Al Horford averaging 15 points, 6 assists, 9.5 rebounds in this playoff series.

[tankcity!]

Why are people equating 5 games to a whole season? At his peak Horford was a 3rd best type player on a title team and he has pretty steadily getting worse.  If Boston had signed Durant then Horford made sense but on his own it was a bad signing because he just isn't good enough.

Why are we equating 2 months of Embiid equaling future superstar? What kind of question is that? Um 5 games in playoffs is pretty important stuff. Keep stewing though. Enjoy watching the smellfest in philly.

**** are you talking about?

Enjoy watching Philly these playoffs? Oh wait, they suck. Keep stewing.

[ederson]

Comparing this season to last season the team finished higher got more wins and reached the EC semis (so far)

It s true that Horford s stats line is not impressive but I doubt the team reached this point because of Jaylen and Rozier....

[GratefulCs]

Why are people equating 5 games to a whole season? At his peak Horford was a 3rd best type player on a title team and he has pretty steadily getting worse.  If Boston had signed Durant then Horford made sense but on his own it was a bad signing because he just isn't good enough.

Why are we equating 2 months of Embiid equaling future superstar? What kind of question is that? Um 5 games in playoffs is pretty important stuff. Keep stewing though. Enjoy watching the smellfest in philly.

**** are you talking about?

Enjoy watching Philly these playoffs? Oh wait, they suck. Keep stewing.

Horford is on OUR team so OBVIOUSLY he can't be any good

[mmmmm]

Horford's stats:

Regular season:  14 points, 5.0 assists, 6.8 rebounds in 32.3 mpg.

Playoffs:  16.1 points, 7.0 assists, 8.6 rebounds in 34.0 mpg.

For those who don't think those stat lines are impressive, it's probably because they don't consider the value of the assists.

Per NBA.com's Player Tracking data, Horford's assists resulted in 12.0 points per game in the regular season and so far 17.1 points per game in the playoffs.  I.E., between points scored and assisted, Horford created 26 per game in the regular season and so far 33.2 per game in the playoffs.

If Horford had posted a stat line of 24 points, 1 assist and 6.8 rebounds in the regular season, would that have been more to their liking?

Or, say, 30 points,  1 assist and 8.6 rebounds in these playoffs?   Would that finally transform him into a 'max player' for those otherwise still doubting?

But the effect on the scoreboard of those two 'alternative reality' stat lines isn't any better than the real stat lines that he actually has posted.

[Roy H.]

For those who don't think those stat lines are impressive, it's probably because they don't consider the value of the assists.

And even beyond stats, Horford is an integral part of our offense, in terms of both movement and spacing.

[Big333223]

I had a response to Big typed and for some reason it didn't go through and I lost.  Basically, I would have signed a combination of lesser players than Horford last summer, with less long term money locked up.  There were any combination of players that could have been signed, including just keeping Sullinger (of course they could have kept him anyway).  Speights, Ezeli, Biyombo, even Howard, all would have been interesting.  I mean is the team really much worse if instead of Horford and Zeller, it has Howard, Sullinger, and Speights (you could even still have Green if you just cut Young as well as Hunter).  The other option would have been just sign some 1 year deal type players (like Sullinger and Speights) and then go into the deadline and acquire someone like Ibaka or Noel, or frankly both of them since you could still have max cap room and keep one of those guys this summer.  Again is the team that much different if instead of Horford and Zeller you have Sullinger, Speights, and Ibaka or Noel.  I don't think the product on the floor is that much different, but in the latter scenarios you don't have nearly 30 million in salary locked up in a player that doesn't fit the age timeline of the rest of the team and isn't a #1 player.  heck at this point Horford probably isn't even a #2 player, and by the end of his contract might not even be a #3 player.  Horford was a bad signing at the time.  A few good playoff games doesn't change that.

Biyombo signed a monster long term deal with Orlando, he never would've come to Boston for a 1 year contract. Howard, similarly, would never have taken a shorter deal with Boston when he had his hometown offering him good money for 3 years. So those two are out. 

Ezeli didn't play a game this season so that would've been wasted money. Speights is interesting but a career backup who would've been fighting for minutes alongside the rest of the big men who weren't good enough to start.

Acquiring someone like Ibaka or Noel means having to deal with their impending free agencies this summer as well which means you're either planning making them one of your big expenditures (neither are as good as Horford) or letting them walk which means giving up assets for a one year rental in a year in which the team wouldn't be competing for anything, especially because the team, in this hypothetical, would be worse than they were in actuality.

To asnwer your question of whether the team is much different with your list of players, the answer is an obvious yes. Our current team is much better than the one you're talking about. For one thing, you can't play 7 players at the same time so you're not replacing Horford is 3 guys, you're replacing him with 1 guy and the other 2 are sitting on the bench.

And if the whole reason for not picking up a superior player (Horford) is to retain max level room for 2 players this summer, who are those players that are more worth it than Horford and are going to come to Boston? And if it's not about this summer, then none of it makes sense to me, because after this summer, IT and Bradley will be looking to get paid which means the space won't be there, anyway.

[celticsclay]

I had a response to Big typed and for some reason it didn't go through and I lost.  Basically, I would have signed a combination of lesser players than Horford last summer, with less long term money locked up.  There were any combination of players that could have been signed, including just keeping Sullinger (of course they could have kept him anyway).  Speights, Ezeli, Biyombo, even Howard, all would have been interesting.  I mean is the team really much worse if instead of Horford and Zeller, it has Howard, Sullinger, and Speights (you could even still have Green if you just cut Young as well as Hunter).  The other option would have been just sign some 1 year deal type players (like Sullinger and Speights) and then go into the deadline and acquire someone like Ibaka or Noel, or frankly both of them since you could still have max cap room and keep one of those guys this summer.  Again is the team that much different if instead of Horford and Zeller you have Sullinger, Speights, and Ibaka or Noel.  I don't think the product on the floor is that much different, but in the latter scenarios you don't have nearly 30 million in salary locked up in a player that doesn't fit the age timeline of the rest of the team and isn't a #1 player.  heck at this point Horford probably isn't even a #2 player, and by the end of his contract might not even be a #3 player.  Horford was a bad signing at the time.  A few good playoff games doesn't change that.

Biyombo signed a monster long term deal with Orlando, he never would've come to Boston for a 1 year contract. Howard, similarly, would never have taken a shorter deal with Boston when he had his hometown offering him good money for 3 years. So those two are out. 

Ezeli didn't play a game this season so that would've been wasted money. Speights is interesting but a career backup who would've been fighting for minutes alongside the rest of the big men who weren't good enough to start.

Acquiring someone like Ibaka or Noel means having to deal with their impending free agencies this summer as well which means you're either planning making them one of your big expenditures (neither are as good as Horford) or letting them walk which means giving up assets for a one year rental in a year in which the team wouldn't be competing for anything, especially because the team, in this hypothetical, would be worse than they were in actuality.

To asnwer your question of whether the team is much different with your list of players, the answer is an obvious yes. Our current team is much better than the one you're talking about. For one thing, you can't play 7 players at the same time so you're not replacing Horford is 3 guys, you're replacing him with 1 guy and the other 2 are sitting on the bench.

And if the whole reason for not picking up a superior player (Horford) is to retain max level room for 2 players this summer, who are those players that are more worth it than Horford and are going to come to Boston? And if it's not about this summer, then none of it makes sense to me, because after this summer, IT and Bradley will be looking to get paid which means the space won't be there, anyway.

Yea ending up with Speights and Ezeli and Ibaka instead of Horford would have been brutal. As pointed out Ezeli was paid 8 million to not play this year and his second year was not picked up. That was the biggest waste of money this side of Noah. Speights is an ok big, but he doesn't really help our need (rebounding) and he showed when Blake went down that he really can't take on a larger role. Ibaka has not made an ounce of difference for the Raptors and is probably much older than his listed age of 27.

[nickagneta]

For those who don't think those stat lines are impressive, it's probably because they don't consider the value of the assists.

And even beyond stats, Horford is an integral part of our offense, in terms of both movement and spacing.

Plus his great team and individual defense. And all the offcourt intangibles he provides like veteran leadership, calming demeanor, how his presence will affect Boston's image as a place free agents will want to be and what he does in the community. Add that all up and you have a max player.

[Moranis]

I had a response to Big typed and for some reason it didn't go through and I lost.  Basically, I would have signed a combination of lesser players than Horford last summer, with less long term money locked up.  There were any combination of players that could have been signed, including just keeping Sullinger (of course they could have kept him anyway).  Speights, Ezeli, Biyombo, even Howard, all would have been interesting.  I mean is the team really much worse if instead of Horford and Zeller, it has Howard, Sullinger, and Speights (you could even still have Green if you just cut Young as well as Hunter).  The other option would have been just sign some 1 year deal type players (like Sullinger and Speights) and then go into the deadline and acquire someone like Ibaka or Noel, or frankly both of them since you could still have max cap room and keep one of those guys this summer.  Again is the team that much different if instead of Horford and Zeller you have Sullinger, Speights, and Ibaka or Noel.  I don't think the product on the floor is that much different, but in the latter scenarios you don't have nearly 30 million in salary locked up in a player that doesn't fit the age timeline of the rest of the team and isn't a #1 player.  heck at this point Horford probably isn't even a #2 player, and by the end of his contract might not even be a #3 player.  Horford was a bad signing at the time.  A few good playoff games doesn't change that.

Biyombo signed a monster long term deal with Orlando, he never would've come to Boston for a 1 year contract. Howard, similarly, would never have taken a shorter deal with Boston when he had his hometown offering him good money for 3 years. So those two are out. 

Ezeli didn't play a game this season so that would've been wasted money. Speights is interesting but a career backup who would've been fighting for minutes alongside the rest of the big men who weren't good enough to start.

Acquiring someone like Ibaka or Noel means having to deal with their impending free agencies this summer as well which means you're either planning making them one of your big expenditures (neither are as good as Horford) or letting them walk which means giving up assets for a one year rental in a year in which the team wouldn't be competing for anything, especially because the team, in this hypothetical, would be worse than they were in actuality.

To asnwer your question of whether the team is much different with your list of players, the answer is an obvious yes. Our current team is much better than the one you're talking about. For one thing, you can't play 7 players at the same time so you're not replacing Horford is 3 guys, you're replacing him with 1 guy and the other 2 are sitting on the bench.

And if the whole reason for not picking up a superior player (Horford) is to retain max level room for 2 players this summer, who are those players that are more worth it than Horford and are going to come to Boston? And if it's not about this summer, then none of it makes sense to me, because after this summer, IT and Bradley will be looking to get paid which means the space won't be there, anyway.

how does me saying less long term money equate to 1 year deals? 

And Ibaka is basically Horford. Less passing but better shot blocking. Very similar offensive players. Strong overall skills but not elite at anything. They are pretty similar players in their recent careers (early on Horford was a much better rebounder than he is now).  Ibaka is 27 so fits the timeline better as well.  Add Sullinger and Speights to the bench with Ibaka starting and Boston is just as good if not better and would actually have room for a max contract player this summer without moving anyone. Now maybe Boston doesn't sign anyone but Ainge sure seems to think it will which is why he didn't make any moves at the deadline. He wanted to keep that flexibility which he would have had without Horford.  Overpaying Horford gave up the flexibility the team might have had to do something at the deadline.  I mean if Boston basically did nothing ladt summer it could have acquired someone like Cousins and still would have had room to add someone like Hayward this summer.

And Horford will likely cost the team Olynyk, Bradley, and/or Smart just from a salary perspective.  No way the team can realistically keep all of them and Thomas.  And that is if no one is added this summer.  Add someone and Olynyk is for sure gone and Bradley or Smart is as well if not both.  None of that is the case if Horford isn't here taking up valuable salary

[ThaPreacher]

For those who don't think those stat lines are impressive, it's probably because they don't consider the value of the assists.

And even beyond stats, Horford is an integral part of our offense, in terms of both movement and spacing.

Basketball fans on Celticsblog may not understand Al Horford, but basketball coaches everywhere understand what Al Horford does for the Celtics.  Right now, appreciate the man. He's a huge part of the winning.

[cman88]

and if we didnt sign horford, the same posters would be saying how no one wants to sign here and how horford spurred us for atlanta...

hes playing very well this playoffs and along with Thomas (who likewise some posters want to jettison) is a large reason we have won 5 games in a row.

 perhaps horford has finally felt comfortable in the offense.

[Big333223]

how does me saying less long term money equate to 1 year deals? 

And Ibaka is basically Horford. Less passing but better shot blocking. Very similar offensive players. Strong overall skills but not elite at anything. They are pretty similar players in their recent careers (early on Horford was a much better rebounder than he is now).  Ibaka is 27 so fits the timeline better as well.  Add Sullinger and Speights to the bench with Ibaka starting and Boston is just as good if not better and would actually have room for a max contract player this summer without moving anyone. Now maybe Boston doesn't sign anyone but Ainge sure seems to think it will which is why he didn't make any moves at the deadline. He wanted to keep that flexibility which he would have had without Horford.  Overpaying Horford gave up the flexibility the team might have had to do something at the deadline.  I mean if Boston basically did nothing ladt summer it could have acquired someone like Cousins and still would have had room to add someone like Hayward this summer.

And Horford will likely cost the team Olynyk, Bradley, and/or Smart just from a salary perspective.  No way the team can realistically keep all of them and Thomas.  And that is if no one is added this summer.  Add someone and Olynyk is for sure gone and Bradley or Smart is as well if not both.  None of that is the case if Horford isn't here taking up valuable salary

I talked about one year deals because you previously had stated, "I would have signed multiple lesser individual players on shorter contracts and then gone into this summer with more than max space and the ability to create 2 max spots if needed and tried again."

If you wanted 2 max spots this summer, that would've required expiring deals for the players you mentioned. If 2 max spots wasn't necessarily what you were looking for, the C's will still have to spend some amount of money this summer, plus whatever money you imagine having to pay these players who got a lot of money elsewhere and then IT and Bradley come up for new contracts in '18 and all of a sudden that long term flexibility you wanted is gone. So if it wasn't about keeping money open for this summer, I don't know what it was about.

And then I have a bunch of problems with your Ibaka setup. For one, Ibaka is nowhere near the offensive player Horford is. Ibaka is a spot up shooter and a lob threat but he can't handle the ball, create his own offense, or create offense for others. Calling them "very similar offensive players" would be like calling James Harden a similar offensive player to Klay Thompson because they both shoot 3's (except Klay is probably closer to Harden than Ibaka is to Horford because Klay can handle the ball from a little).

The other big problem is your assertion that, with Ibaka, we'd be able to get max room "without moving anyone" which ignores the fact that Ibaka had to be traded for, so to get him the C's already would have had to move players/assets. And then they'd likely have to spend more money this summer to retain a worse player than Horford or else let him walk and then we're right back where we started, missing a bunch of the players/assets you don't want to lose in order to get max room but we wind up with a worse roster.

[Moranis]

Rozier and Boston's 18 1st supposedly would have gotten Ibaka.  So basically a player that isn't long for the team and a late 1st that likely will be a draft and stash.  His cap hold this summer is less than Horford's contract allowing the team to sign a max free agent without making any additional moves (other than not picking up KO's option).  Sign the max free agent and then re-sign Ibaka.  Ibaka is not the passer Horford is but he is an excellent shooter from everywhere and is a better overall defender (Ibaka can still guard most PF's something Horford can't do). The on court difference wouldn't be that much different but if you had more depth down low it would have overall been a better team.

[celticsclay]

Rozier and Boston's 18 1st supposedly would have gotten Ibaka.  So basically a player that isn't long for the team and a late 1st that likely will be a draft and stash.  His cap hold this summer is less than Horford's contract allowing the team to sign a max free agent without making any additional moves (other than not picking up KO's option).  Sign the max free agent and then re-sign Ibaka.  Ibaka is not the passer Horford is but he is an excellent shooter from everywhere and is a better overall defender (Ibaka can still guard most PF's something Horford can't do). The on court difference wouldn't be that much different but if you had more depth down low it would have overall been a better team.

You really think Ibaka is only 27?
He has shown a sharp decline for someone that should just be entering their peak and looks a lot less physically explosive than he did in his early Thunder years.

[Ilikesports17]

Rozier and Boston's 18 1st supposedly would have gotten Ibaka.  So basically a player that isn't long for the team and a late 1st that likely will be a draft and stash.  His cap hold this summer is less than Horford's contract allowing the team to sign a max free agent without making any additional moves (other than not picking up KO's option).  Sign the max free agent and then re-sign Ibaka.  Ibaka is not the passer Horford is but he is an excellent shooter from everywhere and is a better overall defender (Ibaka can still guard most PF's something Horford can't do). The on court difference wouldn't be that much different but if you had more depth down low it would have overall been a better team.

2 things
1. I think you are underselling the difference between the two players. Horford helps the offense much more than Ibaka and brings more to the team in terms of leadership etc
2. Ibaka wasn't that cheap this offseason. You can't count on a player like that being available at the deadline for peanuts.

So even if you think the on court difference is really small ( I don't) the risk of waiting and potentially adding neither was not worth it. Had you told me this past offseason I could get Ibaka for Rozier or Horford for a max contract it would have made for a decently tough decision, but since that wasn't actually the choice, Horford was a no-brainer.