What would have been the downside had the Celtics decided to wait a year on the extension? Why not see what Pierce did with this team before emptying the vault?
This is the question that Peter May asks in his latest rant against the Celtics. He doesn't think the Celtics should have resigned Pierce to the big deal and claims that they should have waited to make the deal. The problem with this is that it overlooks the fact that Pierce could have opted out at the end of next season and simply left the Celtics, with Boston getting nothing in return for their top player.
Sure, you would have run the risk of the ``disrespect factor" by waiting. But here's what the Celtics also should have been gauging: What teams were going to have cap space in the summer of 2008 and did they really think any of those teams were going to keep that money to sign Pierce? In other words, were they negotiating against themselves?
As noted above, the Celtics risked losing Pierce in the summer of 2007 but overlooking that snafu, the following teams could have cap space in 2008: Washington, Toronto, Seattle, San Antonio, Portland, Orlando, New Orleans, Miami, LA Lakers, LA Clippers, Detroit, Denver, Dallas, Chicago, Charlotte, and Atlanta. Now while Miami and San Antonio might not go after Pierce as it would mean their entire salary cap was spent on three or four players, to imply that Paul Pierce would not have had his suitors is simply ridiculous. In fact, even Peter May seemed to know this as he framed his point by using questions. He never stated anything; he provided himself with an out as he could claim that he never made that point but was simply asking a question.
If May wanted to make an argument, he could have made a bigger issue of the amount of money Pierce is getting. He began to state that Pierce hasn't shown that he can carry a team but he didn't venture much further into that discussion. He could have argued that it might have been better had the Celtics tried to get Pierce to sign a Ray Allen type deal for less money. These are stances that actually have some solid footing under them. While there would be some staunch opposition to those opinions, they'd at least be legitimate arguments. To say that the Celtics erred by making the deal now and not waiting until all of the bargaining chips were in Pierce's hand makes no sense whatsoever.
