Anything short of reaching game 6 of 2017/2018 of ECF = No max for IT4? (poll)

[Tr1boy]

Danny still has a chance to see the river card , before offering IT4 max or not. 

If a relatively healthy Celtics squad does not reach game 6-7 in the ECF , does Danny need to give IT4 max?

Even if Horford looks like he lost half a step and should shoulder most of the blame vs GH or IT4....   the reality would be the team lead by these three likely would not be good enough to win a championship.   So putting a stranglehold on the cap (signing IT4 to max) ... when next second you know Brown, Tatum etc. need to be extended is probably not a smart move imo

Unfortunately this means IT4 has ALOT riding on his shoulders to make sure this team at least goes further than it did last season.  The min threshold for that imo is the team reaching game 6-7 of the ECF

What is the min threshold you have set at for IT4 to make max?

[BitterJim]

Unless IT wins MVP there's no reason to give him a 5 year max, but as long as he shows that the hip injury isn't hindering him and he hasn't lost a step, a 3 year max (or 4 year less than max deal) would make a ton of sense.  I don't think how many games we play in the ECF will matter (although if we are healthy and don't make the ECF I think that could play a role)

[tarheelsxxiii]

Assuming a comparable outcome next season, there is no threshold.  He will be maxed.  If that upsets you, though, there are about 50 other threads full of meltdowns related to this topic.  Perhaps they can all be merged.

[KG Living Legend]

 I will say this though what if Brown and Tatum just absolutely show out this year. And there's statistical data suggesting were a better team with those guys on the court and smart at point guard.

[tarheelsxxiii]

 I will say this though what if Brown and Tatum just absolutely show out this year. And there's statistical data suggesting were a better team with those guys on the court and smart at point guard.

That'd be a nice problem to have.  The data say CsBlog is better when KGLL is online.

[SparzWizard]

I would say anything short of an NBA Finals appearance.

No excuse of losing in the ECF with Cleveland Cavaliers having an implosion right now, and the Celtics adding Gordon Hayward, Aron Baynes, Marcus Morris, and Jayson Tatum.

[BudweiserCeltic]

This discussion without the most important components, salary cap considerations, buying power, alternatives, is fairly meaningless.

If you're not retaining Isaiah Thomas, at whatever his market rate ends up being, what's your plan then?

I've also always thought that the whole "if we don't reach X round, we can't pay X player" to be a very shortsighted way of looking at things.

[loco_91]

IT's individual performance matters here, not the team's performance.

If IT has another season like last year, I'd try to sign him to at most a 3 year max. He gets paid but the C's retain cap flexibility in the long run. I wouldn't offer him more than a 3 year max under any circumstances, as he's a small PG who is bound to age poorly. If IT shows clear signs of decline next year, I'd be hesitant to pay more than a 2 year max, or something like 3 years/$75m.

Nothing against IT. He's awesome and he fully deserves the max right now. It's just a reality that he won't be as good in 3-4 years as he is now.

[Ilikesports17]

Need more context.

Generally speaking, Isaiah does need to prove that last years dominance was repeatable and that we are within striking distance of a ring.

[trickybilly]

I actually think you need to get deep into the Finals to justify it - taking a game off GSW doesn't justify 5 years of close but nowhere near a cigar.

I'm usually Polly Positive around here, and I really do think IT is incredible, and I like watching him play as much as (if not more than) anyone in the league, but I just don't want 5 years of him chewing up 34 million dollars. I could probably be talked into 4 years though...begrudgingly. 3 years at the max would be totally fine, heck give him a no-trade clause for that length too. I'd be totally on board with watching three years of Horford, IT, and Gordy (and Jaylen, Marcus, Tatum) trying to figure out the San Francisco Globetrotters.

Not sure what happens to team morale if he isn't offered a 5-year max deal though... could be deleterious long-term. Also, a 5 year deal only really overlaps with Brown and Tatum's next deal. No reason to think necessarily that Horford or Hayward would still be here and competing for space.

Meh, in Danny I trust.

[Tr1boy]

This discussion without the most important components, salary cap considerations, buying power, alternatives, is fairly meaningless.

If you're not retaining Isaiah Thomas, at whatever his market rate ends up being, what's your plan then?

I've also always thought that the whole "if we don't reach X round, we can't pay X player" to be a very shortsighted way of looking at things.

Really?  With this mentality, isnt this how Carmelo was overpaid?

[chilidawg]

This discussion without the most important components, salary cap considerations, buying power, alternatives, is fairly meaningless.

If you're not retaining Isaiah Thomas, at whatever his market rate ends up being, what's your plan then?

I've also always thought that the whole "if we don't reach X round, we can't pay X player" to be a very shortsighted way of looking at things.

Really?  With this mentality, isnt this how Carmelo was overpaid?

No, it's exactly the opposite. 

[wdleehi]

Depends on how he plays, not on the number of games in a playoff series. 


The bigger issue is what other teams do during FA period. 

[Eddie20]

We should've just kept Mickey.

[Tr1boy]

We should've just kept Mickey.

Do you say anything else?

Yes fire Danny for not keeping Mickey.. 

I say give him a raise for not drafting Alexandre and Bender