He's not the worst contract of the entire offseason, but he's definitely on that "candidate list" for being one, especially now that he's likely coming off the bench from here on out (unless Embiid is hurt or load managed)
I am curious who is clearly worse at this point? Rozier who was mentioned is making 10 million less a year and putting up 18 points and 4 rebounds and 4 assists while shooting 39% from 3. You would like to see him shoot a bit better from the field but given his 9 year age difference from Horford or whatever, would definitely rather have his contract than Horfords.
Harris? He is at 19 and 7. Not what you want from a max contract, but again he is not going to curdle the next few years like Horford will continue to do.
Any other contract a contender?
That's an odd comparison to Rozier. I think the Sixers like having Horford under his contract much more than the Hornets like having Rozier under his right now. I like Rozier, but high usage guards that can score 15-18 ppg on a bad team but cannot set up teammates are pretty common in the NBA, and they aren't helping anyone win championships. Horford is a much better player and better asset on his contract. .
If we had to convert their relative value to a standard, I would think Rozier would be worth at most an expiring and a lottery-protected first. Horford would be worth a role player on a decent contract, a young asset (not a star-potential asset, but still a young player), and a first or second (depending on the quality of the role player). They would get a similar package to the one that the Grizzles got for Gasol (Jonas, Wright, Miles, and a 2nd).
I'll put it this way: don't you think the Blazers would have been willing to trade Whiteside, Collins, and a first for Horford? I even think that in whispers they would have offered Simons instead of Collins.
All 30 teams, if all things were equal, would rather have Horford at 28 million than Rozier at 18 million.
What in the world are you talking about? Every single writer or analyst I have heard that covers the NBA has mentioned Horford is a negative asset at this point... jesus.
Well, I disagree with them. I don't generally listen to talking heads. The truth is that most teams realize that Harris and Horford could probably be had for less than their true value because the Sixer situation is a mess and Philly knows they have to try something else.
But that doesn't mean that, all things being equal, Horford is worth less on his contract than Rozier on his. You could argue that Rozier isn't even the best guard on that team (although I'm not really a Graham fan), and the other guard makes like 6% of Rozier's contract.
I know the Sixers situation is bad. It's sad that Horford has become the fall guy. He doesn't deserve that. He's a really good player that can help good teams, but he can't fix a team that's fundamentally broken. He shouldn't be expected to. That's not his role.
Just because the narrative in the echo chamber of NBA talking heads has swung that far, doesn't make it so.