Has this series hurt the Celtics chances of landing Horford this off season?

[kozlodoev]

So, yeah.  Best center in the NBA, and it's not particularly close.  Lots of great players have had 33 win seasons. Notable guys who won 33 games or less?  2007 Paul Pierce (24 wins), 2007 Kevin Garnett (32 wins), 2007 Ray Allen (31 wins).  Clearly those are all guys that teams should have stayed away from if they wanted a title.

Except 33 wins is a career-high for Cousins. He's averaged something of the order of 28 wins over his career so far. He's not the first star player to toil on some horrible teams, but he's definitely the most futile one in such an endeavor that I can think of. So, no.

edit: I lied, Kevin Love was worse. Which is a telling example, given how Love has suddenly looked mortal after he moved to Cleveland.

Cousins is just 25, hasn't even entered his prime yet and Sacramento has been a disaster area beyond anything he's done.  This past season is probably the first one for which you can really hold him responsible.  The West after the top four is weak and someone with Cousins' apparent ability should have been able to drag a moderately talented roster to the playoffs.

Cousins has been around for a while now, and has played with some half-decent players. The fact that he never managed to pass 30 wins until last season is a major red flag to me, but to each their own.

I was trying to think about about this and who would you say were the best players that Cousins has played with?

IT obviously jumps out. However, looking at their 2014-2015 roster
no player from that team went on to even be a rotation player somewhere this year.
http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fantasy/nba/sacramento-kings/team/roster/15/26/1

If you look at 2013-2014, obviously IT jumps out and Marcus Thornton and Patrick Patterson have been an ok 7th or 8th man,  but it is filled with a ton of guys that immediately were out of the league

http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fantasy/nba/sacramento-kings/team/roster/14/26/1

The 2012-2013 team was more of the same. Again they had Thomas, but their other best player Tyreke Evans has done absolutely nothing.

Looking back at those teams it becomes kind of shocking just how bad the talent around him has been. You then factor in that their draft picks have been absolutely awful (Stauskas, Mclemore)

Rudy Gay is no world beater, but he's a prolific scorer -- and he's been with Sacramento for parts of three seasons now. Darren Collison is a competent player, so were Evans and Thomas.

He wasn't supposed to contend for the NBA title with these, but 28 wins seems like perpetual underachievement.

[nickagneta]

Cousins is a talent and has great individual stats in his favor. I dont think there is any denying that.

But Cousins is also a head case, a problem to coach, and goes through periods were his effort isnt there and he just stops playing, mostly due to not being able to control his anger and emotion. I am really not sure that can be disputed though the cause of why he acts the way he does possibly could be. The cause doesnt matter. He is a possible team cancer.

Also, I think it cant be disputed that he hasnt done much to raise his team to be that of a winner. 6 years averaging 27 or so wins a year is telling.

Personally, I dont want him. Dont trust him to change his ways and make this team better

He makes his own team much better. They play at a playoff level with him on the court.  Why wouldn't he make the Celtics better?

His positive on off court point differential on that Sactown team points more to just how bad that 2nd team is more so than how much he elevates the first team, IMO. Also, I would love to know what stats you are using to make you think that team plays at a playoff level at any time, never mind when he is on the floor.

Theres more dynamics that go into team building than just sticking guys with good stats together. Cousins fails as a piece of the puzzle when you consider such things as interpersonal relations, locker room presence, on court intelligence and awareness of situations, consistent effort, and maturity. I dont find him to be a winner when taking these things into consideration and if he causes problems in this very close knit Celtic locker room, he would become a huge net negative.

He is a great get on a fantasy basketball team. I think he brings substantially less when you consider everything that goes into being a winning basketball player in real life. I dont want him. Let him prove me wrong somewhere else.

[mctyson]

Cousins is a talent and has great individual stats in his favor. I dont think there is any denying that.

But Cousins is also a head case, a problem to coach, and goes through periods were his effort isnt there and he just stops playing, mostly due to not being able to control his anger and emotion. I am really not sure that can be disputed though the cause of why he acts the way he does possibly could be. The cause doesnt matter. He is a possible team cancer.

Also, I think it cant be disputed that he hasnt done much to raise his team to be that of a winner. 6 years averaging 27 or so wins a year is telling.

Personally, I dont want him. Dont trust him to change his ways and make this team better

He makes his own team much better. They play at a playoff level with him on the court.  Why wouldn't he make the Celtics better?

The Celtics are not getting Cousins.  They would have to trade the farm for him and I highly doubt Danny Ainge is going to do that for a guy who clearly has serious question marks.

[mctyson]

I don't think it makes a difference. Horford probably appreciates the Celtics style

I'm not entirely sold on breaking the bank or Horford. Sure, he's a nice piece to have, but is a nice piece really what you want to spend a max contract on?

We have got to get over the nonsense about saving dollars and maximizing value.  The salary cap is exploding for everyone and lots of teams are going to have money to spend.  In fact, it already did explode and they already have spent the money.

Horford is, without question, a max contract player.  He is an All Star!! If that doesn't net you a max deal in a world where Demare Carrol is making $25M per, what does???

Now, that doesn't mean I am in favor of signing Horford.  He is 30 years old and he has a history of injuries.  But the idea that he isn't, on talent alone, a max player is ridiculous.

[Celtics4ever]

I doubt we ever had much of a chance, Tommy's comments probably hurt our chances more than the series, though.

I think guys like to use Boston to jack up their prices, with no intention of coming here.  I think if Ainge could get a star player  via trade, then someone might sign here.

[jambr380]

I don't think it makes a difference. Horford probably appreciates the Celtics style

I'm not entirely sold on breaking the bank or Horford. Sure, he's a nice piece to have, but is a nice piece really what you want to spend a max contract on?

We have got to get over the nonsense about saving dollars and maximizing value.  The salary cap is exploding for everyone and lots of teams are going to have money to spend.  In fact, it already did explode and they already have spent the money.

Horford is, without question, a max contract player.  He is an All Star!! If that doesn't net you a max deal in a world where Demare Carrol is making $25M per, what does

Now, that doesn't mean I am in favor of signing Horford.  He is 30 years old and he has a history of injuries.  But the idea that he isn't, on talent alone, a max player is ridiculous.

He is actually on a 4yr/$60M deal ($15M/yr). That is still a lot and was seen as a bit of an overpay, especially compared to our very own Jae Crowder, but he did put up 13/5 last year with 40% from 3 and what was seen as elite defense. Toronto felt he was the missing piece and they needed to pry him away from Atlanta.

If Boston or another team feels that Horford is their missing piece, then he will get a max contract. It is also possible that Atlanta signs him and then deals him for whatever assets the can get in return at the deadline or next offseason - similar to what Orlando did with Harris.

I'm not sure he 'deserves' a max contract at $25+M/yr, though.

[mef730]

Whether it helps us with Horford specifically or not, this series has definitely helped us. And please keep in mind, I'm normally a pessimist (what I believe is referred to as the miserati 'round these here parts).

In terms of physical play, I think most players understand that it's strictly business, nothing personal (the "leave the gun, take the cannoli" theory).

We've won two games despite injuries to our three best players, including one which sidelined our best defender. Had Bradley remained in Game 1, it's likely that we'd be up 3-2, not them. We've shown that we're a team that wants badly to win, is well-coached and is one strong player away from being a contender. Yeah, we've had a couple of stinkers, but overall, we've fought. In fact, the above physicality might look good.

Bottom line: With a team clearly on the rise, a top coach and a desire to win, I can see a couple of all-stars, if not superstars, looking at us and deciding that they are the difference between our being a "gritty" team and a championship contender.

Mike

[hodgy03038]

Who cares? Horford has played very poorly in this series against the Celts. He has disappeared. How would he fare against even tougher competition like the Cavs or GS or San Antonio? I think he's a great player during the season but in playoff crunch time he is Missing In Action.

[jambr380]

Who cares? Horford has played very poorly in this series against the Celts. He has disappeared. How would he fare against even tougher competition like the Cavs or GS or San Antonio? I think he's a great player during the season but in playoff crunch time he is Missing In Action.

One might think those dollars would be better spent on Bazemore. Horford was so bad last night and really didn't come to play this series and he is the supposed best player in this match-up.

I've said it before, if signing him leads to a bigger splash (Durant, trade for Cousins or Butler), then yeah, of course we go for it. Otherwise, there might be better moves to make.

I don't think Horford moves the needle for us in a game like last night. Only when he sat down did the Hawks finally explode. It's just one game, I know, but yikes.

[Drucci]

Who cares? Horford has played very poorly in this series against the Celts. He has disappeared. How would he fare against even tougher competition like the Cavs or GS or San Antonio? I think he's a great player during the season but in playoff crunch time he is Missing In Action.

One might think those dollars would be better spent on Bazemore. Horford was so bad last night and really didn't come to play this series and he is the supposed best player in this match-up.

I've said it before, if signing him leads to a bigger splash (Durant, trade for Cousins or Butler), then yeah, of course we go for it. Otherwise, there might be better moves to make.

I don't think Horford moves the needle for us in a game like last night. Only when he sat down did the Hawks finally explode. It's just one game, I know, but yikes.

I understand the argument that we have to sign Horford if it helps in bringing During on board but why would Durant - or another star free agent - would particulary crave playing with Horford ? Especially with the way he has played in this series, his health issues and his age?

I understand the dominos effect of signing a good-but-no-great player to entice a true superstar but to me Horford does not belong in the first category and I don't see why the best free agents to hit the market should see him that way.

[jambr380]

Who cares? Horford has played very poorly in this series against the Celts. He has disappeared. How would he fare against even tougher competition like the Cavs or GS or San Antonio? I think he's a great player during the season but in playoff crunch time he is Missing In Action.

One might think those dollars would be better spent on Bazemore. Horford was so bad last night and really didn't come to play this series and he is the supposed best player in this match-up.

I've said it before, if signing him leads to a bigger splash (Durant, trade for Cousins or Butler), then yeah, of course we go for it. Otherwise, there might be better moves to make.

I don't think Horford moves the needle for us in a game like last night. Only when he sat down did the Hawks finally explode. It's just one game, I know, but yikes.

I understand the argument that we have to sign Horford if it helps in bringing During on board but why would Durant - or another star free agent - would particulary crave playing with Horford ? Especially with the way he has played in this series, his health issues and his age?

I understand the dominos effect of signing a good-but-no-great player to entice a true superstar but to me Horford does not belong in the first category and I don't see why the best free agents to hit the market should see him that way.

Oh, you definitely don't need to sell me on the negatives of signing Horford, but he is a big enough name and essentially a perennial all-star. Other than our speedy PG, we don't have any other players that a big FA might really want to play with (although I do think Stevens and our defensive tenacity, as a whole, is a draw). Like it or not, Horford might be our best chance at signing another impact FA or getting a disgruntled all-star to demand a trade to our team.

I am not saying it is likely, just pointing out that I would happily sign him if a bigger opportunity arose contingent on his signing.

[Drucci]

Who cares? Horford has played very poorly in this series against the Celts. He has disappeared. How would he fare against even tougher competition like the Cavs or GS or San Antonio? I think he's a great player during the season but in playoff crunch time he is Missing In Action.

One might think those dollars would be better spent on Bazemore. Horford was so bad last night and really didn't come to play this series and he is the supposed best player in this match-up.

I've said it before, if signing him leads to a bigger splash (Durant, trade for Cousins or Butler), then yeah, of course we go for it. Otherwise, there might be better moves to make.

I don't think Horford moves the needle for us in a game like last night. Only when he sat down did the Hawks finally explode. It's just one game, I know, but yikes.

I understand the argument that we have to sign Horford if it helps in bringing During on board but why would Durant - or another star free agent - would particulary crave playing with Horford ? Especially with the way he has played in this series, his health issues and his age?

I understand the dominos effect of signing a good-but-no-great player to entice a true superstar but to me Horford does not belong in the first category and I don't see why the best free agents to hit the market should see him that way.

Oh, you definitely don't need to sell me on the negatives of signing Horford, but he is a big enough name and essentially a perennial all-star. Other than our speedy PG, we don't have any other players that a big FA might really want to play with (although I do think Stevens and our defensive tenacity, as a whole, is a draw). Like it or not, Horford might be our best chance at signing another impact FA or getting a disgruntled all-star to demand a trade to our team.

I am not saying it is likely, just pointing out that I would happily sign him if a bigger opportunity arose contingent on his signing.

I would happily do it too but I'd rather sign a guy like Jimmy Butler who would certainly bring issues of his own - regarding egos, shots distribution, etc. - but is much younger. I think (or at least can only hope) that players like Durant take the big names' ages and health into consideration when they make their choices.