is barely a top 10 PG in a league rich with them.
Our incoming franchise player plays his position.

Those are stark facts that lead to an obvious conclusion.

He just combined scoring + effiency in a way that only six players in the history of the NBA have. All are current of future HOFers. The only guard to ever score as many points with as high a TS% is Steph Curry.

So what?  The regular season really doesn't matter.  In the playoffs against better teams, IT's offense becomes less effective and his defense becomes more of a liability.  The question is can we build a true contender with IT and Horford using nearly 60% of cap.  I don't think just adding Hayward, George or Butler would get us there.  I think we'd need to add one of them and Cousins (with all the risks involved) to get us there.  If Ainge can't see a path for us to be a contender with IT, he needs to trade IT or just let him walk after next season.

It's not just that. IT gives us 29 points and 6 assists per game. In order for him to score 29 points he has to take 19.5 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 13-14). Would you play him 34-35 minutes per game in order for him to take 13 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.

Doesn't this same flawed analysis apply to Kyrie?

No because Kyrie is 6'3, therefore he has the tools to rise to the occasion whenever it matters. IT will always be a defensive liability no matter how hard he tries.

[Ilikesports17]

Facts:

He is not a top 10 player.
He is barely a top 10 PG in a league rich with them.
Our incoming franchise player plays his position.

Those are stark facts that lead to an obvious conclusion.

He just combined scoring + effiency in a way that only six players in the history of the NBA have. All are current of future HOFers. The only guard to ever score as many points with as high a TS% is Steph Curry.

So what?  The regular season really doesn't matter.  In the playoffs against better teams, IT's offense becomes less effective and his defense becomes more of a liability.  The question is can we build a true contender with IT and Horford using nearly 60% of cap.  I don't think just adding Hayward, George or Butler would get us there.  I think we'd need to add one of them and Cousins (with all the risks involved) to get us there.  If Ainge can't see a path for us to be a contender with IT, he needs to trade IT or just let him walk after next season.

It's not just that. IT gives us 29 points and 6 assists per game. In order for him to score 29 points he has to take 19.5 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 13-14). Would you play him 34-35 minutes per game in order for him to take 13 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.

Doesn't this same flawed analysis apply to Kyrie?

In the playoffs, Irving has shown the ability to become a decent defender when he locks in (as he does when the lights really come on).

Thomas hasnt really done this (according to my eye test).

Also,  as good a scorer as Thomas is, Irving and Harden are the only two guys in the NBA who I think are better ISO shot creators.

[Jvalin]

Facts:

He is not a top 10 player.
He is barely a top 10 PG in a league rich with them.
Our incoming franchise player plays his position.

Those are stark facts that lead to an obvious conclusion.

He just combined scoring + effiency in a way that only six players in the history of the NBA have. All are current of future HOFers. The only guard to ever score as many points with as high a TS% is Steph Curry.

So what?  The regular season really doesn't matter.  In the playoffs against better teams, IT's offense becomes less effective and his defense becomes more of a liability.  The question is can we build a true contender with IT and Horford using nearly 60% of cap.  I don't think just adding Hayward, George or Butler would get us there.  I think we'd need to add one of them and Cousins (with all the risks involved) to get us there.  If Ainge can't see a path for us to be a contender with IT, he needs to trade IT or just let him walk after next season.

It's not just that. IT gives us 29 points and 6 assists per game. In order for him to score 29 points he has to take 19.5 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 13-14). Would you play him 34-35 minutes per game in order for him to take 13 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.

Its entirely possible that Isaiah could continue to take a high volume of shots even with additionally stars surrounding him.

Steph took 20 shots a game last year and added the best offensive player in the world. This year Steph took 18 shots a game.

I think you make a good point but its not as black and white as you present it.

Isaiah maxed out his value this year in my opinion. However, Isaiah added MVP-type value to this team. He can be less valuable than he was this year and still be a top 3 piece on a contender.

He can be your 3rd best player in a big 3 and still be the best or second best scorer and thus get his touches and shots.

Sure, but that's not the same thing. The Warriors already had Klay (and to a lesser extent Green) to take shots away from Curry. IT is hands down the focal point of our offense. The whole team is built around him. If we sign a second star, his shots per game will take a major fall.

Since you are mentioning what happened to the Warriors after the acquisition of KD, I think the Thunder would be a more suitable example. Last year Westbrook was taking 18 shots per game. This year he was taking 24 shots!

[Ilikesports17]

Facts:

He is not a top 10 player.
He is barely a top 10 PG in a league rich with them.
Our incoming franchise player plays his position.

Those are stark facts that lead to an obvious conclusion.

He just combined scoring + effiency in a way that only six players in the history of the NBA have. All are current of future HOFers. The only guard to ever score as many points with as high a TS% is Steph Curry.

So what?  The regular season really doesn't matter.  In the playoffs against better teams, IT's offense becomes less effective and his defense becomes more of a liability.  The question is can we build a true contender with IT and Horford using nearly 60% of cap.  I don't think just adding Hayward, George or Butler would get us there.  I think we'd need to add one of them and Cousins (with all the risks involved) to get us there.  If Ainge can't see a path for us to be a contender with IT, he needs to trade IT or just let him walk after next season.

It's not just that. IT gives us 29 points and 6 assists per game. In order for him to score 29 points he has to take 19.5 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 13-14). Would you play him 34-35 minutes per game in order for him to take 13 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.

Its entirely possible that Isaiah could continue to take a high volume of shots even with additionally stars surrounding him.

Steph took 20 shots a game last year and added the best offensive player in the world. This year Steph took 18 shots a game.

I think you make a good point but its not as black and white as you present it.

Isaiah maxed out his value this year in my opinion. However, Isaiah added MVP-type value to this team. He can be less valuable than he was this year and still be a top 3 piece on a contender.

He can be your 3rd best player in a big 3 and still be the best or second best scorer and thus get his touches and shots.

Sure, but that's not the same thing. The Warriors already had Klay (and to a lesser extent Green) to take shots away from Curry. IT is hands down the focal point of our offense. The whole team is built around him. If we sign a second star, his shots per game will take a major fall.

Since you are mentioning what happened to the Warriors after the acquisition of KD, I think the Thunder would be a more suitable example. Last year Westbrook was taking 18 shots per game. This year he was taking 24 shots!

Yeah, so its entirely reasonable to believe Isaiah could get ~18 shots a game.

Steph gets that number and he plays with Klay and KD.
Westbrook got that number when he played with KD too.
Last year in the finals(ie when it matters for the Cavs) Kyrie took 22 shots a game despite playing with Lebron James and Kevin Love.

[Future Celtics Owner]

Facts:

He is not a top 10 player.
He is barely a top 10 PG in a league rich with them.
Our incoming franchise player plays his position.

Those are stark facts that lead to an obvious conclusion.

He just combined scoring + effiency in a way that only six players in the history of the NBA have. All are current of future HOFers. The only guard to ever score as many points with as high a TS% is Steph Curry.

So what?  The regular season really doesn't matter.  In the playoffs against better teams, IT's offense becomes less effective and his defense becomes more of a liability.  The question is can we build a true contender with IT and Horford using nearly 60% of cap.  I don't think just adding Hayward, George or Butler would get us there.  I think we'd need to add one of them and Cousins (with all the risks involved) to get us there.  If Ainge can't see a path for us to be a contender with IT, he needs to trade IT or just let him walk after next season.

It's not just that. IT gives us 29 points and 6 assists per game. In order for him to score 29 points he has to take 19.5 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 13-14). Would you play him 34-35 minutes per game in order for him to take 13 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.

Doesn't this same flawed analysis apply to Kyrie?

No because Kyrie is 6'3, therefore he has the tools to rise to the occasion whenever it matters. IT will always be a defensive liability no matter how hard he tries.

It's not just height.
There is an 8'' difference in standing reach between Kyrie and IT. That is such a huge margin to make up, and it is not like KI is abnormally tall for the PG, he's probably average height. That 8''  difference only gets worse from PG down to Center.

For example, Fultz has an 8'6'' standing reach....which is almost a foot longer than IT's. That's a lot to make up.

[Future Celtics Owner]

Ainge acknowledges we can go in a different direction, but there is too much unknown at this time. With the draft, FA, and etc.

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/246066/Significant-Change-Could-Occur-For-Celtics-In-Offseason

[Jvalin]

Facts:

He is not a top 10 player.
He is barely a top 10 PG in a league rich with them.
Our incoming franchise player plays his position.

Those are stark facts that lead to an obvious conclusion.

He just combined scoring + effiency in a way that only six players in the history of the NBA have. All are current of future HOFers. The only guard to ever score as many points with as high a TS% is Steph Curry.

So what?  The regular season really doesn't matter.  In the playoffs against better teams, IT's offense becomes less effective and his defense becomes more of a liability.  The question is can we build a true contender with IT and Horford using nearly 60% of cap.  I don't think just adding Hayward, George or Butler would get us there.  I think we'd need to add one of them and Cousins (with all the risks involved) to get us there.  If Ainge can't see a path for us to be a contender with IT, he needs to trade IT or just let him walk after next season.

It's not just that. IT gives us 29 points and 6 assists per game. In order for him to score 29 points he has to take 19.5 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 13-14). Would you play him 34-35 minutes per game in order for him to take 13 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.

Its entirely possible that Isaiah could continue to take a high volume of shots even with additionally stars surrounding him.

Steph took 20 shots a game last year and added the best offensive player in the world. This year Steph took 18 shots a game.

I think you make a good point but its not as black and white as you present it.

Isaiah maxed out his value this year in my opinion. However, Isaiah added MVP-type value to this team. He can be less valuable than he was this year and still be a top 3 piece on a contender.

He can be your 3rd best player in a big 3 and still be the best or second best scorer and thus get his touches and shots.

Sure, but that's not the same thing. The Warriors already had Klay (and to a lesser extent Green) to take shots away from Curry. IT is hands down the focal point of our offense. The whole team is built around him. If we sign a second star, his shots per game will take a major fall.

Since you are mentioning what happened to the Warriors after the acquisition of KD, I think the Thunder would be a more suitable example. Last year Westbrook was taking 18 shots per game. This year he was taking 24 shots!

Yeah, so its entirely reasonable to believe Isaiah could get ~18 shots a game.

Steph gets that number and he plays with Klay and KD.
Westbrook got that number when he played with KD too.
Last year in the finals(ie when it matters for the Cavs) Kyrie took 22 shots a game despite playing with Lebron James and Kevin Love.

My guess would be more like 16-17 or something but it doesn't make a big difference either way. KD missed far too many games this season. Had he played in all of those games, I bet Curry wouldn't have averaged 18 shots per game for the season.

No because Kyrie is 6'3, therefore he has the tools to rise to the occasion whenever it matters. IT will always be a defensive liability no matter how hard he tries.

It's not just height.
There is an 8'' difference in standing reach between Kyrie and IT. That is such a huge margin to make up, and it is not like KI is abnormally tall for the PG, he's probably average height. That 8''  difference only gets worse from PG down to Center.

For example, Fultz has an 8'6'' standing reach....which is almost a foot longer than IT's. That's a lot to make up.

Yep, couldn't agree more!

Ainge acknowledges we can go in a different direction, but there is too much unknown at this time. With the draft, FA, and etc.

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/246066/Significant-Change-Could-Occur-For-Celtics-In-Offseason

''(...) there is a potential for there to be some significant change. But maybe less change. Maybe more change; maybe not. A lot will be dependent on what we’re able to pull off in the draft and in deals leading up to free agency (...)''

IT to the Mavs for #9.

Use the pick to draft Isaac (hopefully he is still on the board).

Do it Danny! Pull the trigger!!

[Smokeeye123]

The Celtics are NOT trading Thomas unless some team gets absolutely stupid with what they offer. Imagine what trading him would do to the lockerroom?

If we dont resign him so be it, let him walk. People forget that he was 3rd in the league in scoring and 2nd team all nba last year. His defense is poor yes, but without him we are probably the 5th seed.

[Smokeeye123]

Facts:

He is not a top 10 player.
He is barely a top 10 PG in a league rich with them.
Our incoming franchise player plays his position.

Those are stark facts that lead to an obvious conclusion.

He just combined scoring + effiency in a way that only six players in the history of the NBA have. All are current of future HOFers. The only guard to ever score as many points with as high a TS% is Steph Curry.

So what?  The regular season really doesn't matter.  In the playoffs against better teams, IT's offense becomes less effective and his defense becomes more of a liability.  The question is can we build a true contender with IT and Horford using nearly 60% of cap.  I don't think just adding Hayward, George or Butler would get us there.  I think we'd need to add one of them and Cousins (with all the risks involved) to get us there.  If Ainge can't see a path for us to be a contender with IT, he needs to trade IT or just let him walk after next season.

It's not just that. IT gives us 29 points and 6 assists per game. In order for him to score 29 points he has to take 19.5 shots per game. If we sign a second star via free agency, it's only logical to assume that IT will be taking less shots (let's say 16-17 shots). If we had a legit big 3 he would be taking even less than that (let's say 13-14). Would you play him 34-35 minutes per game in order for him to take 13 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.

IT is forced to shoot a lot. Would you rather Smart lay some more bricks or Rozier miss some more layups?

And if Durant had signed with us this year you dont think we could win a championship? That would make IT our 2nd or 3rd best player.

[Ilikesports17]

The Celtics are NOT trading Thomas unless some team gets absolutely stupid with what they offer. Imagine what trading him would do to the lockerroom?

If we dont resign him so be it, let him walk. People forget that he was 3rd in the league in scoring and 2nd team all nba last year. His defense is poor yes, but without him we are probably the 5th seed.

That's honestly generous. I'm not entirely sure we make the playoffs without him.

[Ilikesports17]

Facts:

He is not a top 10 player.
He is barely a top 10 PG in a league rich with them.
Our incoming franchise player plays his position.

Those are stark facts that lead to an obvious conclusion.

He just combined scoring + effiency in a way that only six players in the history of the NBA have. All are current of future HOFers. The only guard to ever score as many points with as high a TS% is Steph Curry.

So what?  The regular season really doesn't matter.  In the playoffs against better teams, IT's offense becomes less effective and his defense becomes more of a liability.  The question is can we build a true contender with IT and Horford using nearly 60% of cap.  I don't think just adding Hayward, George or Butler would get us there.  I think we'd need to add one of them and Cousins (with all the risks involved) to get us there.  If Ainge can't see a path for us to be a contender with IT, he needs to trade IT or just let him walk after next season.

It's not just that. IT gives us 29 points and 6 assists per game. In order for him to score 29 points he has to take 19.5 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 13-14). Would you play him 34-35 minutes per game in order for him to take 13 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.

Its entirely possible that Isaiah could continue to take a high volume of shots even with additionally stars surrounding him.

Steph took 20 shots a game last year and added the best offensive player in the world. This year Steph took 18 shots a game.

I think you make a good point but its not as black and white as you present it.

Isaiah maxed out his value this year in my opinion. However, Isaiah added MVP-type value to this team. He can be less valuable than he was this year and still be a top 3 piece on a contender.

He can be your 3rd best player in a big 3 and still be the best or second best scorer and thus get his touches and shots.

Sure, but that's not the same thing. The Warriors already had Klay (and to a lesser extent Green) to take shots away from Curry. IT is hands down the focal point of our offense. The whole team is built around him. If we sign a second star, his shots per game will take a major fall.

Since you are mentioning what happened to the Warriors after the acquisition of KD, I think the Thunder would be a more suitable example. Last year Westbrook was taking 18 shots per game. This year he was taking 24 shots!

Yeah, so its entirely reasonable to believe Isaiah could get ~18 shots a game.

Steph gets that number and he plays with Klay and KD.
Westbrook got that number when he played with KD too.
Last year in the finals(ie when it matters for the Cavs) Kyrie took 22 shots a game despite playing with Lebron James and Kevin Love.

My guess would be more like 16-17 or something but it doesn't make a big difference either way. KD missed far too many games this season. Had he played in all of those games, I bet Curry wouldn't have averaged 18 shots per game for the season.

No because Kyrie is 6'3, therefore he has the tools to rise to the occasion whenever it matters. IT will always be a defensive liability no matter how hard he tries.

It's not just height.
There is an 8'' difference in standing reach between Kyrie and IT. That is such a huge margin to make up, and it is not like KI is abnormally tall for the PG, he's probably average height. That 8''  difference only gets worse from PG down to Center.

For example, Fultz has an 8'6'' standing reach....which is almost a foot longer than IT's. That's a lot to make up.

Yep, couldn't agree more!

Ainge acknowledges we can go in a different direction, but there is too much unknown at this time. With the draft, FA, and etc.

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/246066/Significant-Change-Could-Occur-For-Celtics-In-Offseason

''(...) there is a potential for there to be some significant change. But maybe less change. Maybe more change; maybe not. A lot will be dependent on what we’re able to pull off in the draft and in deals leading up to free agency (...)''

IT to the Mavs for #9.

Use the pick to draft Isaac (hopefully he is still on the board).

Do it Danny! Pull the trigger!!

Do you realize how rare it is for a player to be traded while injured?

No one is giving you a top 10 pick for a player who just had surgery

I think 16-17 shots is probably about right and still enough to make Isaiah a net positive for sure