Hawks ready to offer Horford max

[Roy H.]

I don't want him for max money at 30 years old. He's an old 30 too.

Can someone explain this to me?  I don't recall that he's had any major injuries.  Also, the Hawks have not made a deep playoff run while he's been on the team.  Why is he an 'old' 30?

He's had two major pectoral injuries which basically cost him almost two full seasons.

There was some speculation that the pec tears were related to PED use, but I'm not sure that's fair.

[dannyboy35]

What concerns me about Horford is his rebounding numbers but I admit I haven't seen them outside of playing us this year. Do you guys think it's a result of style of play or is it the getting " old" thing?

[saltlover]

I don't want him for max money at 30 years old. He's an old 30 too.

Can someone explain this to me?  I don't recall that he's had any major injuries.  Also, the Hawks have not made a deep playoff run while he's been on the team.  Why is he an 'old' 30?

He's had two major pectoral injuries which basically cost him almost two full seasons.

There was some speculation that the pec tears were related to PED use, but I'm not sure that's fair.

Yeah, the pectoral injuries were weird.  Although the first one wasn't truly a full season injury -- that was the lockout-shortened year and he made it back for some of the playoffs after getting hurt early on.  In an unabridged season he would have played more games.

At the same time, he's had very little of traditional big man injuries (back, knee, feet) and played 76 games last season and all 82 this year, so recent history indicates he's quite healthy.  Every NBA player who's been in the league that long is some kind of injury risk.  Horford might be slightly more of one, but his minutes have been managed well over his career, so that ameliorates things.

[saltlover]

What concerns me about Horford is his rebounding numbers but I admit I haven't seen them outside of playing us this year. Do you guys think it's a result of style of play or is it the getting " old" thing?

I think it is partly because Milsap takes some rebounds that Horford used to get, but more style of play.  The Hawks as a team have de-emphasized rebounds in favor of pace on the offensive end and stopping transition on the defensive end.  I don't expect that he would be a rebounding liability.

[crimson_stallion]

I don't want him for max money at 30 years old. He's an old 30 too.

Can someone explain this to me?  I don't recall that he's had any major injuries.  Also, the Hawks have not made a deep playoff run while he's been on the team.  Why is he an 'old' 30?

Not sure of the reasoning other people use, by my reasoning comes simply from watching him play.

He does not move or play like a 30 year old.  He moves and plays like a 33 - 34 year old.  His rebounding has dropped off a cliff, he looks even slower then Sully, and his offensive game has pretty much transformed into that of a jump shooter and not much else.

His agility and offensive ability is basically on par with where KG was at when he was ~35 years old, except that his defence and rebounding is not even remotely close to that of a 35 year old KG.

Horford just isn't the player he used to be.  Even when he was in his prime, he was never a real surefire star.  He was a borderline star who played beyond his talent level because of all the little things he did, and because of his energy and effort.

Now he looks like a shadow of his former self (despite being only 30, and seemingly completely healthy) which is a major red flag to me when I start thinking about how he is going to look one, two of (god forbid) three years from now.

As big men get older their game tends to slowly drop for a year or two, and then suddenly drops off a cliff one year - as was the case with KG when he moved to Brooklyn, and Pierce this year, and David West recently.

Horford seems to have already put up a season or two of "gradual decline", and it looks like his "fall off a cliff" moment is frighteningly imminent.  I suspect that he has at most two seasons of effective starting basketball left in him before he drops off hard and becomes a backup / end of bench big man (e.g. David Lee, David West).

All the signs are there, and I'm just surprised that more people haven't seen it.

[crimson_stallion]

Better them than us.

Mark my words right now - any team who offers Al Horford upwards of $25m+ a year for the next 4+ years is going to regret it in a huge way.

I personally think he will be a good signing for at least three of those four years. Over the last four years his stats have been pretty consistent in just about every category, advanced stats or not, with the exception of his rebounding, which has trailed off some as Atlanta has played him more on the perimeter, and his three point shooting, which he has developed into a weapon just this year.

I think Horford's game will stay consistent for a few years but probably not be great at 34 years old. But he will give great value for that contract under the new salary structure for at least three years, IMO.

I'm not sure how anybody could describe a 30 year old 15-and-7 guy as being "great value" when being paid $25 million a year.   

Even when you factor in the rising cap situation, I still just cannot fathom that concept.

For any guy to be considered "great value" at $25M a year, they had better be either:

1) An all our superstar (Lebron, Durant, Harden, etc)
2) A <25 year old All-Star who has potential to become an all out superstar

I just don't understand how $25M a year for a fringe All-Star can be considered great value, good value, or even fair value.  It's a definite overpay (even at his current level of production) and projects to be a horrendous overpay in 2-3 years if he declines further (which he almost certainly will).

Somebody mentioned Joe Johnson's contract as a comparison - it sounds a bit harsh, but it's actually not far off the reality of the situation.  Joe Johnson was from memory around 28-29 when he got his last huge contract, and at the time he still looked like an All-Star for the most part.  Fast forward a couple of years, and Johnson's massive decline has rendered him utterly untradeable.  The only good thing that came from Johnson's big contract is that it utterly crippled the Nets finances, which in turn left them unable to recover from the Pierce/KG failed experiment, which in turn led to us scoring the Nets #3 pick.

You take a very, very big risk when you give a huge contract to a ~ 30 year old fringe star. 

I'm ok with giving a big contract to a ~30 year old guy if it's somebody who is a former / current superstar (Lebron, Carmelo, Dwight) because when a superstar declines, you usually still end up with an All-Star or fringe All-Star.  But taking that gamble on a ~30 year old guy who is ALREADY a fringe All-Star is risky, because when those guys fade out they become decent starters at best - and nobody will ever take on a mammoth contract for a 'decent starter', so those guys end up becoming completely untradeable.

[jambr380]

Crimson has been arguing against Horford for a while and it's hard to disagree with his logic. It hard to say no when you can get something for nothing (nothing in this case means not giving up picks/players), but the NBA has a salary cap and he would take up a massive part of that.

I am just glad we didn't trade for him mid-season because we would be giving him more years and money which would assinine. I will say, however, that if Durant (for some reason) says he will come here if we sign Horford, then we should obviously do it, as Durant is worth much more than the max and some of Horford's money would essentially be Durant's.

One last thing, some have said that Horford will sign a 1-1 so that he can sign an even bigger max next year. I can't imagine him taking that chance with what will likely be a pretty sharp decline (or what will be perceived as one by GMs) at any moment.

[crimson_stallion]

Crimson has been arguing against Horford for a while and it's hard to disagree with his logic. It hard to say no when you can get something for nothing (nothing in this case means not giving up picks/players), but the NBA has a salary cap and he would take up a massive part of that.

I am just glad we didn't trade for him mid-season because we would be giving him more years and money which would assinine. I will say, however, that if Durant (for some reason) says he will come here if we sign Horford, then we should obviously do it, as Durant is worth much more than the max and some of Horford's money would essentially be Durant's.

One last thing, some have said that Horford will sign a 1-1 so that he can sign an even bigger max next year. I can't imagine him taking that chance with what will likely be a pretty sharp decline (or what will be perceived as one by GMs) at any moment.

Thanks for the kind words

I kinda feel bad being so negative about Horford because I do really like who he seems to be as a person.  He seems like a great locker room guy, a good teammate, and a legitimate team first guy. 

I feel especially bad about it because there was a time (some years back) when I really did like Horford.  Hell, I still remember that playoff series against the Hawks where we pretty much had them in a corner, then Horford came back from injury and the moment he returned he absolutely killed us - really made things difficult.  We still won the series from memory, but it was a hard fought battle to the very end.

So memories like that make me feel positive towards Horford and make me want to root for him.  But at the same time I know it's important to remove oneself from the situation emotionally and look at it from an objective point of view, and when you look at the player Horford is right now, it does make it really difficult to justify/support the idea of investing so much into him. 

It's such a big risk, and one that I feel we cannot afford to make if we want to propel ourselves to true contender status.  While the new cap situation makes it very tempting to splurge and throw money away just for the sake of throwing money away, that's exactly the type of approach that gets teams into long term financial problems.  Just ask the Pistons (Villenueva and Gordon) and the Nets (Pierce/KG/Johnson/Deron). 

Even when you have what feels like masses of free money to spend...sometimes the best purchase is still no purchase at all.  Sometimes you're just betting off leaving that cash for a rainy day, or saving it for when that perfect deal arises that you've been waiting on for years.  You don't want to overcommit on mediocrity only to find that when that big deal comes along, you are out of the running. 

Luckily Danny has made a lot of comments in the recent months suggestion that he will not overspend for talent purely for the sake of adding talent.  He won't acquire new talent unless either (a) the price is fair or (b) it is world class talent.  If it's the latter case, you overpay regardless.

Danny could have made moves to bring in guys like Horford, Love or Howard this trade deadline, but he didn't do it.  He didn't want to give up valuable future assets (Nets pick, Crowder, etc) for guys who he felt couldn't be game changers, or wouldn't be able to stick around long enough.  I love that he has that mindset, and I think it will serve him well (as it has thus far).

[CoachBo]

I don't agree - at all - with the "best deal is the one not made" philosophy and I fear we're about to see why played out on the floor in the Atlanta series.

This team as constituted is NOT a championship contender, and I'd caution Celtics Fan against becoming enamored with it. Ainge is quite correct - moves are going to have to be made to upgrade the talent on this roster.

Al Horford is a talented player who would be an asset to the Celtics. Is he atop my wish list? No. But he is a definite upgrade over our inside game as it exists today. I wouldn't be upset if Ainge landed him - because this franchise is not close to 18, and Ainge needs to move it closer NOW. The window of "well, we'll stand pat because we can't fleece anyone" has closed. "Assets" aren't valuable if you can't parlay them into championship basketball.

[CoachBo]

Better them than us.

Mark my words right now - any team who offers Al Horford upwards of $25m+ a year for the next 4+ years is going to regret it in a huge way.

I personally think he will be a good signing for at least three of those four years. Over the last four years his stats have been pretty consistent in just about every category, advanced stats or not, with the exception of his rebounding, which has trailed off some as Atlanta has played him more on the perimeter, and his three point shooting, which he has developed into a weapon just this year.

I think Horford's game will stay consistent for a few years but probably not be great at 34 years old. But he will give great value for that contract under the new salary structure for at least three years, IMO.

Completely agree with this. TP.

[Evantime34]

As reported by Chris Vivlamore, the Atlanta Hawks are willing to offer a five-year max deal to Al Horford, who'll be an unrestricted free-agent this summer. Horford has been a key player for the Hawks in the recent past and the front-office wants to keep him around no matter the price.

The market for Horford could be very big, with teams like Raptors, Celtics and Cavs that will pursue him.

Link: http://www.sportando.com/en/usa/nba/197132/hawks-willing-to-offer-a-max-deal-to-al-horford-in-the-off-season.html

Sounds crazy to me that they are willing to offer a 30 year old player that much money. We might have to win the series against Atlanta if we want to convince Horford that we are a much better team for him than the one he is playing on right now.

If the Hawks offer him the 5 year max then he isn't leaving.

[rondohondo]

Howard said he likes atl and is from there , would they have enough room to sign Horford and Dwight to max deals?

Teague
Korver
Millsap
Horford
Dwight

[loco_91]

If we want to get Horford, it's important that we beat the Hawks. Will make their front office think hard about rebuilding, and will make Horford think hard about greener pastures.

I think Horford would be great on this squad. Massive upgrade over our current bigs. We can afford to pay him the max with all the young talent that's coming in, and I don't see him as the type of guy whose game falls off a cliff in his early 30's. If anything he's actually improved the last couple years, slashing his turnovers and adding a 3pt shot to his game.

[SparzWizard]

I'll give Al Horford a 4-5 year max contract with no hesitation, if he guarantees Kevin Durant signing here. 

[jpd985]

I'll give Al Horford a 4-5 year max contract with no hesitation, if he guarantees Kevin Durant signing here. 

We can only sign him for 4 max. Only Atlanta can give him 5 years.