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

[CelticSooner]

I'm fine with Howard as a rental if the cost is minimal (no BKN picks and no one from the Smart/Crowder/AB/IT4 bunch) but no real interest in locking him long-term.

Why waste any assets for him unless you want to resign him next season? It's not like the C's are going to win a championship this year anyways.

$30 mill a year is too much for declining player with back problems. I don't see Ainge trading for him.

[rondohondo]

I'm fine with Howard as a rental if the cost is minimal (no BKN picks and no one from the Smart/Crowder/AB/IT4 bunch) but no real interest in locking him long-term.

Why waste any assets for him unless you want to resign him next season? It's not like the C's are going to win a championship this year anyways.

$30 mill a year is too much for declining player with back problems. I don't see Ainge trading for him.

the c's cant use all these draft picks, there simply is not enough roster spots.....

[tomrod]

I'm sorry but I stopped reading after the Love - Howard comparison. I mean, Love is just younger and better at this point and his max is still less money than Howard's, my point stands. I will read it all later though. But I think you are over valuing Howard.

How is it relevant that Love is younger if he is ALREADY declining at a rediculously higher rate than Howard is?

Also how in god's name is Love (who is averaging 15.7 Pts, 10.3 Reb, 2.4 ast, 41.7% FG with average-to-mediocre defense) better than Dwight (who is averaging 14.6 Pts, 12 Reb, 1.5 Ast, 61% FG, and is one of the most dominate defensive players in NBA history)?   

I find that claim incredibly amusing, but alas I will give you an opportunity to justify it just in case I'm missing something.

It's also worth nothing that long, defensive minded bigs have a tendency to remain productive NBA players quite late in their careers - just look at guys like Tim Duncan, KG, Theo Ratliff, Marcus Camby, Dikembe Mutombo, etc.  Even as they got to their 35-36 age range, those guys were still quite productive NBA players who had no trouble finding spots on rosters.

On the other hand, undersized offensive minded bigs tend to decline quite aggressively once they reach their 30's and are usually pretty much out of the league by the time they reach 32 - 33.  Just look at Carlos Boozer, David Lee, David West, Troy Murphy, etc.

Fact is, when you have guys with elite defensive IQ, good rebounding instincts, and great length - those are tools that you do not lose with age.  Your jumpshot might fade and you might lose your ability to finish around the basket...but you'll still be able to impact games with your defense and your rebounding well into your mid 30's despite those declines (KG and Duncan are perfect examples). 

It's much harder for undersized guys, because those guys need to depend more on their mobility to defend and to get rebounding position...and it also gets harder to get shots off against NBA competition (inside and outside) as you start to lose your conditioning.  So once these guys get to around 32 or 33 years old and start to lose a step, they tend to become 15 MPG guys who can't do very much aside from coming off the bench and hitting midrange jumpers.

Given how early undersized bigs tend to decline, combined with the way Love is already declining, the future doesn't look promising for him at all.

Given how long tall defensive minded bigs tend to last, combined with the fact that Dwight (at 30) is STILL putting up numbers on par with his career averages, tells me that his future looks much brighter.

This is assuming he doesn't suffer a career ending injury (knock on wood), but he's really no more risk of that then Love is.

Im sorry, I should have stated it better. Howard is already declined, he isnt a force worth the max anymore.

[CelticSooner]

I'm fine with Howard as a rental if the cost is minimal (no BKN picks and no one from the Smart/Crowder/AB/IT4 bunch) but no real interest in locking him long-term.

Why waste any assets for him unless you want to resign him next season? It's not like the C's are going to win a championship this year anyways.

$30 mill a year is too much for declining player with back problems. I don't see Ainge trading for him.

the c's cant use all these draft picks, there simply is not enough roster spots.....

Ainge is in no hurry to trade picks. Plenty of time to do so if needed. They can traded away for future picks or stashing euros if need be as well.

[Dino Pitino]

I'm fine with Howard as a rental if the cost is minimal (no BKN picks and no one from the Smart/Crowder/AB/IT4 bunch) but no real interest in locking him long-term.

Why waste any assets for him unless you want to resign him next season? It's not like the C's are going to win a championship this year anyways.

Definitely not with that attitude!

Do you feel the same way about the Sox when they trade a C+ prospect for a rental ace to make a playoff run? Ainge is on record as believing that Golden State is not totally unbeatable. If you anchor an already elite defense with Howard, you become a steep longshot to win it all, but at least you're in the race. Why not cash in one decent, extraneous pick to at least try? The point of all these assets is to win a title. The chance of the relatively minor assets sacrificed for Howard turning into the key to winning a championship if we kept them instead? Would probably not exceed the low single digit chance to win the Finals if we rent Howard.

$30 mill a year is too much for declining player with back problems. I don't see Ainge trading for him.

Absolutely agree here. I've been talked into the idea of Horford long term for the max, but Howard? Hell no.

[crimson_stallion]

I'm sorry but I stopped reading after the Love - Howard comparison. I mean, Love is just younger and better at this point and his max is still less money than Howard's, my point stands. I will read it all later though. But I think you are over valuing Howard.

How is it relevant that Love is younger if he is ALREADY declining at a rediculously higher rate than Howard is?

Also how in god's name is Love (who is averaging 15.7 Pts, 10.3 Reb, 2.4 ast, 41.7% FG with average-to-mediocre defense) better than Dwight (who is averaging 14.6 Pts, 12 Reb, 1.5 Ast, 61% FG, and is one of the most dominate defensive players in NBA history)?   

I find that claim incredibly amusing, but alas I will give you an opportunity to justify it just in case I'm missing something.

First: Listen, Love is not declining, he is missused. Irving and Lebron, two ball hogs, you only mentioned one.

Second: You keep saying my logic is flawed, yet you cite Howard's past resume as to why we should sign him now. He is just not that player anymore. Case in point: Defensive rating: In the nineties all his years in Orlando, up to 104 now, thats basically what Love is for his career. So there you see his decline, he isnt the defensive force he once was, and its not even close. That was the trait that made him so valuable, and its gone. And its not because he is disgruntled in Houston, it was the same last year, and just a little better in the playoffs.

Third: I dont even think Howard is as good of a fit here. He is ok, but Love is just perfect for Stevens system.

So you are saying you want that player, to be your max player for the next 4 years, you are just never going to get to the finals. Nevermind beating the Warrios or the Spurs. If Howard would agree to a below 20 million per year then maybe its worth considering it, but again, Ainge has said he wants a bigger championship window.


Finally, I think either player is a risk, players like Cousins and Durant are risks for different reasons. But I'm more confident in a 27 year old Love, that has declined when he moved to a system that didnt make an effort to fit him in, than a 30 year Howard, that is showing clear signs of declining.

I'm not sure how you support Love with the excuse of poor fit / reduced role, but don't acknowldge the fact that Dwight is held back by that exact same issue?

I'm also not sure how you can assume Dwight's defense has dropped off a cliff based on defensive rating alone, when there are other stats which indicate he is still quite an impressive defensive player. 

For example, Defensive RPM (which apparently takes into account things like teammate quality, opponent quality, etc) indicates that Dwight has been among the league elite defensively for the past three years:

* His Defensive RPM (+3.64) this year ranks him 16th out of 441 (top 3%)
* His Defensive RPM (+2.08) in 2014/15 ranked him 54th out of 474 (top 12%)
* His Defenisve RPM (+4.91) in 2013/14 ranked him 6th out of 437 (top 1%)

Even if you do use the "rating" system, Dwight's defensive rating this year is 104 and his offensive rating is 113, so he still has a net rating of +9. 

His career defensive rating is 99, career offensive rating is 110 and career net rating is +11.

To me that shows that he is still impacting the game just as much now (or darn close to it) as he has his entire career, and pretty much every other statistic seems to back that.

Now Love's DRPM stats are quite good too over the past few years, and I'm actually not one of the people who totally hates on Love defensively...I think he's similar to Olynyk in that he's not an elite individual defender, but solid when it comes to playing positional team defense. 

However a key difference is rim protection - that is one component of defense that we are in desperate need of, and I don't think anybody can deny that Dwight leaves Love for dead in that area. As solid as Love might be as a team defender, he is not even remotely capable as a rim protector, while Dwight remains one of the better in the league in that regard.

Looking at their rim protection from last year confirm that:

Adjusted Points Saved Per 36 (league best = 12.3, League worst = 1.5, median = 6.9):
Dwight Howard: 7.9
Kevin Love: 5.6

Contest Percentage (league best = 79.2%, League worst = 14.6%, median = 46.9%):
Dwight Howard: 54.9%
Kevin Love:  46.0%

Rim FG% Allowed (league best = 40.6%, League worst = 61.2%, median = 50.9%):
Dwight Howard: 45.7%
Kevin Love: 52.7%

On/Off Defensive FG Attempts Per 36 (league best = -5.2, League worst = +3.5, median = -1.75):
Dwight Howard: -3.4
Kevin Love: -0.1

Pretty easy to see that Love is below the league median in every one of these rim protection stats (in some cases only just, in other cases significantly) whole Howard significantly exceeds the median in every case. 

Therefore it's safe to say that Love is a moderately below average rim protector, and Dwight is a significantly above average rim protector. 

[Donoghus]

I'm fine with Howard as a rental if the cost is minimal (no BKN picks and no one from the Smart/Crowder/AB/IT4 bunch) but no real interest in locking him long-term.

Why waste any assets for him unless you want to resign him next season? It's not like the C's are going to win a championship this year anyways.

$30 mill a year is too much for declining player with back problems. I don't see Ainge trading for him.

the c's cant use all these draft picks, there simply is not enough roster spots.....

Ainge is in no hurry to trade picks. Plenty of time to do so if needed. They can traded away for future picks or stashing euros if need be as well.

At some point, I think you need to take risks.  This team is currently a 3 seed without Howard.  Acquiring Howard at the cost of relatively nothing (value the filler & 20-something draft picks however you want) should make this team better.  Why not take the risk and see where this team goes with him in these playoffs?   You still have the option of letting him walk in the summer (which I'm fine with given the future cost).   

You have these draft pick assets at your disposal but you're facing the quandary of having these picks but no roster spots for them.   Use them for something.

[CelticSooner]

I'm fine with Howard as a rental if the cost is minimal (no BKN picks and no one from the Smart/Crowder/AB/IT4 bunch) but no real interest in locking him long-term.

Why waste any assets for him unless you want to resign him next season? It's not like the C's are going to win a championship this year anyways.

Definitely not with that attitude!

Do you feel the same way about the Sox when they trade a C+ prospect for a rental ace to make a playoff run? Ainge is on record as believing that Golden State is not totally unbeatable. If you anchor an already elite defense with Howard, you become a steep longshot to win it all, but at least you're in the race. Why not cash in one decent, extraneous pick to at least try? The point of all these assets is to win a title. The chance of the relatively minor assets sacrificed for Howard turning into the key to winning a championship if we kept them instead? Would probably not exceed the low single digit chance to win the Finals if we rent Howard.

$30 mill a year is too much for declining player with back problems. I don't see Ainge trading for him.

Absolutely agree here. I've been talked into the idea of Horford long term for the max, but Howard? Hell no.

I'm not a baseball fan and I live in Oklahoma. I root against the rest of Boston teams sorry lol I see GS repeating with relative ease. I agree on getting Horford tho. If you assets to spend he makes much more sense longterm.

[crimson_stallion]

I'm fine with Howard as a rental if the cost is minimal (no BKN picks and no one from the Smart/Crowder/AB/IT4 bunch) but no real interest in locking him long-term.

Why waste any assets for him unless you want to resign him next season? It's not like the C's are going to win a championship this year anyways.

Definitely not with that attitude!

Do you feel the same way about the Sox when they trade a C+ prospect for a rental ace to make a playoff run? Ainge is on record as believing that Golden State is not totally unbeatable. If you anchor an already elite defense with Howard, you become a steep longshot to win it all, but at least you're in the race. Why not cash in one decent, extraneous pick to at least try? The point of all these assets is to win a title. The chance of the relatively minor assets sacrificed for Howard turning into the key to winning a championship if we kept them instead? Would probably not exceed the low single digit chance to win the Finals if we rent Howard.

$30 mill a year is too much for declining player with back problems. I don't see Ainge trading for him.

Absolutely agree here. I've been talked into the idea of Horford long term for the max, but Howard? Hell no.

See, it's stuff like this that I just do not understand.

Horford has similar experience to Dwight, so as far as I am aware he would command just as large a contract as Dwight would.

Horford is the same age as Dwight.

Horford has been horribly injury prone his entire career, not really any less so than Dwight.

In their prime and when healthy, Horford was not even CLOSE to as dominant as Dwight was.  Right now, Horford is still nowhere near as dominant as Dwight is.

Horford has shown at least as much decline as Howard has in terms of statistical production, despite not seeing any real reduction in role (Howard got stuck behind Harden, which explains his drop off). 

History tells us that a player with Horford's physical attributes and playing style are likely to decline more rapidly than somebody with Howard's physical attributes and playing style.

With all this considered, I find it very difficult to grasp why people would be ok taking that gamble on Horford (who is a solidly productive player but not dominant, and has never carried a team) but not on Howard (who has proven he can be dominant, and has proven he can carry a team).

I understand people not liking Dwight from a locker room standpoint (I have my questions too) but none of the above makes any sense to me.

[CelticSooner]

I'm fine with Howard as a rental if the cost is minimal (no BKN picks and no one from the Smart/Crowder/AB/IT4 bunch) but no real interest in locking him long-term.

Why waste any assets for him unless you want to resign him next season? It's not like the C's are going to win a championship this year anyways.

Definitely not with that attitude!

Do you feel the same way about the Sox when they trade a C+ prospect for a rental ace to make a playoff run? Ainge is on record as believing that Golden State is not totally unbeatable. If you anchor an already elite defense with Howard, you become a steep longshot to win it all, but at least you're in the race. Why not cash in one decent, extraneous pick to at least try? The point of all these assets is to win a title. The chance of the relatively minor assets sacrificed for Howard turning into the key to winning a championship if we kept them instead? Would probably not exceed the low single digit chance to win the Finals if we rent Howard.

$30 mill a year is too much for declining player with back problems. I don't see Ainge trading for him.

Absolutely agree here. I've been talked into the idea of Horford long term for the max, but Howard? Hell no.

See, it's stuff like this that I just do not understand.

Horford has similar experience to Dwight, so as far as I am aware he would command just as large a contract as Dwight would.

Horford is the same age as Dwight.

Horford has been horribly injury prone his entire career, not really any less so than Dwight.

In their prime and when healthy, Horford was not even CLOSE to as dominant as Dwight was.  Right now, Horford is still nowhere near as dominant as Dwight is.

Horford has shown at least as much decline as Howard has in terms of statistical production, despite not seeing any real reduction in role (Howard got stuck behind Harden, which explains his drop off). 

History tells us that a player with Horford's physical attributes and playing style are likely to decline more rapidly than somebody with Howard's physical attributes and playing style.

With all this considered, I find it very difficult to grasp why people would be ok taking that gamble on Horford (who is a solidly productive player but not dominant, and has never carried a team) but not on Howard (who has proven he can be dominant, and has proven he can carry a team).

I understand people not liking Dwight from a locker room standpoint (I have my questions too) but none of the above makes any sense to me.

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.

[tomrod]

I'm sorry but I stopped reading after the Love - Howard comparison. I mean, Love is just younger and better at this point and his max is still less money than Howard's, my point stands. I will read it all later though. But I think you are over valuing Howard.

How is it relevant that Love is younger if he is ALREADY declining at a rediculously higher rate than Howard is?

Also how in god's name is Love (who is averaging 15.7 Pts, 10.3 Reb, 2.4 ast, 41.7% FG with average-to-mediocre defense) better than Dwight (who is averaging 14.6 Pts, 12 Reb, 1.5 Ast, 61% FG, and is one of the most dominate defensive players in NBA history)?   

I find that claim incredibly amusing, but alas I will give you an opportunity to justify it just in case I'm missing something.

First: Listen, Love is not declining, he is missused. Irving and Lebron, two ball hogs, you only mentioned one.

Second: You keep saying my logic is flawed, yet you cite Howard's past resume as to why we should sign him now. He is just not that player anymore. Case in point: Defensive rating: In the nineties all his years in Orlando, up to 104 now, thats basically what Love is for his career. So there you see his decline, he isnt the defensive force he once was, and its not even close. That was the trait that made him so valuable, and its gone. And its not because he is disgruntled in Houston, it was the same last year, and just a little better in the playoffs.

Third: I dont even think Howard is as good of a fit here. He is ok, but Love is just perfect for Stevens system.

So you are saying you want that player, to be your max player for the next 4 years, you are just never going to get to the finals. Nevermind beating the Warrios or the Spurs. If Howard would agree to a below 20 million per year then maybe its worth considering it, but again, Ainge has said he wants a bigger championship window.


Finally, I think either player is a risk, players like Cousins and Durant are risks for different reasons. But I'm more confident in a 27 year old Love, that has declined when he moved to a system that didnt make an effort to fit him in, than a 30 year Howard, that is showing clear signs of declining.

I'm not sure how you support Love with the excuse of poor fit / reduced role, but don't acknowldge the fact that Dwight is held back by that exact same issue?

I'm also not sure how you can assume Dwight's defense has dropped off a cliff based on defensive rating alone, when there are other stats which indicate he is still quite an impressive defensive player. 

For example, Defensive RPM (which apparently takes into account things like teammate quality, opponent quality, etc) indicates that Dwight has been among the league elite defensively for the past three years:

* His Defensive RPM (+3.64) this year ranks him 16th out of 441 (top 3%)
* His Defensive RPM (+2.08) in 2014/15 ranked him 54th out of 474 (top 12%)
* His Defenisve RPM (+4.91) in 2013/14 ranked him 6th out of (437 top 1%)

While his rim protection stats last year also ranked him among the best.

Even if you do use the "rating" system, Dwight's defensive rating this year is 104 and his offensive rating is 113, so he still has a net rating of +9. 

His career defensive rating is 99, career offensive rating is 110 and career net rating is +11.

To me that shows that he is still impacting the game just as much now (or darn close to it) as he has his entire career, and pretty much every other statistic seems to back that.

Not sure why you come to those conclusions, he is obvioulsy declined in his advanced defensive stats and the stats you bring prove exactly that. His offensive stats are not that relevant when you evaluate him, I mean they are ok, just as his defense is still very good. Just not max player good.

I'd take Horford first, because of system fit, and his salary should be lower.

[KGs Knee]

Major TP's to you, crimson stallion for bringing a bit of sanity and facts to this debate.

It's utterly sickening the hate Howard gets and how easily people dismiss him simply because he may not be the most likable person.

Is he worth a 5 year max? No, he's not, I wouldn't want to wager his body holds up for the duration of the contract.

Is he worth giving up a couple of non-lottery 1sts and signing to a reasonable contract, you bet. Dude can still bring it like very few centers in this league.  Anyone care to guess how many players in the last 30 years have put up 36/26 in a game?  Three players: Dwight, CWebb and Hakeem (IIRC).

But you know what they say....haters gonna hate.

[Dino Pitino]

See, it's stuff like this that I just do not understand.

Horford has similar experience to Dwight, so as far as I am aware he would command just as large a contract as Dwight would.

Horford is the same age as Dwight.

Horford has been horribly injury prone his entire career, not really any less so than Dwight.

In their prime and when healthy, Horford was not even CLOSE to as dominant as Dwight was.  Right now, Horford is still nowhere near as dominant as Dwight is.

Horford has shown at least as much decline as Howard has in terms of statistical production, despite not seeing any real reduction in role (Howard got stuck behind Harden, which explains his drop off). 

History tells us that a player with Horford's physical attributes and playing style are likely to decline more rapidly than somebody with Howard's physical attributes and playing style.

With all this considered, I find it very difficult to grasp why people would be ok taking that gamble on Horford (who is a solidly productive player but not dominant, and has never carried a team) but not on Howard (who has proven he can be dominant, and has proven he can carry a team).

I understand people not liking Dwight from a locker room standpoint (I have my questions too) but none of the above makes any sense to me.

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.

[bleedGREENdon]

Isaiah
Bradley
Smart
Crowder
Howard

Lineup to end games would be very very very tenacious.

Now also think of putting Kelly alongside Dwight with crowder Isaiah and or Brsdley Smart

[Quetzalcoatl]

Isaiah
Bradley
Smart
Crowder
Howard

Lineup to end games would be very very very tenacious.

Now also think of putting Kelly alongside Dwight with crowder Isaiah and or Brsdley Smart

Tenaciously watching Howard shoot 100 fts