Celtics & Rockets discussing Howard trade

[Ilikesports17]

If we traded for Howard, then we would be the team with the expiring malcontent and a first round exit.  This argument could go either way.  If they are pretty good assets, why don't we keep them?

Houston is a bottom five defense. That's a huge part of why they're doomed in the playoffs. Howard's D Rating is 4 points better than the team's. The Celtics are a top two defense, and their weaknesses on D happen to be exactly what Howard excels at, interior defense and defensive rebounding. If he were to improve the Celtics' D Rating by 4 points, then we'd be practically equal to San Antonio. That ain't 1st-round-exit material. That's ECF material.

Two mid-late 1sts are pretty good assets for a team looking to get back something for an expiring Howard. Two mid-late 1sts are excessive assets for a team that already has a surplus of picks and a surplus of mid-late 1st talent at the bottom of the roster.

The argument does NOT go either way.
The contexts are very different.

I agree. But then you are dealing with DH and history says he is the worst to deal with. We would have options and even keeping him and overpaying could turn out good if he stays healthy....especially/mostly for the playoffs.

I get the Cavs don't have a DH and that gives us a huge advantage. If we get DH I don't want to hear anything about a second or ECF appearance......we are in championship mode plain and simple.

We might be in that mode, but realistically we would be underdogs to the Cavs and massive Underdogs to GS/SAS.

Bridging the gap between us and that top tier seems virtually impossible unless we acquire another star which I dont really see happening.

[ssspence]

Howard would help the Celts on defense, but would he help on offense?  At this point he's not a guy you can expect to create points for himself more than a handful of times a game.  The lack of spacing and awful free throw shooting might almost cancel out the defensive improvement he'd bring.

Maybe the improvement on the boards would be enough that it would be a net positive.  Still, I can imagine long stretches of bricks.  Isaiah, Smart, Thomas, or Crowder trying to create and having trouble because there's no space to attack the basket with Howard hanging out down low and the defense sagging.

Is he really a worse scorer than Sullinger?

[SparzWizard]

If only Dwight Howard was here like 5 years earlier...

We'd be going into the finals against Dallas with Rondo/Allen/Pierce/KG/Howard lol.

[Yoki_IsTheName]

No Brooklyn picks involved, let's do this.

Dwight would be a massive upgrade in our Center spot, provide rim protection. We can surround him with shooters ala Orlando and maybe he gets an uptick in his offensive game.

This is what Danny collected assets for. Lee, Sullinger, our 1st, 2 2nd's and let's start the negotiations. If this works, great, if not, we gave up a chunk of the assets we accumulated while not giving up the really good ones.

[Forza Juventus]

Getting Dwight Howard would be great if we didn't have to trade a lot. I would trade Lee and either our own first round pick or the Dallas first round pick or one of our rookies or James Young. Basically my offer would be Lee and a young player or pick. I would probably offer 2 young players or picks instead of one if I have to. Idk I've always liked Dwight. The criticism is massively overblown. He would be a lot of fun here and he is a good basketball player. Plus anything that would make the Celtics hating media in New England hate us more would be beautiful.

[kozlodoev]

Howard would help the Celts on defense, but would he help on offense?  At this point he's not a guy you can expect to create points for himself more than a handful of times a game.  The lack of spacing and awful free throw shooting might almost cancel out the defensive improvement he'd bring.

Maybe the improvement on the boards would be enough that it would be a net positive.  Still, I can imagine long stretches of bricks.  Isaiah, Smart, Thomas, or Crowder trying to create and having trouble because there's no space to attack the basket with Howard hanging out down low and the defense sagging.

So that means we'll never sign a center that can't hit a jump shot?

[Dino Pitino]

Howard would help the Celts on defense, but would he help on offense?  At this point he's not a guy you can expect to create points for himself more than a handful of times a game.  The lack of spacing and awful free throw shooting might almost cancel out the defensive improvement he'd bring.

Maybe the improvement on the boards would be enough that it would be a net positive.  Still, I can imagine long stretches of bricks.  Isaiah, Smart, Thomas, or Crowder trying to create and having trouble because there's no space to attack the basket with Howard hanging out down low and the defense sagging.

Think about which players' minutes Howard would be taking, Sullinger and Amir's. Sure, they take more threes, but they suck at it, so they shouldn't. It creates spacing, maybe, but at the cost of efficiency. They're the two worst free throw shooters on the team, too. Howard's free throw weakness isn't actually that much of a liability, it's only been a significant factor in a couple games this year. The rest of the time he makes just enough of them. Meanwhile, he's among the league leaders in FG%, and even TS% despite the free throws. Also, he's one of the best offensive rebounders in the game. So, you lose a little spacing at times, but you also lose the terrible threes Sullinger and Amir take, you risk teams employing Hack-a-Howard to stage a comeback on certain nights, but you gain the extra foul trouble in puts them in, and you gain more offensive rebounds, more dunks, and harder picks. I'd say Howard might actually upgrade our offense overall. I mean, is any big man on the Celtics capable of having a monster scoring night like Howard still occasionally has? When's the last time Sullinger or Amir put up 36 pts and 26 rebounds? Howard did two weeks ago.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Howard would help the Celts on defense, but would he help on offense?  At this point he's not a guy you can expect to create points for himself more than a handful of times a game.  The lack of spacing and awful free throw shooting might almost cancel out the defensive improvement he'd bring.

Maybe the improvement on the boards would be enough that it would be a net positive.  Still, I can imagine long stretches of bricks.  Isaiah, Smart, Thomas, or Crowder trying to create and having trouble because there's no space to attack the basket with Howard hanging out down low and the defense sagging.

Is he really a worse scorer than Sullinger?

TP that. The one thing that sully brings is the threat of the 18 foot jumpshot. Howard does not. Sully is also a pretty good distributor.

As far as rebounding, post defense, and post offense, Howard is an elite option.

How do we adjust? It probably means that Turner and Johnson will never be on the court at the same time as Howard. As it is, we almost always have one non-shooter on the floor at a time anyway. Whether that is Sully (kinda') and Johnson (kinda'), or Turner, Zeller, and Lee.

In today's modern NBA, Howard, Turner, and Johnson can never be on the court at the same time.

[BDeCosta26]

Howard would help the Celts on defense, but would he help on offense?  At this point he's not a guy you can expect to create points for himself more than a handful of times a game.  The lack of spacing and awful free throw shooting might almost cancel out the defensive improvement he'd bring.

Maybe the improvement on the boards would be enough that it would be a net positive.  Still, I can imagine long stretches of bricks.  Isaiah, Smart, Thomas, or Crowder trying to create and having trouble because there's no space to attack the basket with Howard hanging out down low and the defense sagging.

Who stops the DH/IT4 pnr? Howard would also get a lot of bigs/ players into foul trouble, they would be afraid to get near IT4 and if your not in his way he is going to slice your guts. Now, spacing will be left to CBS but it's not as if Sully/Amir have done any of that this year anyway.

Yeah, that Howard/Thomas P&R could be devastating, especially in the playoffs. I'd really like the idea of playing a IT/Bradley/Crowder/Olynyk/Howard starting line-up in the playoffs. And a Smart/Bradley/Crowder/Jerebko/Howard line-up when it's time to clamp down. Maybe you have one of Amir or Zeller left to back-up Howard and play in the 4th if FT's become an issue, or you play small with Crowder/Jerebko at the 4 and Olynyk at the 5.

I like the idea. If we could get him without sending back IT, AB, Smart, Crowder, KO and the 16 or 17 Brooklyn picks, I'd probably be down for that.

[Forza Juventus]

Isaiah
Bradley
Crowder
Olynyk
Howard

I think that's great

[ssspence]

Howard would help the Celts on defense, but would he help on offense?  At this point he's not a guy you can expect to create points for himself more than a handful of times a game.  The lack of spacing and awful free throw shooting might almost cancel out the defensive improvement he'd bring.

Maybe the improvement on the boards would be enough that it would be a net positive.  Still, I can imagine long stretches of bricks.  Isaiah, Smart, Thomas, or Crowder trying to create and having trouble because there's no space to attack the basket with Howard hanging out down low and the defense sagging.

Is he really a worse scorer than Sullinger?

TP that. The one thing that sully brings is the threat of the 18 foot jumpshot. Howard does not. Sully is also a pretty good distributor.

As far as rebounding, post defense, and post offense, Howard is an elite option.

How do we adjust? It probably means that Turner and Johnson will never be on the court at the same time as Howard. As it is, we almost always have one non-shooter on the floor at a time anyway. Whether that is Sully (kinda') and Johnson (kinda'), or Turner, Zeller, and Lee.

In today's modern NBA, Howard, Turner, and Johnson can never be on the court at the same time.

The threat.... but he's not all that good at it.

[Dino Pitino]

If we traded for Howard, then we would be the team with the expiring malcontent and a first round exit.  This argument could go either way.  If they are pretty good assets, why don't we keep them?

Houston is a bottom five defense. That's a huge part of why they're doomed in the playoffs. Howard's D Rating is 4 points better than the team's. The Celtics are a top two defense, and their weaknesses on D happen to be exactly what Howard excels at, interior defense and defensive rebounding. If he were to improve the Celtics' D Rating by 4 points, then we'd be practically equal to San Antonio. That ain't 1st-round-exit material. That's ECF material.

Two mid-late 1sts are pretty good assets for a team looking to get back something for an expiring Howard. Two mid-late 1sts are excessive assets for a team that already has a surplus of picks and a surplus of mid-late 1st talent at the bottom of the roster.

The argument does NOT go either way.
The contexts are very different.

I agree. But then you are dealing with DH and history says he is the worst to deal with. We would have options and even keeping him and overpaying could turn out good if he stays healthy....especially/mostly for the playoffs.

I get the Cavs don't have a DH and that gives us a huge advantage. If we get DH I don't want to hear anything about a second or ECF appearance......we are in championship mode plain and simple.

We might be in that mode, but realistically we would be underdogs to the Cavs and massive Underdogs to GS/SAS.

Bridging the gap between us and that top tier seems virtually impossible unless we acquire another star which I dont really see happening.

I see Howard as a one-time rental that'd give us one decent chance to upset the Cavs and make the Finals, where anything is possible if the defense is really in sync by then. We'd be underdogs to the Cavs, but not by much. Yes, we'd be massive underdogs to either the Warriors or Spurs, but even if there'd be just a 15% chance of beating them, I think those odds are worth the price of two mid-late 1sts, considering the need to do something with that surplus. I mean, everyone is in love with the 15% chance we have at landing Simmons, right? An outside chance at a championship is nothing to scoff at. If it doesn't work, if we only make the ECF or Finals and lose, then it was an exciting deep playoff run, oodles of experience and exposure for our core, and all the best long-term assets are still in place to continue the rebuild just as before. If championships are all that matters to you, then a Howard trade is what you should want right now, because it's a one-off shot to poach a title in the middle of rebuilding, without hurting the rebuild.

[tarheelsxxiii]

Dwight's response, posted a few mins ago on Hoopshype:

Dwight Howard addressed rumors of potential trade talk to Boston: “I didn’t say it, what can I do,” he said after Wednesday’s practice. “There is nothing I can say, teams are going to say what they have to say. I don’t know.”
4 mins ago – via ESPN.com

Edit: Post 2500 right when we land a "star," obviously.

[feckless]

Beside the fact that Dwight has always underachieved-- he is not a rocket scientist nor someone you want to build a team around.  A supposed devout christian with 6 (some say 8 ) plus children buy 6+ different women.  Look up dwight howard and children and think if this is a leader who can be the core of the Celtics.  Sounds slimey and too stupid to me.

[manl_lui]

If we traded for Howard, then we would be the team with the expiring malcontent and a first round exit.  This argument could go either way.  If they are pretty good assets, why don't we keep them?

Houston is a bottom five defense. That's a huge part of why they're doomed in the playoffs. Howard's D Rating is 4 points better than the team's. The Celtics are a top two defense, and their weaknesses on D happen to be exactly what Howard excels at, interior defense and defensive rebounding. If he were to improve the Celtics' D Rating by 4 points, then we'd be practically equal to San Antonio. That ain't 1st-round-exit material. That's ECF material.

Two mid-late 1sts are pretty good assets for a team looking to get back something for an expiring Howard. Two mid-late 1sts are excessive assets for a team that already has a surplus of picks and a surplus of mid-late 1st talent at the bottom of the roster.

The argument does NOT go either way.
The contexts are very different.

I agree. But then you are dealing with DH and history says he is the worst to deal with. We would have options and even keeping him and overpaying could turn out good if he stays healthy....especially/mostly for the playoffs.

I get the Cavs don't have a DH and that gives us a huge advantage. If we get DH I don't want to hear anything about a second or ECF appearance......we are in championship mode plain and simple.

We might be in that mode, but realistically we would be underdogs to the Cavs and massive Underdogs to GS/SAS.

Bridging the gap between us and that top tier seems virtually impossible unless we acquire another star which I dont really see happening.

I see Howard as a one-time rental that'd give us one decent chance to upset the Cavs and make the Finals, where anything is possible if the defense is really in sync by then. We'd be underdogs to the Cavs, but not by much. Yes, we'd be massive underdogs to either the Warriors or Spurs, but even if there'd be just a 15% chance of beating them, I think those odds are worth the price of two mid-late 1sts, considering the need to do something with that surplus. I mean, everyone is in love with the 15% chance we have at landing Simmons, right? An outside chance at a championship is nothing to scoff at. If it doesn't work, if we only make the ECF or Finals and lose, then it was an exciting deep playoff run, oodles of experience and exposure for our core, and all the best long-term assets are still in place to continue the rebuild just as before. If championships are all that matters to you, then a Howard trade is what you should want right now, because it's a one-off shot to poach a title in the middle of rebuilding, without hurting the rebuild.

those are all excellent arguments but I do think there is an incentive for Howard to sign here in my honest opinion. People this year are arguing the EAST is the better conference this year when historically speaking, the West was. Whatever case that may be, I feel in the East, the Cavs pretty much still have the East, and the 2nd Toronto Raptors are still very behind and not many if any teams right now in the East can really give the Cavs a run for their money.

The West right now still has Warriors and Spurs, throw in Thunder or Clippers if you want to or whatever team, but I don't see the West is definitely going to the Warriors with certainty.

If we get Howard, who historically speaking when he is with the Magics, gave the Cavs so much trouble in the regular season and playoffs.

Getting Dwight pushes us past a lot Eastern teams currently fighting with us to be in the middle. We might not win this year, but if we do get Howard in a theoretical world, and reaches the ECF and lose. I think that is enough incentive for Howard to sign an extension to have a chance to reach the ECF every year to face the Cavs or whatnot. I do not think the same could be said about him and the Rockets.