Zach Lowe: C's "recoiled" at price for Dwight,may still have interest....

[Dino Pitino]

Howard can't even play on the the 2nd night of back to backs for fear of injury.

1) That's not exactly true, he's done it at least three times this season, full games, solid performance. 2) It won't matter in the playoffs.

[KGs Knee]

I think the difference is that Howard's game is entirely predicated on his extraordinary athleticism. It's all downhill from here. No skill acquisition to come, no adjustments, no maturing well. Horford -- whose game is already way more rounded and less susceptible to sudden collapse -- in the space of a single season just added a competent three point shot! Howard will fall off a cliff, Horford will have a steady decline. Back injuries could instantly cripple Howard's game forever, as soon as tomorrow, if he falls wrong, once. Horford had a pectoral issue, not really a career-killer. Horford is a half-year younger. Most importantly, though, Horford has played about 20700 minutes, and Howard has played 33400...so in "dog years" Howard is already, say, 34 or 35.

I do prefer Howard as a rental versus Horford as a rental.

But for those health reasons you mention, Horford will almost certainly fetch a bigger contract this summer.

Dwight can want a max deal but it doesn't mean anyone will give it to him.  Horford is good, but he isn't worth a 5 year max either, and unfortunately I do think someone will give it to him.

[Dino Pitino]

I think the difference is that Howard's game is entirely predicated on his extraordinary athleticism. It's all downhill from here. No skill acquisition to come, no adjustments, no maturing well. Horford -- whose game is already way more rounded and less susceptible to sudden collapse -- in the space of a single season just added a competent three point shot! Howard will fall off a cliff, Horford will have a steady decline. Back injuries could instantly cripple Howard's game forever, as soon as tomorrow, if he falls wrong, once. Horford had a pectoral issue, not really a career-killer. Horford is a half-year younger. Most importantly, though, Horford has played about 20700 minutes, and Howard has played 33400...so in "dog years" Howard is already, say, 34 or 35.

I do prefer Howard as a rental versus Horford as a rental.

But for those health reasons you mention, Horford will almost certainly fetch a bigger contract this summer.

Dwight can want a max deal but it doesn't mean anyone will give it to him.  Horford is good, but he isn't worth a 5 year max either, and unfortunately I do think someone will give it to him.

Nope. They're both getting the max. 30 teams with max space, many with way more. There are only going to be about five free agents better than Howard. It's a crap free agent crop. At least one team will go ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ and offer him the max.

[kozlodoev]

I think the difference is that Howard's game is entirely predicated on his extraordinary athleticism. It's all downhill from here. No skill acquisition to come, no adjustments, no maturing well. Horford -- whose game is already way more rounded and less susceptible to sudden collapse -- in the space of a single season just added a competent three point shot! Howard will fall off a cliff, Horford will have a steady decline. Back injuries could instantly cripple Howard's game forever, as soon as tomorrow, if he falls wrong, once. Horford had a pectoral issue, not really a career-killer. Horford is a half-year younger. Most importantly, though, Horford has played about 20700 minutes, and Howard has played 33400...so in "dog years" Howard is already, say, 34 or 35.

I do prefer Howard as a rental versus Horford as a rental.

But for those health reasons you mention, Horford will almost certainly fetch a bigger contract this summer.

Dwight can want a max deal but it doesn't mean anyone will give it to him.  Horford is good, but he isn't worth a 5 year max either, and unfortunately I do think someone will give it to him.

Nope. They're both getting the max. 30 teams with max space, many with way more. There are only going to be about five free agents better than Howard. It's a crap free agent crop. At least one team will go ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ and offer him the max.

There certainly arent going to be 30 teams with max space.

[chambers]

Can't everyone get along and we just get Love AND Howard?

[Dino Pitino]

I think the difference is that Howard's game is entirely predicated on his extraordinary athleticism. It's all downhill from here. No skill acquisition to come, no adjustments, no maturing well. Horford -- whose game is already way more rounded and less susceptible to sudden collapse -- in the space of a single season just added a competent three point shot! Howard will fall off a cliff, Horford will have a steady decline. Back injuries could instantly cripple Howard's game forever, as soon as tomorrow, if he falls wrong, once. Horford had a pectoral issue, not really a career-killer. Horford is a half-year younger. Most importantly, though, Horford has played about 20700 minutes, and Howard has played 33400...so in "dog years" Howard is already, say, 34 or 35.

I do prefer Howard as a rental versus Horford as a rental.

But for those health reasons you mention, Horford will almost certainly fetch a bigger contract this summer.

Dwight can want a max deal but it doesn't mean anyone will give it to him.  Horford is good, but he isn't worth a 5 year max either, and unfortunately I do think someone will give it to him.

Nope. They're both getting the max. 30 teams with max space, many with way more. There are only going to be about five free agents better than Howard. It's a crap free agent crop. At least one team will go ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ and offer him the max.

There certainly arent going to be 30 teams with max space.

Okay, figuratively 30. How many will there literally be? 29? 28? And are we including cap holds or not if a team wants to create space?

[crimson_stallion]

Dwight is an offensive black hole. He can't shoot jumpers or free throws. Horford fits what CBS is trying to do some so than Howard. His drop off on D is minimal compared to what he brings on offense. Howard can't even play on the the 2nd night of back to backs for fear of injury.

How can you call Dwight an "offensive black hole" when he:

1) Only takes 9 FGA per night (the same number Turner takes this year off the bench)
2) Averages 3.5 offensive rebounds per game, which probably accounts for 30% of his offense
3) Makes 3.8 Free Throws per night, which probably accounts for another 30% of his offense
4) Shoots 61% from the field and 75% inside 3 feet

I mean honestly, some 50% - 60% of Dwight's offense comes from offensive rebounds and free throw, which are basically free possessions.  You might have to run 4 or 5 plays for him over the entire course of a 48 minute game for him to get his 14 - 15 points. 

Almost every time he touches the ball he's going to score or get to the foul line, so calling him a "black hole" on offense just makes zero sense.  You couldn't find a more efficient offensive player than Dwight Howard if you tried.

That doesn't even take into account the fact that his 7 FTA per night means bout 3.5 fouls drawn against opposing players on a nightly basis - this opens up a whole variety of other benefits such as:

a) Getting key opposing players into foul trouble
b) Getting the team into the bonus early

It's hard to put a number on how much value things like that add to a team.  How much have we gained as a team from Isaiah's ability to get to the line?  It's been huge for us. 

Isaiah and Dwight average 15 FTA per night between them. That's more than 7 personal fouls drawn on opponents, between the two of them, on a nightly basis.  That would add a whole other obstacle for opposing teams when trying to work out how on earth to defend us.
 

I think the difference is that Howard's game is entirely predicated on his extraordinary athleticism. It's all downhill from here. No skill acquisition to come, no adjustments, no maturing well. Horford -- whose game is already way more rounded and less susceptible to sudden collapse -- in the space of a single season just added a competent three point shot! Howard will fall off a cliff, Horford will have a steady decline. Back injuries could instantly cripple Howard's game forever, as soon as tomorrow, if he falls wrong, once. Horford had a pectoral issue, not really a career-killer. Horford is a half-year younger. Most importantly, though, Horford has played about 20700 minutes, and Howard has played 33400...so in "dog years" Howard is already, say, 34 or 35.

I do prefer Howard as a rental versus Horford as a rental.

I disagree with that completely.

A few points.


On Dwights dependence on athleticism

Dwight Howards game is NOT based entirely on athleticism. 

Dwight is 6'11", 265 pounds, has a 7'5" wingspan and is as wide as a Chevy Impala.  The guy is absolutely huge, and even without his athleticism, he still might well be THE most physically imposing player in the entire NBA (he'd certainly be up there). 

I mean honestly - arguing that Dwight's game depends entirely on athleticism is like arguing that Shaq's game was dependent entirely on athleticism.  Yeah Shaq was freakishly athletic for a man of his physical size early in his career - but once his athleticism faded and the injuries came along, he was still able to physically dominate on his sheer size alone. 

That's despite the fact that Shaq put on ridiculous amounts of fat late in his career, versus Dwight who is consistently one of the most impressively ripped/conditioned players in the NBA on a yearly basis. 

When you are as HUGE as Dwight is, you really don't need to be able to outrun the next guy. Dwight's sheer physical size is impressive enough for him to be able to dominate opposing big men in this league for years on end.

Remember how much slower and less mobile KG got in his last couple of years with us, when he was in his mid 30's?  Between age and injuries he had slowed to the point where he looked like he was in quicksand half the time.  But he was still a dominant force on defense and on the boards, largely due to his incredible length, defensive IQ and physicality. 

I don't see any reason why Dwight (if his body holds up) couldn't be just as effective on defense and on the boards, all the way in to his mid 30's.


On declining quicker than Horford

Horford is clearly showing signs of decline. His Per 36 numbers have dropped the past two seasons in a number of statistical category including:

* Points (20.2 -> 18 -> 17.4)
* Rebounds (9.2 -> 8.4 -> 7.8 )
* FG% (56.7% -> 53.8% -> 50.7%)
* Free Throw rate (20.2% -> 14.6% -> 12.8%)

This is all despite the fact that he's still in the same role and on the same team, so you cannot blame change in scenery or role as a possible reason for the declines.

Dwight on the other hand (as I demonstrated earlier) really has not declined statistically in any areas outside of points scored (easy to argue this is due to less attempts, playing with Harden) and shot blocking.

I see no evidence to suggest that Dwight has declined any more than Horford has over the past two seasons, nor do to suggest that he's likely decline more quickly moving forward. 

In fact statistically Horford probably shows more signs of a decline pattern than Dwight does.
 

On being worthy of a max contract

Horford's numbers this year (15.3 / 6.9 / 3.1 / 0.8 / 1.5 / 51% FG) are certainly nowhere near "Max Contract" numbers.

On the other hand Dwight's numbers this year (14.6 / 12.0 / 1.5 / 1.0 / 1.5 / 61% FG) make a pretty strong argument based on his rebounding dominance and elite offensive efficiency alone. 

Horford is highly regarded on this forum for his defense, and yet his advanced defensive stats (RPM, Rim protection, defensive rating) are all pretty much on par with Kevin Love, and only slightly better than Greg Monroe. 

Considering how much most people on this forum bag criticise Love and Monroe for their defense, it's pretty irrational that Horford's Defense is held in such high regard.

The guy has got to be far and away one of the most overrated players in the NBA right now. 

I am completely bewildered as to how so many people are convinced he is a worthy Max Contract / All-Star level player based entirely on the fact that he is decidedly average at absolutely everything (a.k.a. no major holes in his game)...and despite of the fact that he has never been able to lead any of his teams to anything meaningful.


On his potential fit/impact on the Celtics
Even in Horford's absolute best individual season of his career (2012/13) he still:

1) Didn't put up especially impressive numbers (17/10/3 - good but not elite)

2) Couldn't establish himself as the clear #1 player on his team (he was 1A to Josh Smith's 1B) in either the regular season or the playoffs

3) Couldn't lead the Hawks to any success (they finished only 3 games above 0.500 and were eliminated in the first round)

So if that is all Horford was able to achieve in the absolute best season of his NBA career, what do you seriously expect him to bring to the Celtics over the next 5 years, as a 30 year old who has already spent two years in decline?

I mean Horford is a nice player, don't get me wrong.  If you are a team that has an establishes superstar, such as if you are:

* The Pelicans, with Anthony Davis
* The Thunder with Durant/Westbrook
* The Cavs with Lebron
* The Knicks with Carmelo
* The Pacers with George

Then adding a 'nice player' like Horford  (who can do a bit of everything with no major weaknesses), could potentially be a huge addition and could really push you over the top.

But when you are a team like the Hawks or the Celtics (who have rosters filled with 'nice' players and need a star player) then adding guy like Horford does little for you.  He'll make you a better team sure, but he's not going to take transform you dramatically into this elite contender.  He's not going to carry the torch and lead you to the finals.  He's just not THAT type of player. 

The only reason the Hawks have been able to have so much regular season success is that they basically have had three 'Horford-like" players in Horford, Millsap and Teague.  Put three solid guys like that together and your team will become solid enough to be competitive and to get some real success in the regular season.  But once you get to the Playoffs against top tier teams, you'll be stuck trying to work out which of your guys you can depend on to carry you, before eventually realising the answer is "none of them"...because neither one of those guys is a go-to guy.

In fact Isaiah Thomas is FAR more capable of taking on a "go-to guy" role than Horford is, and even IT wasn't enough to save us from getting swept by the Cavs last year (ultimately, the same fate Horford suffered).


On their ability to contribute to a playoff run

In the playoffs last year Al Horford averaged 14 points, 8 rebounds, 3 assists and 50% FG.  The Hawks got swept by the Cavs in the conference finals

Dwight Howard averaged 16 points, 14 rebounds, 2.3 blocks and 58 FG.  The Rockets lost to the Warriors (the eventual champion who convincingly beat the Cavs, and proved themselves one of the best teams in history) in 5 games.

Horford's Career Playoff Per 36 numbers (64 games) are 13.3 points, 8.9 rebounds, 3.1 assists, 0.7 steals, 1.2 blocks, 49% FG, 75% FT.

Dwight's Career Playoff Per 36 numbers (84 games) are 18.5 points, 13.4 rebounds, 1.3 assists, 1.4 steals, 2.5 blocks, 59% FG, 55% FT.

I get that people like Horford more because he has a more 'team first' attitude, but looking at past history it seems pretty clear that Dwight would add more to this team's playoff success than Horford would.

[chambers]

I do think someone will give Dwight the max.
Its $25 million against the cap which will be $107 million in 2 years time. Less than 25% of your cap for a top 10 big man?

Pretty easy decision particularly for smaller market teams.
Charlotte will throw $30 at him in a heartbeat.

[mctyson]

Given the choice, I actually choose the rental.  If we lock in to Love, we are stuck with him.  If he comes to Boston and looks just as bad as he does in Cleveland, then the "lebron" excuse falls aparts, and his trade value falls through the floor.  We would get stuck with a $20M a year contract for the next 4 years that would be practically untradeable - think Amare Stoudemire.

I do not disagree here.  I too would prefer a rental this season.  But understand that a Dwight Howard rental has to be appropriately priced.  According to the little info we have, Morey's current ask is not appropriate.

So if you have to make the comparison to Love (ie a trade has to happen) it makes more sense to "pay up" for a Love who at least in under contract for a few more years and can be traded yet again if you don't like his performance, than it does to pay up for a Howard rental.

I would prefer Horford over all of them, and I think if Danny is patient enough Atlanta will crack and send us Horford for way less than Howard.

[SHAQATTACK]

I think we can eventually land a younger Center ....as defensive stopper .

If ....Danny and Wye want to see How deep they can go and not get totally embarrassed by the Cavs and Spurs ....then you need Howard's defense ......this is the C's big weakness ...protecting the paint from Monore / Lopez types.


Then Howard .....if healthy .....could make a huge difference just standing in the paint ...clogging up the lane .....from Ducan , LeBron , Parker ......he would help limit the damage to,the very porous Celtic interior defense.

I guess it's up DA , Wye and CBS think they have a shot at beating LeBron and tangling with POP or Steph Curry team.
I think it's a year or two too early

[guava_wrench]

I think we can eventually land a younger Center ....as defensive stopper .

If ....Danny and Wye want to see How deep they can go and not get totally embarrassed by the Cavs and Spurs ....then you need Howard's defense ......this is the C's big weakness ...protecting the paint from Monore / Lopez types.


Then Howard .....if healthy .....could make a huge difference just standing in the paint ...clogging up the lane .....from Ducan , LeBron , Parker ......he would help limit the damage to,the very porous Celtic interior defense.

I guess it's up DA , Wye and CBS think they have a shot at beating LeBron and tangling with POP or Steph Curry team.
I think it's a year or two too early

Or clogging up the lane on offense.

[Grindfather]

I do think someone will give Dwight the max.
Its $25 million against the cap which will be $107 million in 2 years time. Less than 25% of your cap for a top 10 big man?

Pretty easy decision particularly for smaller market teams.
Charlotte will throw $30 at him in a heartbeat.

Not sure where those numbers come from. Dwight's got 10+ years of service, making him eligible for a max deal worth 35% of the cap. If the cap goes to ~$107 million in 2017, you're paying him $37.5 million for that season.

[Dino Pitino]

So if that is all Horford was able to achieve in the absolute best season of his NBA career, what do you seriously expect him to bring to the Celtics over the next 5 years, as a 30 year old who has already spent two years in decline?

Hmmm, you've now almost talked me out of finding it acceptable to give Horford the max. To be fair, some of your argument was a little raw and out of context, e.g., using FG% instead of TS% for a dude who just starting making threes, not using per-minute averages that would show a much smaller decline, not factoring in Millsap's growing role. But I've never been a big fan of Horford long term, was more a matter of nothing better to spend cap on and maybe attracting other free agents, totally on the fence. Now I'm off the bandwagon again. Rental or bust.

But still no dice on Howard. I was kind of using athleticism as a catch-all that would include his size. Basically, everything except skill and IQ, lol. I think you're overstating his size advantage. Plenty of heavy, ripped near-seven-footers with long arms in the league. What separates Howard from the rest is the speed and range to go along with the size. His quickness, his vertical. It used to be amazing. It's still extraordinary. It will soon -- health permitting -- become just good, then just above-average. Somewhere in the transition between good and above-average, he will suddenly become useless, because there will be nothing special about him anymore, he'll be no better than a 3rd string center. He's not Shaq. Shaq was a true giant, a freak. Shaq was aggressive, way more willing to bully smaller players, knew how to use his size advantage. Howard doesn't really have a size advantage, man. Isn't a bully. Shaq's fat was an asset, lol. All that mass, in a frame over seven feet. Shaq had a pretty good back, too, and a trunk. Howard is top-heavy. That's the real kicker, though, the back. We here have seen what a bad back can do. You can tell part of what's sapping Howard of his mobility isn't just ordinary aging but back gingerness. That will persist, at best, and only get worse. Ain't ever going to magically go away, unless there's some shocking medical advance. A lot of alley oops he used to sky and slam effortlessly, he's now getting up and laying in effortlessly but a little cautiously. Soon the effortlessness won't be there. He won't be able to lay it in over defenders, because he won't be able to get off the ground as high. He won't be as quick, so he'll be catching people less off guard. Defenses will start blocking his shots. And when they don't, when he takes normal shots that centers take, he'll be missing them more, because he just doesn't have the touch, the sophistication, or the will to develop a crafty old-man low-post game. Nor the range to draw defenders out. On defense he's not even remotely going to be comparable to an aging Garnett, who was way, way more intelligent and never-not-relentless and far less dependent on physical dominance. Howard's game at both ends is going to utterly expire in about 2-3 years, even if the back doesn't worsen. I would even maybe consider signing him to the max for 2-3 years, and likely eat that wasted 3rd year as the price of admission. Unfortunately, there's not a chance in hell he'd accept less than 4-5. Rental or bust.

[Diggles]

I'd do this and add rights to Minnys pick, Dallas Pick, maybe ours and some seconds....   

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=zunw3du

[crimson_stallion]

Hmmm, you've now almost talked me out of finding it acceptable to give Horford the max. To be fair, some of your argument was a little raw and out of context, e.g., using FG% instead of TS% for a dude who just starting making threes, not using per-minute averages that would show a much smaller decline, not factoring in Millsap's growing role. But I've never been a big fan of Horford long term, was more a matter of nothing better to spend cap on and maybe attracting other free agents, totally on the fence. Now I'm off the bandwagon again. Rental or bust.

Oh, I actually was using Per-minute when evaluating Horford's decline, I just didn't specify it.  I've edited it now!

Also I don't think using TS% is going to help you much in determining the value of those two guys offensively.  Horford might have started shooting threes, but Howard has one of the highest Free Throw Rates (81%) in NBA history, versus Horford's almost laughably poor free throw rate the past two years year (18% and 14%).

The fact that Kelly Olynyk (23.7%) has a higher career Free Thow Rate than Horford (22.7%) is a little concerning, especially considering that Horford's FTR has declined significantly the past two years (and is now WELL below that career average), and that Olynyk is a far more effective three point shooter.

In fact Horford averages exactly 1 three pointer made per game and 1.3 free throws made per game.  That means he is contributing a total of 4.3 PPG from three pointers and free throws combined.

Howard averages 3.8 free throws made per game and no three pointers, which equates to 3.8 PPG that he contributes from free throws alone.

Horford misses 1.8 three pointers per game, giving 1.8 opportunities for the opponent to get a defensive rebound (and possession) every game.

Howard misses 3.3 free throws per game, but only one in every two (the second one) gives the opponent an opportunity for a rebound.  That means that Howard's opponents have approximately 1.7 opportunities for defensive rebounds (and hence change of possession) off Howard's missed free throws.

No matter how you look at it, the two pretty much cancel each other out completely...except for the one key added benefit of Howards 7 FTA per game - 3.5 additional fouls drawn against the opponent.  This helps to put your team in the advantage, and increases the potential for you to get key opposing players into foul trouble - two factors that can swing a game in a huge way. 

So since you can pretty much cancel out Horford's three point shooting with Howard's ability to get to the line (if anything, that goes in Howard's favor) all that is left is 2PT percentages.  Here Howard has the clear edge since he shoots 61% from two, versus Horford who shoots 55% from two.

But still no dice on Howard. I was kind of using athleticism as a catch-all that would include his size. Basically, everything except skill and IQ, lol. I think you're overstating his size advantage. Plenty of heavy, ripped near-seven-footers with long arms in the league. What separates Howard from the rest is the speed and range to go along with the size. His quickness, his vertical. It used to be amazing. It's still extraordinary. It will soon -- health permitting -- become just good, then just above-average. Somewhere in the transition between good and above-average, he will suddenly become useless, because there will be nothing special about him anymore, he'll be no better than a 3rd string center. He's not Shaq. Shaq was a true giant, a freak. Shaq was aggressive, way more willing to bully smaller players, knew how to use his size advantage. Howard doesn't really have a size advantage, man. Isn't a bully. Shaq's fat was an asset, lol. All that mass, in a frame over seven feet. Shaq had a pretty good back, too, and a trunk. Howard is top-heavy. That's the real kicker, though, the back. We here have seen what a bad back can do. You can tell part of what's sapping Howard of his mobility isn't just ordinary aging but back gingerness. That will persist, at best, and only get worse. Ain't ever going to magically go away, unless there's some shocking medical advance. A lot of alley oops he used to sky and slam effortlessly, he's now getting up and laying in effortlessly but a little cautiously. Soon the effortlessness won't be there. He won't be able to lay it in over defenders, because he won't be able to get off the ground as high. He won't be as quick, so he'll be catching people less off guard. Defenses will start blocking his shots. And when they don't, when he takes normal shots that centers take, he'll be missing them more, because he just doesn't have the touch, the sophistication, or the will to develop a crafty old-man low-post game. Nor the range to draw defenders out. On defense he's not even remotely going to be comparable to an aging Garnett, who was way, way more intelligent and never-not-relentless and far less dependent on physical dominance. Howard's game at both ends is going to utterly expire in about 2-3 years, even if the back doesn't worsen. I would even maybe consider signing him to the max for 2-3 years, and likely eat that wasted 3rd year as the price of admission. Unfortunately, there's not a chance in hell he'd accept less than 4-5. Rental or bust.

I understand your point, and it's a fair one.

There is no denying that Howard's health issues make him a MAJOR risk.  For those out there who don't want to gamble on him with a large, long term deal for that reason - I completely understand. 

I especially understand this given his complete lack of upside (as a result of his age).

However for those who are willing to take that gamble based on the fact that he can still dominate in a lot of ways (rebounding, rim protection, drawing fouls, etc), I understand that too. 

What I don't understand is all the people who don't want to take the risk on Howard, but are perfectly happy to take the risk on guys like Love and Horford.  That part doesn't make sense to me given that those guys are pretty much just as high risk, but with less upside. 

A few other points:


On other guys being a better fit

I don't get the concept of Horford/Love being a better fit than Howard in Boston.  The way I see it we have:

1) Floor stretchers / shooters (Olynyk, Bradley, Thomas, Crowder)
2) Perimeter defenders (Bradley, Smart, Crowder)
3) General defensive bigs (Johnson, Olynyk)
4) Guys who can attack the basket (Thomas, Turner)

I feel like the only things we are desperately lacking in are:

1) General low post defense
2) Rim protection
3) Rebounding
4) Low post offense
5) A second go-to scorer who can take attention off Thomas

Sully covers #1 and #3 but we can't depend on him, since he's a restricted free agent after this season and we have no idea what offers he might receive (or if Danny will be willing to match them).  Even if we do retain Sully, he still only covers two of those 5 areas, has too many holes in his game (and is too inconsistent) to be trusted as a starter...while also lacking the conditioning to be depended on for extended minutes.

Amir Johnson covers #2 but none of the others, and he's getting older himself (plus is also a high injury risk). 

I think about the possibility of adding Horford or Love, and I don't see how they help fill our holes.  Love would help to fill in our rebounding hole yes.  Horford helps with post scoring, sure.  Both guys can help a bit with #5 (another go-to scorer). 

That still leaves us with a LOT of holes that aren't filled though, which makes it feel (to me) like a very inefficient use of a very, very large contract (which either Love or Horford would be on).

Dwight isn't perfect and he's a high risk guy, but signing him would fill every one of our needs in one fell swoop, and I can't think of any other big man who is available to us right now who can do that.  That fact alone IMHO justifies the gamble and the large spend.

When I look at us adding Howard, I keep envisioning a front line of Olynyk + Howard.  I feel like that is a match made in heaven. 

On offense Olynyk (being perimeter oriented) gives Howard the space he needs to operate inside, while Howard's ability to draw double teams would give Olynyk space on the perimeter.

On defense Olynyk has proven to be an versatile all-round defender who is very effective at challenging outside shots and sticking with quicker bigs.   This allows Howard to stay in the paint where he can dominate the boards and defend the basket.

I seriously struggle to think of a more perfect front-line combination for us.  Those guys were BUILT to play together. 



On the injury / risk argument

Howard's health is a worry, no doubt about it. But it's not AS big a worry as people might think.

Even without Dwight, we are already a #3 seed in the East, so making the playoffs is something we already have locked up.  We can easily afford to play Dwight reduced minutes during the regular season (and rest him on back to backs if need be) without the fear of missing the playoffs or anything as dramatic as that.

The only time we really need the "full Dwight Howard" is in the playoffs, where there are no back-to-backs, so you don't need to worry nearly as much about Dwight's body breaking down. 

That's why I, personally, don't mind taking this gamble.

All we really need Dwight to be able to do is to come along every playoffs and:

1) Give us some modest offensive presence in the post
2) Control the boards
3) Defend the paint

I have no trouble believing that Dwight is capable of doing those things for another 4-5 years, even despite his health concerns. 

I think adding Dwight takes this team on a whole new level.  Not so much in the regular season (where we don't really need it), but in the Playoffs (where we do). 

With Dwight up front we have the means to take on teams like San Antonio (he's one of the few guys who could give Adridge some real trouble) and Cleveland (extra rim protection against the penetration of Lebron and Irving).

Golden State is still a tough cover (Bogut can match up with Dwight, and Green can take our other big) but we actually have a fighting chance. 

With Horford or Love in our front line:
* Aldrige and Duncan will demolish us
* Irving and Lebron will get in to (and score in) the lane at will
* Draymond Green will run circles around us

I also think the Thunder (even with Ibaka) and Clippers (even with DeAndre) would struggle to defend a guy with Howard's physical presence.