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

[Dino Pitino]

IT is our window.

That's a depressing idea for us fans who think we've hit our peak as an Isaiah-centric team. It means the ceiling during that window is Conference Finals, to us.

[Darío SpanishFan]

You in Colorado smoking green?

Top 15 Player in this League......

I have an idea, lets trade him for an 18 year old stiff

I was going to bite, but it's so easy to find 15 better players than I won't do it. And don't come with those funny all-NBA teams, because playoffs is where true basketball and defense are played.

[crimson_stallion]

Isaiah Thomas is an All-Star who ranks 3rd in the NBA in scoring (at 29 PPG) and just took Boston from Lottery -> Playoffs -> ECF in the space of three seasons.

The lowest pick I would even contemplate in return for Thomas would be Philly's pick at #3.  Getting that pick would almost guarantee us the ability to take both Fultz and Tatum (IMHO, the two highest upside players in this draft) so I'd seriously consider it. 

Plus Philly is as desperate for a PG as they are for a backcourt scorer.  Thomas could be the star PG they desperately need.

Anything less then #3 (or another All-Star) and I would hand up the phone there and then. 

[Granath]

IT is our window.

That's a depressing idea for us fans who think we've hit our peak as an Isaiah-centric team. It means the ceiling during that window is Conference Finals, to us.

Well then that's your problem. If you think that "we've hit our peak" with the #3 overall going into his 2nd year and getting the #1 overall pick this year and being an attractive FA destination, you're simply wrong.

If most everyone was already in primes, the guys we were drafting were taken around pick #22 and so forth then yeah, you could say we've probably peaked. It'd be close to the Atlanta Hawks scenario of a couple of years ago. But that's not the case at all - due to the picks (including the Memphis and LAC picks) we have a constant inflow of highly-regarded talent that will continue through the near future. Thus there's highly ranked guys stepping into improve the overall talent level. To think that we've peaked isn't just illogical, it's insane. That is unless someone thinks that Danny is going to whiff on every pick. And if someone thinks that they're also insane.

[crimson_stallion]

IT is our window.

That's a depressing idea for us fans who think we've hit our peak as an Isaiah-centric team. It means the ceiling during that window is Conference Finals, to us.

I don't think it means that at all. 

I think what it means is that Isaiah is the best player we've had in Boston since Pierce and KG left to Brooklyn. 

For all his defensive limitations, he still took this team from a bottom 6 team to a #1 seed (and ECF) within the space of 3 seasons - I think that's plenty of evidence to show he has a LOT of value as far as winning is concerned.

Thomas is 27 years old, and the best chance we have (right now) at beating the Cavs is to add additional star talent to this team so that makes it much harder for teams like the Cavs to focus all of their attention on exploiting Thomas. 

You add a star scorer like George / Butler / Melo to this team and Boston becomes a lot less predictable.  You can no longer just gameplan for Thomas, knowing that every single possession is going through him.  You now have another star scorer or two out there who you need to be mindful of at all times, because Boston could just as easily run plays for those guys - it gives Boston more options, makes the team's offence much less predictable and much harder to defend.

If you don't add another star or two to this roster, then Boston's offence remains incredibly predictable, and teams will continue to exploit that time after time.

Now lets say you draft Fultz this year, draft a rookie next year.  Now you potentially have to wait 3 - 4 years for Fultz, Brown and the 2018 pick to develop enough to be able to contribute every night. 

By then Thomas is a 30-31 years old PG who (at 5'9") likely will have lost some of the quickness that makes him so dangerous.  Horford will be a 34-35 year old big who has probably dropped off to being a 6th man at best.

Now we're hinging all of our hope on those 3 young prospects to become big stars, and if they don't we are back to square one.  If they do, then we've already wasted the best of Thomas' years and Horford's years. 

So if we decided to build through the draft and keep these picks, then suddenly it becomes arguably quite pointless keeping Horford and IT, since they will be past their prime by the time these young guys are able to excel.  May as well move them for more lottery picks so all those young guys can flourish at once and we can maximise our window. 

Or the other alternative - make use of Thomas and Horford while they are still in their prime, and trade those picks for another one or two prime stars (in the 25 - 30 range) who can potentially give us the ability to contend for a title right now.

[Darío SpanishFan]

For all his defensive limitations, he still took this team from a bottom 6 team to a #1 seed (and ECF) within the space of 3 seasons - I think that's plenty of evidence to show he has a LOT of value as far as winning is concerned.

Thomas is 27 years old

This is simply a fallacy (apart from he's 28). He hasn't taken us from bottom 6 into #1 seed. He's just been a big part of it in offense, with Horford as a facilitator, the rising of Crowder and Bradley, flashes of Olynyk, etc. And the defensive effort of all of them to help overcome his inability on that side has been the other.

We've improved so much because of our system and the whole core oriented to help Isaiah (yes, our most talented offensive player by far) succeed. But not because of just him.

[NHCelticsFan]

If we traded IT I would expect something along​ the lines of the Rondo deal.  A decent draft pick and a player that we probably aren't too familiar with (like Crowder at the time) who Ainge and company see a lot of value in.

[crimson_stallion]

For all his defensive limitations, he still took this team from a bottom 6 team to a #1 seed (and ECF) within the space of 3 seasons - I think that's plenty of evidence to show he has a LOT of value as far as winning is concerned.

Thomas is 27 years old

This is simply a fallacy (apart from he's 28). He hasn't taken us from bottom 6 into #1 seed. He's just been a big part of it in offense, with Horford as a facilitator, the rising of Crowder and Bradley, flashes of Olynyk, etc. And the defensive effort of all of them to help overcome his inability on that side has been the other.

We've improved so much because of our system and the whole core oriented to help Isaiah (yes, our most talented offensive player by far) succeed. But not because of just him.

Oh come on, give me a break.

When Ainge made the trade for Thomas, this team immediately became better.  The instant he benched Smart and put Thomas in the starting lineup, the team took another huge leap forward. 

You attribute our success to things like the development of Bradley and Crowder, and the addition of Al Horford?

Jae Crowder's Per 36 stats are right on par with what they were last year and the year before.  They have increases slightly, but hardly 'dramatically'.  The key improvement has been his three point shooting, but in all other aspects of his game he's largely the exact same player he was when he came two seasons ago. 

Avery Bradley improved his rebounding significantly and has no doubt had the best season of his career, but his overall numbers still are not far off from where they were last year and the year before (rebounding aside) - unless you consider +1 PPG a dramatic improvement.

Al Horford came in this year and do you know what he averaged?  14 points, 6.8 rebounds and 5 assists.  Jared Sullinger in most of his tenure here was giving us 13 and 8, and even in his last season (despite the drop in minutes) he still gave us 10 and 8.  Sullinger was also an excellent passing big man.  The only advantage Horford really gave us over Sully is defence.  You cant even cite consistency, because Horford has been up and down like a yo-yo all season long for us and has put up career low numbers in almost every category. 

So yes, we've gained some small improvements from those factor, but none of them come close to the gain that was made when we added a 19 PPG scorer, who then upped his game to become a 22 PPG scorer, who then upped his game AGAIN to become a 29 PPG scorer. 

You don't think adding a 29 PPG scorer (to a team who's previous best scorers were Avery Bradley and Jared Sullinger) has had BY FAR the biggest impact on this team of all the changes, success wise?

You don't think adding a guy who ranks 1st in the entire league in 4th quarter points has had BY FAR the biggest impact on this team of all the changes, success wise? 

The improvement of Bradley and Crowder has been nice, replacing Sully with Horford has been an upgrade.  Nobody can deny those facts.

But NO move made in the past 3 seasons has contributed more to Boston's success then the acquisition of Isaiah Thomas. 

Without Thomas, I can all but guarantee Boston doesn't make the playoffs last year. 

Without Thomas, I can all but guarantee that we would not have made it past Washington in the playoffs.

And you can even add the impact of Horford TO the impact of Thomas, because without Thomas, I can all but guarantee you Horford never would have signed here.

Thomas may not be the only reason for this teams' huge jump, but he is far and away the biggest reason.  Thomas' presence brought Horford here, and if we didnt have those two guys then this team would be unlikely to even make the playoffs. 

[Jvalin]

If we traded IT I would expect something along​ the lines of the Rondo deal.  A decent draft pick and a player that we probably aren't too familiar with (like Crowder at the time) who Ainge and company see a lot of value in.

Assuming Hayward agrees to sign with the C's, we have to part ways with one of Kelly/Bradley/Smart/Crowder/IT.

IT is on the books for $6,261,394 next season. If we trade him for 2 players (one player + one draft pick), we won't have enough cap space available to go after Hayward. The way I see it, if we trade IT it's gonna be either for a lotto pick or for a young prospect, not both. Unless of course we are ready to part ways with more than one piece like for instance

trade IT + renounce Kelly + trade Rozier for future pick(s)/salary relief
or
trade IT + trade one of Bradley/Crowder/Smart

[Darío SpanishFan]

Oh come on, give me a break.


Without Thomas, I can all but guarantee Boston doesn't make the playoffs last year. 

The break is all yours. LOL...

Unless you mean we'd be playing 4 against 5  (like we've done in defense most of the time).

You could have done even better saying THIS year, btw 

[footey]

If we traded IT I would expect something along​ the lines of the Rondo deal.  A decent draft pick and a player that we probably aren't too familiar with (like Crowder at the time) who Ainge and company see a lot of value in.

As a former NH resident, I am embarrassed by the ineptitude of this statement.

[ThePaintedArea]

 In the 2017 draft what is the lowest pick you would take. For example. #8 if we could get Markkanen.

 Would it be #5 if we could get Tatum.

 Or would you take pick #22 if we could get TJ Leaf, Harry Giles, Or Bam

More picks are not what Boston needs.

The Celtics are now making the transition to being a contender - the most difficult transition of all. That's why they got Al Horford, about to turn 31.

There is an urgent need for MORE shot-creation off the dribble, not less, and certainly not in exchange for a guy that you hope will be a role-player in two or three years.

[NHCelticsFan]

If we traded IT I would expect something along​ the lines of the Rondo deal.  A decent draft pick and a player that we probably aren't too familiar with (like Crowder at the time) who Ainge and company see a lot of value in.

As a former NH resident, I am embarrassed by the ineptitude of this statement.

?

I said if we trade him.  How much do you expect to receive for a soon to be free agent expecting a large deal coming off an injury?  Teams aren't going to give up premium assets for such a player, especially when he is an unrestricted free agent at the end of the year.

[Jvalin]

If we traded IT I would expect something along​ the lines of the Rondo deal.  A decent draft pick and a player that we probably aren't too familiar with (like Crowder at the time) who Ainge and company see a lot of value in.

As a former NH resident, I am embarrassed by the ineptitude of this statement.

?

I said if we trade him.  How much do you expect to receive for a soon to be free agent expecting a large deal coming off an injury?  Teams aren't going to give up premium assets for such a player, especially when he is an unrestricted free agent at the end of the year.

Don't bother mate. Seems like some posters feel IT is the next Paul Pierce or something.

It's almost like hearing Stephen A. talk about Kobe.

Trade IT??? THAT IS BLASPHEMOUS!!

[ThePaintedArea]

If we traded IT I would expect something along​ the lines of the Rondo deal.  A decent draft pick and a player that we probably aren't too familiar with (like Crowder at the time) who Ainge and company see a lot of value in.

Still looks like a step back to me.

It's great the way Crowder has turned into a critical piece of the puzzle, but the Celtics now need a star, and shouldn't give up a star like Thomas unless getting back a better star.