Author Topic: Could Horford end up being the worst contract of offseason?  (Read 6614 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Could Horford end up being the worst contract of offseason?
« Reply #15 on: July 17, 2019, 02:50:57 PM »

Offline celticsclay

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11002
  • Tommy Points: 1163
As long as he holds up pretty well for two years no.

The 76ers are all in on the next two years, after that they'll be selling off someone.

Isn't 56 million for two years of non-all-star level play fairly unprecedented?

As a % of the cap, I don't think it's that unprecedented.  Using $28m per against cap figures from here, Horford's contract will be between 24%-25% of the cap the next 2 years, and 21%-22% in Years 3-4.

Similar to Gasol (22%) and Ibaka (20%) this last year.

Tristan Thompson was 20% of the cap in '16.

David Lee (24%) and Andrew Bogut (21%) were the 2 highest paid players for GS in '15 (helps to have Steph on a bargain, and Klay and Green on rookie deals).

And then you have cases of guys like Stephen Jackson (SAS '13) or Caron Butler (DAL '11) who are the 3rd highest players on their team taking up 17%-18% of the cap, but aren't even playing in the playoffs for their teams Finals/Championship run.  Even if they did play you're not getting top 3-4 player production from them (Butler is questionable, but Jackson was like 9th man in Spurs rotation).  Add that salary to a random bench guy, and you suddenly have 25% of your cap and only getting 8th-9th man production from 1 player out of it.

Horford's making a lot for his role/production for sure, but not unprecedented, can't-win-with-this-contract levels.

The percentage of cap is interesting but I think it is unfair to use guys like Gasol and Ibaka making that at the last year of their contract. The first couple years of the contract they were expect to perform better than what they were this last year. How much worse is Horford supposed to be compared to what Gasol was in the first year of his recent deal? in 2015 when they signed Gasol to that 5 year deal he was only 30 and coming off a year averaging 17.5 points and 8 rebounds. At that point he was coming off an all-star season and would in fact go on to make another all-star game. I don't think Philly or anyone else is expecting Horford to do that at 33.

Re: Could Horford end up being the worst contract of offseason?
« Reply #16 on: July 17, 2019, 02:53:40 PM »

Offline Fafnir

  • Larry Bird
  • *****************************
  • Posts: 29838
  • Tommy Points: 1247
I posed this question in the "what grade would you give the offseason thread?" but Ainge couldn't afford Horford because he needed the cap space to offer Kemba a max contract, right?
Yes barring a sign triple sign and trade that would have required Boston sending something BKN wanted. (They reportedly asked for the Memphis pick when Boston was trying to change Horford's mind still)

Re: Could Horford end up being the worst contract of offseason?
« Reply #17 on: July 17, 2019, 02:57:30 PM »

Offline gpap

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7559
  • Tommy Points: 358
I posed this question in the "what grade would you give the offseason thread?" but Ainge couldn't afford Horford because he needed the cap space to offer Kemba a max contract, right?
Yes barring a sign triple sign and trade that would have required Boston sending something BKN wanted. (They reportedly asked for the Memphis pick when Boston was trying to change Horford's mind still)

Better off that Ainge balked then. I think Horford had his mind made up he was going to leave Boston. Not necessarily anything personal, but he might not have liked Brad's coaching and the idea of him playing center.

He probably looks at Philly as a better fit being a 4 with a big playing behind him in Embiid.


Re: Could Horford end up being the worst contract of offseason?
« Reply #18 on: July 17, 2019, 03:08:37 PM »

Offline obnoxiousmime

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2053
  • Tommy Points: 202
  • "Smile for the camera, Shareef!"
Remember, the deal is 97 million guaranteed and 12 million "tied to championships." So that's 24.25 million/year with the potential to be worth 27.25/year (the details of the bonus haven't been revealed so I'm just guessing based on an average). If they win a title, they'd gladly pay that. I'm just pointing this out because it seems like some people are thinking he's making the max or something.

I don't think that's a crazy amount because they're clearly going for it and two years of solid play would make the deal worth it. Also, they had to sign somebody before Simmons' contract extension kicks in and they're capped out. Were there better ways to spend that money? I can't really think of anyone else that would have gone there that is an impact guy, maybe Bojan Bogdanovic since they need shooting? Or, they could have tried to get Mirotic who went to Europe. Other than that, there aren't many other attractive names that aren't role players and whom fit their team.

There's also the added benefit of making the Celtics weaker in the short term. Horford was one of the few guys who could somewhat guard Embiid one-on-one, and he's also good (if you can say anybody is) at guarding Giannis.

Basically, it's the kind of deal that makes sense for a contending team but is too rich for a non-contender. That's why you could say both Philly and the Celtics made the right decision.
Yo pretty boy. I looked up basketball player in the dictionary and it said 'Not you!'

Re: Could Horford end up being the worst contract of offseason?
« Reply #19 on: July 17, 2019, 03:25:28 PM »

Offline celticsclay

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11002
  • Tommy Points: 1163
Remember, the deal is 97 million guaranteed and 12 million "tied to championships." So that's 24.25 million/year with the potential to be worth 27.25/year (the details of the bonus haven't been revealed so I'm just guessing based on an average). If they win a title, they'd gladly pay that. I'm just pointing this out because it seems like some people are thinking he's making the max or something.

I don't think that's a crazy amount because they're clearly going for it and two years of solid play would make the deal worth it. Also, they had to sign somebody before Simmons' contract extension kicks in and they're capped out. Were there better ways to spend that money? I can't really think of anyone else that would have gone there that is an impact guy, maybe Bojan Bogdanovic since they need shooting? Or, they could have tried to get Mirotic who went to Europe. Other than that, there aren't many other attractive names that aren't role players and whom fit their team.

There's also the added benefit of making the Celtics weaker in the short term. Horford was one of the few guys who could somewhat guard Embiid one-on-one, and he's also good (if you can say anybody is) at guarding Giannis.

Basically, it's the kind of deal that makes sense for a contending team but is too rich for a non-contender. That's why you could say both Philly and the Celtics made the right decision.

You can argue about the 4th year having only partial guaranteed money (at which point al will be 37?) but he is making 28, 27, 27 the next 3 years and from everything i am reading all of that is fully guaranteed. Not really reasonable to try and finesse the numbers because the last year is not guaranteed. They are paying him legit all-star money the next 3 years.

Re: Could Horford end up being the worst contract of offseason?
« Reply #20 on: July 17, 2019, 03:57:05 PM »

Offline Walker Wiggle

  • Marcus Smart
  • Posts: 182
  • Tommy Points: 45
Thestepien had a pretty deep dive on this. Bottom line - they have questions about the first two seasons of the contract and they're bearish on the last two.

As the OP points out, Al's minutes per game fell below 30 for the first time in his career; he also didn't reach 70 games. That *might* just be load management, but the team reported he was having trouble with his knees and we saw he was well off his game the first part of the year. Another injury could become a serious problem. Maybe more significant is that his dunks and scoring inside the 3-point arc just died in the playoffs, meaning he wasn't a very efficient offensive player even while he kept shooting threes pretty well. In the past he was able to post-up or drive - something he didn't do this past year. Again, maybe that was just strategy, or maybe he doesn't need to be a threat to score at the rim if he's playing with Philly - camping on the arc is fine. But it could also reflect diminishing athleticism. Sometimes you see a player in his 30s who declines gradually; other times, a minor injury or loss of athleticism takes him below a threshold and he's really inefficient. Hard to say how that plays out for Philly.

One last note about this Stepien piece - they pointed out that Philly had a lot of trouble with small, shifty guards who can pull up into their shot - Kemba roasted them last year - and they think the Cs may match up pretty well, especially if they can make a move at the deadline for a good center.

https://www.thestepien.com/2019/07/11/horford-76er-relation-injury-age-player-decline-non-elite-players/

Haven't read the piece cited above but I would also be concerned about that team's ability to guard on the perimeter. There are not a lot of teams that play two bigs like that, as Philly is about to do with Embiid and Horford. Horford isn't stone-footed, but he's not as mobile as he used to be -- no way. That team is going to get absolutely roasted on defense by five-out, drive-and-kick, 3-point shooting perimeter teams. Can you make up for it on the other side, with Horford punishing other opposing PFs in the post on offense? I'm not entirely sold.

The value for Philly may simply be that Embiid himself can't play a lot of minutes, and you need someone not just to start alongside him, but to serve as the backup center when he's on the bench. That makes some sense, but I'm not sure that's worth the money for Horford at his age.

Re: Could Horford end up being the worst contract of offseason?
« Reply #21 on: July 17, 2019, 04:02:14 PM »

Offline DefenseWinsChamps

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3133
  • Tommy Points: 525
It depends on how you value your money.

I think Horford's on court impact will be similar to Andre Igoudala's in his age 33 season with the Warriors. Iggy went for 7-4-3 with good defense. That's what I think Horford will average in his lesser role this year.

That's only worth that much money if the team is playing in championship series.
Most talent in the league. We don't want or need AD.

Re: Could Horford end up being the worst contract of offseason?
« Reply #22 on: July 17, 2019, 04:06:26 PM »

Offline Diggles

  • Kyrie Irving
  • Posts: 838
  • Tommy Points: 42
Look what injuries did you Hayward!    So he "could"   
Diggles

Re: Could Horford end up being the worst contract of offseason?
« Reply #23 on: July 17, 2019, 04:07:21 PM »

Offline celticsclay

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11002
  • Tommy Points: 1163
It depends on how you value your money.

I think Horford's on court impact will be similar to Andre Igoudala's in his age 33 season with the Warriors. Iggy went for 7-4-3 with good defense. That's what I think Horford will average in his lesser role this year.

That's only worth that much money if the team is playing in championship series.

If Horford averages 7-4-3 in the first year of this contract, it will definitely be the worst deal signed by anyone this offseason (worse than Terry or Barnes.

Re: Could Horford end up being the worst contract of offseason?
« Reply #24 on: July 17, 2019, 04:14:57 PM »

Offline ETNCeltics

  • NCE
  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1331
  • Tommy Points: 135
No, I think the worst contract signed this offseason (from a team's perspective) will hands-down be Rozier's.

But I do believe Philly will regret this contract in 2 years if they haven't won a title. Al was good for us and it hurt to see him leave, but he showed signs of aging, IMO. It will short-term strengthen Philly and weaken us, but I think it worked out good for us from the perspective of the next 5 years, all things considered.

Re: Could Horford end up being the worst contract of offseason?
« Reply #25 on: July 17, 2019, 04:15:24 PM »

Offline DefenseWinsChamps

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3133
  • Tommy Points: 525
It depends on how you value your money.

I think Horford's on court impact will be similar to Andre Igoudala's in his age 33 season with the Warriors. Iggy went for 7-4-3 with good defense. That's what I think Horford will average in his lesser role this year.

That's only worth that much money if the team is playing in championship series.

If Horford averages 7-4-3 in the first year of this contract, it will definitely be the worst deal signed by anyone this offseason (worse than Terry or Barnes.

People would have said the same thing about Igoudala if the Warriors weren't winning, but that is what I fully expect he will average.
Most talent in the league. We don't want or need AD.

Re: Could Horford end up being the worst contract of offseason?
« Reply #26 on: July 17, 2019, 04:19:49 PM »

Offline ETNCeltics

  • NCE
  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1331
  • Tommy Points: 135
It depends on how you value your money.

I think Horford's on court impact will be similar to Andre Igoudala's in his age 33 season with the Warriors. Iggy went for 7-4-3 with good defense. That's what I think Horford will average in his lesser role this year.

That's only worth that much money if the team is playing in championship series.
Iggy in GSW was a very narrow set of circumstances. Because of the way contracts worked out with their guys on long-term deals from the old CBA, they had $$ to throw at him without a ton of luxury tax.

Now that Klay is getting paid and luxury tax will be huge, they're looking to shed higher priced guys. No team can sustain reasonable cap economics while paying a role player a near max contract, a role which Al may be quickly approaching.


Re: Could Horford end up being the worst contract of offseason?
« Reply #27 on: July 17, 2019, 04:25:59 PM »

Offline SparzWizard

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7768
  • Tommy Points: 439
Not if they make it to the NBA Finals a few times during his contract tenure.

Re: Could Horford end up being the worst contract of offseason?
« Reply #28 on: July 17, 2019, 04:26:58 PM »

Offline bdm860

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4645
  • Tommy Points: 1985
As long as he holds up pretty well for two years no.

The 76ers are all in on the next two years, after that they'll be selling off someone.

Isn't 56 million for two years of non-all-star level play fairly unprecedented?

As a % of the cap, I don't think it's that unprecedented.  Using $28m per against cap figures from here, Horford's contract will be between 24%-25% of the cap the next 2 years, and 21%-22% in Years 3-4.

Similar to Gasol (22%) and Ibaka (20%) this last year.

Tristan Thompson was 20% of the cap in '16.

David Lee (24%) and Andrew Bogut (21%) were the 2 highest paid players for GS in '15 (helps to have Steph on a bargain, and Klay and Green on rookie deals).

And then you have cases of guys like Stephen Jackson (SAS '13) or Caron Butler (DAL '11) who are the 3rd highest players on their team taking up 17%-18% of the cap, but aren't even playing in the playoffs for their teams Finals/Championship run.  Even if they did play you're not getting top 3-4 player production from them (Butler is questionable, but Jackson was like 9th man in Spurs rotation).  Add that salary to a random bench guy, and you suddenly have 25% of your cap and only getting 8th-9th man production from 1 player out of it.

Horford's making a lot for his role/production for sure, but not unprecedented, can't-win-with-this-contract levels.

The percentage of cap is interesting but I think it is unfair to use guys like Gasol and Ibaka making that at the last year of their contract. The first couple years of the contract they were expect to perform better than what they were this last year. How much worse is Horford supposed to be compared to what Gasol was in the first year of his recent deal? in 2015 when they signed Gasol to that 5 year deal he was only 30 and coming off a year averaging 17.5 points and 8 rebounds. At that point he was coming off an all-star season and would in fact go on to make another all-star game. I don't think Philly or anyone else is expecting Horford to do that at 33.

I think it's fair to use Gasol/Ibaka because those were new deals for Toronto, and neither were expiring.  Toronto took on Gasol, knowing they're paying him 24% of the cap this last year (my math was slightly off in previous post when I said 22%) and 23% this upcoming season, hoping he'd be their 4th-5th best player and definitely not expecting him to make an All-Star team ever again.  Toronto willingly took that on knowing Memphis production from 3 years ago was never coming back.  To me that's practically the same thing as signing a 2 year contract with Toronto last year.  No?

Toronto took on Ibaka knowing they'd have to pay him 20% of the cap that 1st half of season, and with an estimate that it would be 21% of the cap for the other 2 seasons remaining, hoping he'd be their 3rd-4th best player and knowing he has never have and most likely never will make an All-Star team.

Those were new deals for Toronto that Toronto chose to take on at their current rates.  Both shorter than Al's 4 year deal, sure, but I was just comparing the first 2 years based off your/Fafnir's correspondence ($56m for 2 years).  Very similar to Gasol/Ibaka situation me thinks.

After 18 months with their Bigs, the Littles were: 46% less likely to use illegal drugs, 27% less likely to use alcohol, 52% less likely to skip school, 37% less likely to skip a class

Re: Could Horford end up being the worst contract of offseason?
« Reply #29 on: July 17, 2019, 04:50:03 PM »

Offline celticsclay

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11002
  • Tommy Points: 1163
As long as he holds up pretty well for two years no.

The 76ers are all in on the next two years, after that they'll be selling off someone.

Isn't 56 million for two years of non-all-star level play fairly unprecedented?

As a % of the cap, I don't think it's that unprecedented.  Using $28m per against cap figures from here, Horford's contract will be between 24%-25% of the cap the next 2 years, and 21%-22% in Years 3-4.

Similar to Gasol (22%) and Ibaka (20%) this last year.

Tristan Thompson was 20% of the cap in '16.

David Lee (24%) and Andrew Bogut (21%) were the 2 highest paid players for GS in '15 (helps to have Steph on a bargain, and Klay and Green on rookie deals).

And then you have cases of guys like Stephen Jackson (SAS '13) or Caron Butler (DAL '11) who are the 3rd highest players on their team taking up 17%-18% of the cap, but aren't even playing in the playoffs for their teams Finals/Championship run.  Even if they did play you're not getting top 3-4 player production from them (Butler is questionable, but Jackson was like 9th man in Spurs rotation).  Add that salary to a random bench guy, and you suddenly have 25% of your cap and only getting 8th-9th man production from 1 player out of it.

Horford's making a lot for his role/production for sure, but not unprecedented, can't-win-with-this-contract levels.

The percentage of cap is interesting but I think it is unfair to use guys like Gasol and Ibaka making that at the last year of their contract. The first couple years of the contract they were expect to perform better than what they were this last year. How much worse is Horford supposed to be compared to what Gasol was in the first year of his recent deal? in 2015 when they signed Gasol to that 5 year deal he was only 30 and coming off a year averaging 17.5 points and 8 rebounds. At that point he was coming off an all-star season and would in fact go on to make another all-star game. I don't think Philly or anyone else is expecting Horford to do that at 33.

I think it's fair to use Gasol/Ibaka because those were new deals for Toronto, and neither were expiring.  Toronto took on Gasol, knowing they're paying him 24% of the cap this last year (my math was slightly off in previous post when I said 22%) and 23% this upcoming season, hoping he'd be their 4th-5th best player and definitely not expecting him to make an All-Star team ever again.  Toronto willingly took that on knowing Memphis production from 3 years ago was never coming back.  To me that's practically the same thing as signing a 2 year contract with Toronto last year.  No?

Toronto took on Ibaka knowing they'd have to pay him 20% of the cap that 1st half of season, and with an estimate that it would be 21% of the cap for the other 2 seasons remaining, hoping he'd be their 3rd-4th best player and knowing he has never have and most likely never will make an All-Star team.

Those were new deals for Toronto that Toronto chose to take on at their current rates.  Both shorter than Al's 4 year deal, sure, but I was just comparing the first 2 years based off your/Fafnir's correspondence ($56m for 2 years).  Very similar to Gasol/Ibaka situation me thinks.

Well I still think that Gasol is quite a bit different from Horford here. They got Gasol with 3 months left in the season, he had a player option people were not even certain he would take, but at worst, they are paying him a high amount for three months of a championship run and then at worst have a large expiring on their hand. How can you compare that to 85 million for horford over 3 years? However, at least as players I agree they were at similar points in their career with horford being a little bit better than Gasol. With Ibaka, he was at a very different point in his career. He was averaging 15, 7 and 1.5 blocks for Orlando and only 27 years old. I don't think they were viewing him as a declining player at that point like Horford is now.

 

Hello! Guest

Welcome to the CelticsStrong Forums.

Community

Signup to win FREE tickets

* indicates required