Problems for the Celts other teams would love to have...IT

[eja117]

What to do with IT?

I have heard people in the past 24 hours or so suggest the Celts are better off without him. The idea is we beat the Cavs without him. I find that absurd. To beat the Cavs it took multiple things to happen that could never happen consistently. It took one of the worst games of Bron's life. It took the best game of Smart's. Maybe the best game of Jerebko's. And very good games from almost everyone else and in a manner of speaking we caught them sleeping and had to come back from 21 points or something.

The argument is without IT there's better ball movement and Smart can grow. Whatever. Smart has been in this situation before. He didn't become an all star then and I don't believe he will now.

Further we weren't better without normal IT. We were maybe better without an IT that was thoroughly beat up, distracted by a deceased sibling, and missing teeth. We might be better off without that kind of IT.

Stephen A Smith has made an observation I wouldn't have made.

IT isn't making max money at all. He makes like 7 mill or something. So in terms of talent you can't get a max player for him. If you did it would be a guy with a year left on his contract or something just like IT. Plus any team that trades for him does it knowing he can leave in a year. So to get max talent back you would ALSO have to package Al Horford. Very difficult and now you're starting to gut a very successful team.

But who does make 7 mll? Well recent top 5 draft picks make money sorta like that. Like Prozingis. So......you'd be trading an all-nba type guy for a 21 year old or something. Very risky.

So you sorta have to pay him. But he's gonna want a ton of money for a ton of years. So you have to let him walk or trade him for a pick.

He's 28. So at the end of next year he's 29. So a max takes him maybe till he's 34. We don't have money for that I don't think. Do we? We'd have hopefully 3 maxes and three top 3 picks most likely. It looks like we could maybe do this. The year after Horford's contract is up Jaylen's comes due. So we'd be transitioning from a big 6ish to a big 3.

Maybe it can be done but it won't be easy. Hopefully IT goes for 4 years the way Horford did or it gets very difficult. Another distinct possibility is a guy like Hayward agrees on a three year deal, because in that case the money is similar whether he gets it from us or the Jazz.

I think what will happen is the team will wait to pay him. They'll wait to see how good Smart and Jaylen get this summer and how good Fultz is. If hypothetically Smart is suddenly 75% as good as Avery and if Jaylen is suddenly 3 times the player he is now and if Fultz is a dominant rookie and on top of that if Rozier becomes as good as Smart is now.......problem kinda solved and the IT situation will go to getting big man help.

Also Zizic's contract will come due the same year as Fultz. And Yab if we bring him in this year (and some people hope we won't).

[DERRENMATTS]

Spot on, E.

Nope, Smart will not all of a sudden turn into an All-Star because of his magnificent game yesterday. And to think we'd be just as good, or even better without a healthy IT playing like an MVP, is not accurate either. If you took IT out of this year's team, we do not win 53 games.

But, as Fresh pointed out, we'd be in a tough situation paying him max money.

For one, that would mean we'd be paying Horford and IT max money, and as good as they are, they're not alpha dog players -- sidekicks is more who they are. If we sign Hayward, that'll be 3 sidekicks taking up all our salary cap.

I haven't a clue what Ainge is going to do, but I'm sure he's going to have a lot of new white hairs sprouting up thinking about it.

[Roadrunner]

If PHI was all about bigs, then BOS is all about smalls. Game [HASH]3 was a fluke, because a lot of very good things happened. Ideally, I would want IT signed to a 3-year max contract, and re-up Smart and Bradley on good, but not max deals. Rozier is a wild card.

[eja117]

People like the style of the team without IT a little more for two reasons. One is defense. The other is that it forces more ball movement. But it forces ball movement because there's nobody that can make their own offense. Smart can't get past anybody. So every single player has to drive and cut and pass and it does result in more ball movement and maybe some more open looks, but what good is that if nobody can make those open looks.

The other part is defense. The team looks better defensively (at least for a while) with less IT and more Smart. But this team is essentially overrated defensively. Kyrie Irving just dropped 42 on the Celts with a bad ankle. Love did pretty well too.

On the one hand lots of people are like "We need another scorer" and then say "We need to trade IT." Those things don't match up.

Fultz isn't in the Hall of Fame yet.

What we really need is less Smart. Offense wins games. Kyrie's offense won last night's game. Smart going 7 for 10 won the last one but that doesn't happen very often

[runrondo]

It's tough to be a really good defensive team without a solid inside presence which we lack. I think it's much easier for us on the defensive end without IT which is nice, but I don't think that means we're better as is. We need some talent on the offensive end regardless of our plans with IT.

[Roadrunner]

The issue with one way players, esp defensive players, is that they do not force the opponent to work on the defensive end.

Irving, for what it is worth, is probably one of the best 1 on 1 players in the NBA.

With or without IT, with because BOS does not win close games without IT.

[mev17]

Same thing happened in the regular season - after one win against Orlando some thought we looked better without IT, until we lost our next couple of games. We have no offense without IT, unless we happen to hit a bunch of 3 pointers. IMO, without IT we are a lottery team. But he obviously needs more help because none of his teammates is a consistent offensive threat, so other teams can keep running extra guys at him.

[jmost]

I don't think Danny makes a decision about IT until he sees how IT plays with Fultz, and how Fultz plays without IT on the court (which could be as early as the start of next season if IT is recuperating from surgery). Because of IT's hip injury and possible surgery, it's not a good time to trade him anyway, so I think we can assume that we'll have them both at the start of next season. I do not believe however, that all three of Bradley, Smart and Rozier will be on board. Bradley probably has the highest trade value, but he's also the guy I'd most like to keep. I'm hoping that there's a GM out there who is desperate enough for toughness and defense to give us something decent for Smart.

[Roadrunner]

Decisions. I like Bradley, but he is fragile. I also like Crowder, but he is inconsistent. I also like Smart, but he can not shoot (where is everyone that said Rondo could not shoot). IT as your [HASH]2, and Horford as your [HASH]3 is very good. Let's hope Fultz is the [HASH]1.

[FLCeltsFan]

IT has said that he isn't in a hurry to get an extension and it's fine with him if Danny gets a free agent and makes other moves before he works on the extension. That will give Danny time to evaluate other players as jmost said.

One player I hope Danny gives a chance is Zizic. He was very impressive in Europe last season and I think he will be able to make an impact with the Celtics next season. I'm still on the bubble about Yabusele, though.

Of the players on the team now, I think Danny is going to have to pick 2 of Bradley, Smart and Rozier. One will be expendable if he goes with Fultz with the top pick and doesn't trade it.

I'd like to see him give Kelly another year at the least. He's just starting to develop into a good player and I think he's worth giving another year or two to develop.

If there's room at the end of the bench, we could do a lot worse than Jerebko and Green as 11th and 12th men.

Decisions have to be made on Amir, Zeller, Jackson, Mickey and Young. I don't see most of them coming back. I really had a lot of hope for Mickey, but he just hasn't shown much improvement. I haven't seen much of Jackson but the fact that he couldn't get any playing time at all seems to indicate that he is dispensable.

As for IT, I don't think we are better without him. Not even close. i'm just hoping that he will take a discount to stay with the Celtics and will take a contract that gives the Celtics some flexability. More than likely, some team will throw a max contract at him but I'm hoping he puts loyalty and desire to stay in Boston as a priority.

[jmost]

I really don't see him taking a discount to stay. Not based on his previous comments. And I don't really blame him. Fortunately, Danny has time to evaluate Fultz before he has to decide on IT. If Fultz shows he's the real deal before the all-star break, then I think we could see IT traded. By then we'll also have a better handle on Zizic and 2nd-yr-Jaylen, to know what we need. We'll also have the benefit of seeing whichever FA star we can sign this summer.

One thing I'm sure of is that IT will not warm up to the idea of being a 6th man.

[Roadrunner]

Whoever signs IT to a 5-year contract, years 4 & 5 will be an issue because of his age.