sign howard

[ThePaintedArea]

i hate players clowns.. thats why i do not like howard..
But...
Boston has no disneyland fakerland and hardenland....
he will play for a team that everyone tries his best... not big egos... defensive team first...he will play in a system.. without kobe and harden dictating the ball...
Without an overpay i would sign him... stevens could do defensive wonders with him..

You might be right but I'm skeptical.

They had a deeply divided locker room. With the departure of Kevin McHale his touches went way down, which, reportedly, he was vocally unhappy about. Not a good sign in a contract year - actually he has a player option for 2017 for 23 million plus; after the season he had he might have trouble duplicating that, but it would mean playing for Houston another year, which now seems increasingly unlikely.

Turnovers are awful, free-throw shooting is worse, and he slows down your offense if you give him the ball. He's DeAndre with an unrealistic conception of his role. He turns 31 in December.

Pass.

Why are more posters not talking about Marc Gasol?

[ThePaintedArea]

Honestly, I just don't think cap flexibility means much if anything the next few years.

 Sure it does. Not having to match salaries makes all your assets more fungible, especially all those draft picks.

[TheSundanceKid]

There are better and cheaper choices out there than Howard. Like the Amir signing last year I think Ainge will have an idea of a few of them.
However I would take Howard on a short term deal, like a 1+1 at $20m. The thing is he has a player option for $22.5m so why wouldn't he just take that and hit the market in 2017?

Whoever signs him will need to give him a long term deal and I'd rather not do that with the other options we might have (Cousins, M Gasol, Pachulia to give a few examples)

[TA9]

Depends on what he wants. If we can sign him to a somewhat similiar deal as Amir Johnson (money-wise of course), then I would be all for it.   

[CelticPride2016]

Ok if we sell our picks and smart and bradley and thomas and crowder..
We could have a shot at cousins who is at his prime...
Obviously he is less as a clown...
Oh sorry no coach he ever played for is happy with him
Everyone is saying that dwight is clown and always will be..
Noone is saying that cousins is a problem and will stay as a problem

I also find it odd that someone can argue to give away everything for DeMarcus Cousins, yet when Howard could possibly be acquired for free, he is described as a clown.

Lots of people felt Amir Johnson was overpriced, but it turned out he wasn't. He simply had plantar fasciitis and looked solid by the end of the year.

Our best players are at least a few years away from their primes. I am thinking of Marcus Smart and possibly Olynyk who few seem to have faith in. Isaiah Thomas could use another year or two to reach his peak. Crowder probably needs more time but is getting there. Avery Bradley is probably a finished product, but he is still young.

We are very young. We have a top pick coming in. No one can predict anything. I think Dwight Howard would be a very interesting Plan B or C. Durant is the obvious choice. I don't think trades are the way to go except for tinkering. And I don't think Danny Ainge is in any rush just because some fans are impatient.

No one knows what Howard will be offered. He could ask for $30 million, but I don't see it happening or it will be some desperate team like the Nets.

That's why Howard should just be one more card to possibly play.

I like the idea of free agents over trades.

Danny's wealth is in his volume of quality players and draft picks.

Yes, we need another "star" to go with Isaiah.

Or a guy like Howard could give us our first real center since Shaq?

I wouldn't want to sign him for more than two years or some kind of contract that wouldn't saddle us. Maybe that is impossible and Dwight wants a long deal.

But, in regards to adding Dwight to our team as a yes or no question, I say yes. I kinda thought Danny might swing a deal for him this year because his trade value seemed low.

I also don't think Brad Stevens is going anywhere if it takes Danny a few more years to get the roster closer to true contention with the heavyweight teams.

With the salary cap rising, maybe offer him two years at $25 million contingent on passing the physical of course. Dwight Howard is exactly the type of player we had in 2008. He needs a ring. He is one of the best players the last ten or twenty years. People have short memories.

Picture Howard with Crowder, Smart, Olynyk and Thomas. That could be the best team in the NBA considering we should still have a strong bench to back that up. Resign Amir.

I think it's a crazy idea to trade for Cousins when we can get one of the best centers who must be starving for recognition as a historic player.

I try not to get into the speculation part of being a fan, but I like Dwight Howard and wouldn't refer to him as a clown. It's about timing and chemistry.

Dwight is 30, though. I wouldn't want to sign him long-term like Washington did with Gortat. I'd give him three years tops at 20-25 million or cheaper depending on market value.

That's for Danny to worry about. I'd love Dwight Howard for some fireworks. We are already a defensive team. He would make us almost impossible to score on for many possessions playing with the other guys.

We need a bridge for two or three years unless Danny is able to go trader Danny all over cashing in chips like in 2007-08. I like slow and steady. I don't like having to give up anything to get someone. Cousins would cost so much in a trade. Big trades that work out seem to usually be a fluke.

I don't ever remember an off-season like this where anything could happen. Danny is stacked with asset chips. These are great times. It's almost as if Danny can't blow it unless he takes a big chance for a trade and then what if that player gets hurt? Isn't it better to have a deep team and not be completely dependent on any one player?

[PhoSita]

Honestly, I just don't think cap flexibility means much if anything the next few years.

 Sure it does. Not having to match salaries makes all your assets more fungible, especially all those draft picks.

Our assets are plenty fungible already.

[Roy H.]

Honestly, I just don't think cap flexibility means much if anything the next few years.

 Sure it does. Not having to match salaries makes all your assets more fungible, especially all those draft picks.

Our assets are plenty fungible already.

They are. Wasting $31 million on one non-star would make things substantially less flexible.

[LooseCannon]

Honestly, I just don't think cap flexibility means much if anything the next few years.

 Sure it does. Not having to match salaries makes all your assets more fungible, especially all those draft picks.

Our assets are plenty fungible already.

You think the Celtics' assets are all interchangeable and can easily be substituted for each other in any trade offer without any difference in value?

[PhoSita]

Honestly, I just don't think cap flexibility means much if anything the next few years.

 Sure it does. Not having to match salaries makes all your assets more fungible, especially all those draft picks.

Our assets are plenty fungible already.

You think the Celtics' assets are all interchangeable and can easily be substituted for each other in any trade offer without any difference in value?

A lot of them are, yeah. 

And I think what "ThePaintedArea" is really talking about here is having the ability to make trades work without having to worry about the cap numbers.  Just put the pieces you want in the trade without having to take a bad contract back, or include one of your highly paid vets (e.g. Amir), or whatever.

I'm not worried about that.  Ainge has shown that he's plenty adept in that area, and with the cap jumping up this year and next, there will always be teams ready to take on salary dumps or facilitate deals as necessary.

I really don't think that protecting cap space for the next two years is a significant concern.  There will be more cap space around the league than everybody can possibly use.

The main thing is not signing anybody for far more years or for far more money than you think they will actually be valuable for.  You want to avoid ending up with a guy who doesn't give you good value and who can't be traded.

[PhoSita]

Honestly, I just don't think cap flexibility means much if anything the next few years.

 Sure it does. Not having to match salaries makes all your assets more fungible, especially all those draft picks.

Our assets are plenty fungible already.

They are. Wasting $31 million on one non-star would make things substantially less flexible.

Sure, but I don't regard it as a waste, so therein lies our disagreement.

It's an overpay, sure, but welcome to this cap environment. Everybody will be overpaying except for teams that get to re-sign their own really good RFAs and the handful of teams that get to sign the superstars.


The Celtics are a young team with lots of draft picks.  Their best players are wildly underpaid by a factor of 3 or 4.  That means they have the ability to overpay to take the next step.  However much you overpay Howard is more than off-set by all of the rookie contracts you have (assuming you actually develop them), and by however much Isaiah and Crowder are already underpaid.  Not to mention Bradley, Smart, and Olynyk.

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

Dwight's defense would make Boston's overall D pretty great, but he's self-destructed too many times in his career for my liking. Not to mention he's not a go-to scorer. I'll pass.

[kozlodoev]

I think the "he won't be a clown because it's Boston" argument is wishful thinking.

Howard has been to many places, and he's been a clown everywhere he went.. so yeah, that's probably an accurate assessment.

[Roy H.]

Honestly, I just don't think cap flexibility means much if anything the next few years.

 Sure it does. Not having to match salaries makes all your assets more fungible, especially all those draft picks.

Our assets are plenty fungible already.

They are. Wasting $31 million on one non-star would make things substantially less flexible.

Sure, but I don't regard it as a waste, so therein lies our disagreement.

It's an overpay, sure, but welcome to this cap environment. Everybody will be overpaying except for teams that get to re-sign their own really good RFAs and the handful of teams that get to sign the superstars.


The Celtics are a young team with lots of draft picks.  Their best players are wildly underpaid by a factor of 3 or 4.  That means they have the ability to overpay to take the next step.  However much you overpay Howard is more than off-set by all of the rookie contracts you have (assuming you actually develop them), and by however much Isaiah and Crowder are already underpaid.  Not to mention Bradley, Smart, and Olynyk.

Smart management isn't "I have inexpensive assets so I can wildly overpay on a non-star".

Rather, smart management is using that same $31 million (I.e., 35% of the cap, a not insignificant amount) and signing / trading for two or three contributors).

[PhoSita]

We have too many "contributors" as it is.

Bringing in two or three guys at 10 million each is not likely to make the difference that adding one guy with Howard's skillset (i.e. rebounding, finishing, rim protection) at $30 million would.

If we're talking long term, absolutely.  I would not give Howard a four or five year deal.  No chance.  Because I'd be really concerned about the last year or two.

But if you could sign him to a three year deal, maybe with an option on that last year, then I think it's a no brainer.


And I disagree about smart management.  I think a smart team could recognize, hey, we have all of these cost controlled assets, that means we have the ability to spend a little more for a guy we believe can take us to another level.

You don't do that if you could sign 2-3 players who will have a greater net impact for the same money.  But I don't think that's the situation here.  Depth is not the weakness of this roster.

[Moranis]

I'm with Pho on this one.  In this cap environment, the guys that are getting 10 million contracts will be MLE type players.  Sure nice players to have around, but Boston already has plenty of those.  Howard can be a difference maker defensively in the paint and on the glass.  Those are two areas Boston is in great need and you aren't going to find MLE players that can provide that. 

I think signing Howard to a 3 year contract, even at 30 million a year, is probably a good result for the summer if Boston can't land Durant.  He is the exact type of player Boston needs and would significantly improve the roster.  Not sure he makes Boston a real threat to the Cavs, but he is a big step in the right direction and when he comes off the books is when the BKN rookie will hopefully be ready to lead the team to the promised land.