Could Horford end up being the worst contract of offseason?

[tazzmaniac]

You cant look at it based on the start of last seasons lineup...you have to look at it like this...

They replaced reddick/butler with richardson/Horford

To me that's a downgrade. Reddick is a huge loss. Not sure where their 3 point shooting is going to come from

I don't have to do anything.  I presented plenty of reasons why re-signing Butler may not have been a good idea.  Other than closing, I don't think losing Butler hurts them.  Richardson appears to be a poor man's Butler without the negatives. 

Why can't anyone on here get Redick's name correct?  I've already said previously that losing Redick was the bigger issue offensively but they also lost Redick's defensive liabilities.  As for 3pt shooting, Harris, Richardson and Horford can shoot 3s. 

[Green-18]

The Horford contract could certainly be the worst contract of the off-season, but let's not get ahead of ourselves.  We're all rooting for Philly to fail, so it's easier to identify potential flaws in their roster.  I still believe the 76ers have an excellent chance of getting through the Eastern Conference.   

I also wont ignore the intangibles that Horford brings to the table.  Philly has lacked composure and execution in late game situations.  It's very possible that his experience will fix many of these issues.  For all of the concerns about perimeter scoring, the 76ers should be equally difficult to score against in the half court.

I'll have a hard time calling it the worst contract if the 76ers make a Finals appearance, even if they get beaten soundly.   

[Fafnir]

Credible reports were that Philly did offer a 5 year deal to Butler. Not sure if it was the max or when they offered.

Based on their early pursuit of Horford they either had heard Jimmy was gone, or they had decided it was Jimmy or Harris + Horford.

[timpiker]

There's a lot of bad contracts - Middleton at $35M a year comes to mind but yes, absolutely Horford's contract is insane.  Hate to lose Horford but maybe he's doing us a big favor by ruining Philly for years.

[Green-18]

There's a lot of bad contracts - Middleton at $35M a year comes to mind but yes, absolutely Horford's contract is insane.  Hate to lose Horford but maybe he's doing us a big favor by ruining Philly for years.

How is Middleton's contract a bad one?  Most max contracts are overpays if we assess them in a vacuum.  The Bucks made the right move in the context of their situation.  They have a real shot to make it to the NBA Finals next season.  Losing Middleton would kill their chances and frustrate Giannis at the same time.  The last thing you want to do is have Giannis lose faith in the organization. 

 

[SHAQATTACK]

its basically two years , about the max time Al has left to be anything like his previous self.  So its a huge amount , in my mind they paid four years worth of money to get TWO decent years .  So he was paid over double what his real value was to Danny.  Danny was right not paying for years when a guy will not be performing at his best levels.

i expect Al will be a big help year one .   After that or small injuries could derail the whole contract to ZIP.  its a huge gamble

[gpap]

Glad to see there's a lot of fiscal responsibility on this thread.

[rondofan1255]

Anything's possible, depending on how quickly he drops off. Could end up like James Posey w/ New Orleans giving him the extra year. Posey dropped off faster than expected.

Not a fan of these two:

PHI Harris 5/180
SAC Barnes 4/85

Coincidentally, Batum was 27 when his 5/120 deal kicked in... Barnes and Harris will both be 27 as well. Those would be my two picks for contracts that teams will regret soon.

[Walker Wiggle]

Anything's possible, depending on how quickly he drops off. Could end up like James Posey w/ New Orleans giving him the extra year. Posey dropped off faster than expected.

Not a fan of these two:

PHI Harris 5/180
SAC Barnes 4/85

Coincidentally, Batum was 27 when his 5/120 deal kicked in... Barnes and Harris will both be 27 as well. Those would be my two picks for contracts that teams will regret soon.

Yikes, I had forgotten about Harris's deal. Wow, that's a lot of money tied up in two good-but-not-great players (Harris and Horford).

[tazzmaniac]

its basically two years , about the max time Al has left to be anything like his previous self.  So its a huge amount , in my mind they paid four years worth of money to get TWO decent years .  So he was paid over double what his real value was to Danny.  Danny was right not paying for years when a guy will not be performing at his best levels.

i expect Al will be a big help year one .   After that or small injuries could derail the whole contract to ZIP.  its a huge gamble

The reports were Danny bumped his offer to 4 years at the end.  Not clear on how much money but wouldn't be surprised if it was ~80M.  Horford's not really a huge gamble.  The Sixers wouldn't have cap space after this offseason so they needed to spend it on someone.  Having an overpaid Horford as your 5th starter isn't that bad. 

[tazzmaniac]

There's a lot of bad contracts - Middleton at $35M a year comes to mind but yes, absolutely Horford's contract is insane.  Hate to lose Horford but maybe he's doing us a big favor by ruining Philly for years.

How is Middleton's contract a bad one?  Most max contracts are overpays if we assess them in a vacuum.  The Bucks made the right move in the context of their situation.  They have a real shot to make it to the NBA Finals next season.  Losing Middleton would kill their chances and frustrate Giannis at the same time.  The last thing you want to do is have Giannis lose faith in the organization. 

 

Bucks are interesting.  They paid Middleton and B. Lopez but not Brogdon.  Of course they also paid Giannis' brother.  Giannis only has 2 years left on his contract. 
If they don't make the finals, their offseason is going to be really interesting. 

[obnoxiousmime]

The way some people are making it sound, we shouldn't have even re-signed Horford to 60/3 years. Seriously, if he's really that broken down and old how can you justify paying him anything 20 mil and above/year?

They're going for a title. All they're doing is paying an extra 8 million a year and guaranteed 15 in the fourth year. To a team that's going for it, that extra amount is not a dealbreaker. If you want to poke holes in a lot of the deals made this summer, you easily could in many of them. Durant is coming off a major injury and won't play next season. Just a year ago Kyrie's knees were a big deal. Paul George dropped off late last season due to his shoulder injuries. Kawhi is only a year recovered from a mysterious injury that put him on a 60 game load-management plan in the regular season. Anthony Davis has been injury prone his entire career.

My point is just that, when you're going for it, you can afford to make "bad" deals to push yourself over the top. Every deal needs to be seen in the proper context.

[Moranis]

There's a lot of bad contracts - Middleton at $35M a year comes to mind but yes, absolutely Horford's contract is insane.  Hate to lose Horford but maybe he's doing us a big favor by ruining Philly for years.

How is Middleton's contract a bad one?  Most max contracts are overpays if we assess them in a vacuum.  The Bucks made the right move in the context of their situation.  They have a real shot to make it to the NBA Finals next season.  Losing Middleton would kill their chances and frustrate Giannis at the same time.  The last thing you want to do is have Giannis lose faith in the organization. 

 

Bucks are interesting.  They paid Middleton and B. Lopez but not Brogdon.  Of course they also paid Giannis' brother.  Giannis only has 2 years left on his contract. 
If they don't make the finals, their offseason is going to be really interesting.

They had Bledsoe already locked up though making Brogdon expendable.  Obviously Brogdon and Bledsoe could play well together, but at some point a team has to have some fiscal responsibility and pick and choose where to spend money.  I personally would have gone with Brogdon over Bledsoe, but Bledsoe also re-signed during the season at a fairly reasonable amount and he is more suited as a PG whereas Brogdon is better at SG a position the Bucks are pretty deep at.

Either way the Sixers and the Bucks are clearly ahead of everyone else in the East, so keeping or adding solid supporting members even at great long term cost had to be the way for them to go for them.  You have to go for the title when you have a realistic shot at it.

[Muzzy66]

The way some people are making it sound, we shouldn't have even re-signed Horford to 60/3 years. Seriously, if he's really that broken down and old how can you justify paying him anything 20 mil and above/year?

They're going for a title. All they're doing is paying an extra 8 million a year and guaranteed 15 in the fourth year. To a team that's going for it, that extra amount is not a dealbreaker. If you want to poke holes in a lot of the deals made this summer, you easily could in many of them. Durant is coming off a major injury and won't play next season. Just a year ago Kyrie's knees were a big deal. Paul George dropped off late last season due to his shoulder injuries. Kawhi is only a year recovered from a mysterious injury that put him on a 60 game load-management plan in the regular season. Anthony Davis has been injury prone his entire career.

My point is just that, when you're going for it, you can afford to make "bad" deals to push yourself over the top. Every deal needs to be seen in the proper context.

Because he probably could continue to produce at a level similar to last season, for maybe this year and the next.  So in that case two of those three years would fair value.

The third year could be a little ugly, but in the third year it also becomes an expiring contract, so that potentially helps to offset some of the risk as the contact in that third year may have some value as trade filler / salary dump.

But increasing it to four years and over $25M makes that third year potentially nightmarish. 

[Muzzy66]

Either way the Sixers and the Bucks are clearly ahead of everyone else in the East, so keeping or adding solid supporting members even at great long term cost had to be the way for them to go for them.  You have to go for the title when you have a realistic shot at it.

They are?

Embiid is a terrible leader who can't stay healthy, Simmons consistently chokes come playoff time, adding Horford will only further clog up the paint (which was already too clogged up as it is).  They lost the only closer and "alpha" guy on the team (Butler).  They also lost their best outside shooter (Reddick) - a guy who's mere presence was crucial in creating the space for Simmons and Embiid to operate.

I think people are dramatically underestimating the importance that Reddick and Butler had on that team last season.  It was the first time the Sixers have ever shown serious competitiveness in the playoffs, and the sole reason for that was the addition of Jimmy butler - who averaged 22 / 7 / 6 through that series with the Raptors and gave the Sixers the toughness and winners mentality that they needed to have a fighting chance.  Now Butler is gone.

The Bucks should be way better then the Sixers this year.  I wouldn't be shocked if the Pacers are better.  I wouldn't even be shocked if the Celtics are better.