Big Lead Article: "Al Horford Has Become a Big Problem for the Celtics"

[PhoSita]

Of course I understand why Horford's salary is so large, but that still doesn't change the fact that he has the 11th highest salary in the league and is no where near the 11th best player in the league.  He is 24% of Boston's cap space this year and based on estimates of next year's cap will be close to 27%, and something like 25% in his final year (if he picks up the option).  Horford is a very good player, but he isn't worth that contract.

You are begging for a false premise:  That league salaries should be ordered in accordance to talent.

They are not.  They are not every going to be.  They are not really even supposed to be.

Whether a player is "worth" a contract is not based on this sort of dubious and contrived ranking.   A player on a rookie contract or a value deal blows that sort of methodology completely away.

Here is the proper way to assess whether a player is 'worth his contract'.

The job of a player is to help his team win.  That is what you are paying him to do.   His value is realized in how well he does that and can be estimated by estimating the share of his team's wins his contributions resulted in.  There are various analytics that estimate this, one of the more commonly known being BBREF Win Shares.

A win has a dollar value.   Based on BRI projections, I'm going to conservatively estimate that a Win Share this season will probably be worth on the order of $4M - $5M.

Horford is on pace to generate about 9 Win Shares this season.  That would put his revenue value at somewhere around $40M, plus or minus some handful of millions, but probably well, well above his salary.

Note, due to the size of Boston's market and the fact that wins on this team will contribute to a playoff run (thus generating playoff revenue), the case can be made that a Win Share is more valuable to a team like Boston than it is to the league on average.   Thus the real number is probably higher.

Thank you for this excellent explanation.



Would the Celts be better off now if they had not signed Al Horford and saved that cap space?  I say no.

Would the Celts be better off if they had used the cap space they used on Horford to sign 1-2 lower cost players who might be more productive in a conventional box score sense?  Again, I say no.

[Big333223]

is 54th among high-volume defenders allowing 0.813 points per play per Synergy, for No. 1 defense in NBA.

You mean 5th.

I do. Apologies. Tp for catching it.

[Moranis]

Of course I understand why Horford's salary is so large, but that still doesn't change the fact that he has the 11th highest salary in the league and is no where near the 11th best player in the league.  He is 24% of Boston's cap space this year and based on estimates of next year's cap will be close to 27%, and something like 25% in his final year (if he picks up the option).  Horford is a very good player, but he isn't worth that contract.

You are begging for a false premise:  That league salaries should be ordered in accordance to talent.

They are not.  They are not every going to be.  They are not really even supposed to be.

Whether a player is "worth" a contract is not based on this sort of dubious and contrived ranking.   A player on a rookie contract or a value deal blows that sort of methodology completely away.

Here is the proper way to assess whether a player is 'worth his contract'.

The job of a player is to help his team win.  That is what you are paying him to do.   His value is realized in how well he does that and can be estimated by estimating the share of his team's wins his contributions resulted in.  There are various analytics that estimate this, one of the more commonly known being BBREF Win Shares.

A win has a dollar value.   Based on BRI projections, I'm going to conservatively estimate that a Win Share this season will probably be worth on the order of $4M - $5M.

Horford is on pace to generate about 9 Win Shares this season.  That would put his revenue value at somewhere around $40M, plus or minus some handful of millions, but probably well, well above his salary.

Note, due to the size of Boston's market and the fact that wins on this team will contribute to a playoff run (thus generating playoff revenue), the case can be made that a Win Share is more valuable to a team like Boston than it is to the league on average.   Thus the real number is probably higher.

Thank you for this excellent explanation.



Would the Celts be better off now if they had not signed Al Horford and saved that cap space?  I say no.

Would the Celts be better off if they had used the cap space they used on Horford to sign 1-2 lower cost players who might be more productive in a conventional box score sense?  Again, I say no.

except the Celtics easily could be better off had they not signed Horford.  Perhaps Ainge pulls the trigger on a Cousins, George, or Butler trade since he would still had room to sign a max level free agent like Hayward.  Maybe Boston still has the assets to acquire Irving.  Wouldn't having one of those players instead of Horford be a better position.

[Alleyoopster]

Journalism is becoming more and more about raising controversy than stating logical opinions and/or facts. The goal is often to make readers react. If that's what the writer was trying to do, then he succeeded. The article was basically meritless.

I felt similarly to the writer about signing Gordon Hayward for $32M/year. Thought the Celtics could have received more value for 2 players with that amount of money. However, once I saw him play defense my opinion somewhat changed. I'm hoping he returns 100% next season. Otherwise, this could turn out to be a very expensive signing. 

[Rosco917]

When sportswriters don't have anything significant to offer, I wish they wouldn't advertise it.

[Thruthelookingglass]

This is probably my first time to drop in on a Horford thread, but geez.  I've marveled at Al's game since he killed it at Florida.  And I still do.  Stats don't give me goosebumps.  I much prefer actual basketball to perusing magic numbers and algorithms to judge a player.  And I much prefer actual basketball to sitting around and coveting dudes on other teams.

While Horford has slumps and off games, he's a hell of a player and he is special.  Best of all, he's on OUR team.  I can still hardly believe our good fortune to see him in a Celtics uniform. 

Guys, remember who you're rooting for.  Stop being cheap with other people's money.  If we really have to talk trash, we're supposed to be talking trash about the players on OTHER teams.

[tarheelsxxiii]

Of course I understand why Horford's salary is so large, but that still doesn't change the fact that he has the 11th highest salary in the league and is no where near the 11th best player in the league.  He is 24% of Boston's cap space this year and based on estimates of next year's cap will be close to 27%, and something like 25% in his final year (if he picks up the option).  Horford is a very good player, but he isn't worth that contract.

You are begging for a false premise:  That league salaries should be ordered in accordance to talent.

They are not.  They are not every going to be.  They are not really even supposed to be.

Whether a player is "worth" a contract is not based on this sort of dubious and contrived ranking.   A player on a rookie contract or a value deal blows that sort of methodology completely away.

Here is the proper way to assess whether a player is 'worth his contract'.

The job of a player is to help his team win.  That is what you are paying him to do.   His value is realized in how well he does that and can be estimated by estimating the share of his team's wins his contributions resulted in.  There are various analytics that estimate this, one of the more commonly known being BBREF Win Shares.

A win has a dollar value.   Based on BRI projections, I'm going to conservatively estimate that a Win Share this season will probably be worth on the order of $4M - $5M.

Horford is on pace to generate about 9 Win Shares this season.  That would put his revenue value at somewhere around $40M, plus or minus some handful of millions, but probably well, well above his salary.

Note, due to the size of Boston's market and the fact that wins on this team will contribute to a playoff run (thus generating playoff revenue), the case can be made that a Win Share is more valuable to a team like Boston than it is to the league on average.   Thus the real number is probably higher.

How do you assign monetary value to a win-share based on BRI projections?

[wiley]

Was Horford not outstanding in last year's playoffs?  My memory is poor but I think he was...
Danny/Brad/The owners....they are rolling their eyes and laughing at the over-thinking pseudo science of this article.

[Celtic_Pride777]

I'm not going to worry about Horford until he's a free agent because by then he should be ready for a pay cut, which invalidates the criticism against him as a such a highly paid player. And until then, he's worth the contract he got based on 1) production vs. alternatives available at the time of signing him, 2) crucial role on team not reflected in traditional stats and 3) value as a player who contributed to getting hayward (and even if only slightly intrigued durant that summer).

I even expect his production to drop slightly the next couple of years and still think he was, is and will be worth this current contract. It's his next contract that will be the question.

Are you sure Horford will be amenable to a paycut when the time comes to offer extensions to other key core players?

For this team's sake, I hope he does

[Celtics4ever]

Journalism is becoming more and more about raising controversy than stating logical opinions and/or facts.

I  agree.   I have never heard of the author of this piece or the big lead and think it was hack controversial journalism.

A hack writer is a pejorative term for a writer who is paid to write low-quality, rushed articles or books "to order", often with a short deadline.

[/b]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hack_writer

[jambr380]

Danny wanted to use Horford to convince Durant to come to Boston. He signed Horford at the market rate, then lost on Durant.

Horford is overpaid, as are many free agents.

I'm sure Danny would include him in a trade if one becomes available. Until then, he'll be a useful big man that helps run an offense.

This is probably my take on Horford as well. I am happy to have him, was excited when we signed him, and have been mostly pleased with his play throughout his first two seasons with the Cs. But, I don't consider him untouchable and think that Hayward will replace a lot of what he does when he is finally healthy.

Like others, I wonder about what kind-of pay cut he will take when he is a FA again. It is entirely possible he opts out of his contract after next season and signs on with another team for [near] max dollars knowing the Cs won't be able to do the same. He doesn't seem like the type, but you never know.

Also, I don't think it is totally fair to assume the Cs would be a train wreck or wouldn't be as well-off if we didn't have Horford - Ainge has earned the benefit of the doubt in his team building. I think everybody agrees that Horford is better than nothing.

Until 'something' happens, I am going to just go ahead an keep enjoying Horford and the rest of the Cs play well and hope they can make a long playoff run!

[gift]

I'm not going to worry about Horford until he's a free agent because by then he should be ready for a pay cut, which invalidates the criticism against him as a such a highly paid player. And until then, he's worth the contract he got based on 1) production vs. alternatives available at the time of signing him, 2) crucial role on team not reflected in traditional stats and 3) value as a player who contributed to getting hayward (and even if only slightly intrigued durant that summer).

I even expect his production to drop slightly the next couple of years and still think he was, is and will be worth this current contract. It's his next contract that will be the question.

Are you sure Horford will be amenable to a paycut when the time comes to offer extensions to other key core players?

For this team's sake, I hope he does

I'm not sure at all. But I'm not worried about Horford or his contract until that time.

[JBcat]

Danny wanted to use Horford to convince Durant to come to Boston. He signed Horford at the market rate, then lost on Durant.

Horford is overpaid, as are many free agents.

I'm sure Danny would include him in a trade if one becomes available. Until then, he'll be a useful big man that helps run an offense.

This is probably my take on Horford as well. I am happy to have him, was excited when we signed him, and have been mostly pleased with his play throughout his first two seasons with the Cs. But, I don't consider him untouchable and think that Hayward will replace a lot of what he does when he is finally healthy.

Like others, I wonder about what kind-of pay cut he will take when he is a FA again. It is entirely possible he opts out of his contract after next season and signs on with another team for [near] max dollars knowing the Cs won't be able to do the same. He doesn't seem like the type, but you never know.

Also, I don't think it is totally fair to assume the Cs would be a train wreck or wouldn't be as well-off if we didn't have Horford - Ainge has earned the benefit of the doubt in his team building. I think everybody agrees that Horford is better than nothing.

Until 'something' happens, I am going to just go ahead an keep enjoying Horford and the rest of the Cs play well and hope they can make a long playoff run!

It’s very unlikely he will get near max dollars in his next contract. He will be approaching his mid 30’s, and after 2016 and 2017 only a handful of teams will have near max cap space for the foreseeable future (mostly bad teams).

[mmmmm]

Of course I understand why Horford's salary is so large, but that still doesn't change the fact that he has the 11th highest salary in the league and is no where near the 11th best player in the league.  He is 24% of Boston's cap space this year and based on estimates of next year's cap will be close to 27%, and something like 25% in his final year (if he picks up the option).  Horford is a very good player, but he isn't worth that contract.

You are begging for a false premise:  That league salaries should be ordered in accordance to talent.

They are not.  They are not every going to be.  They are not really even supposed to be.

Whether a player is "worth" a contract is not based on this sort of dubious and contrived ranking.   A player on a rookie contract or a value deal blows that sort of methodology completely away.

Here is the proper way to assess whether a player is 'worth his contract'.

The job of a player is to help his team win.  That is what you are paying him to do.   His value is realized in how well he does that and can be estimated by estimating the share of his team's wins his contributions resulted in.  There are various analytics that estimate this, one of the more commonly known being BBREF Win Shares.

A win has a dollar value.   Based on BRI projections, I'm going to conservatively estimate that a Win Share this season will probably be worth on the order of $4M - $5M.

Horford is on pace to generate about 9 Win Shares this season.  That would put his revenue value at somewhere around $40M, plus or minus some handful of millions, but probably well, well above his salary.

Note, due to the size of Boston's market and the fact that wins on this team will contribute to a playoff run (thus generating playoff revenue), the case can be made that a Win Share is more valuable to a team like Boston than it is to the league on average.   Thus the real number is probably higher.

Thank you for this excellent explanation.



Would the Celts be better off now if they had not signed Al Horford and saved that cap space?  I say no.

Would the Celts be better off if they had used the cap space they used on Horford to sign 1-2 lower cost players who might be more productive in a conventional box score sense?  Again, I say no.

except the Celtics easily could be better off had they not signed Horford.  Perhaps Ainge pulls the trigger on a Cousins, George, or Butler trade since he would still had room to sign a max level free agent like Hayward.  Maybe Boston still has the assets to acquire Irving.  Wouldn't having one of those players instead of Horford be a better position.

Again, you are begging for us to accept your unsupported premise:  That it would have been 'easy' for Ainge to secure one of those alternatives AND that it truly would have made the Celtics 'better off'.

Even if true, neither changes that Horford has, indeed, earned his salary so far.

[moiso]

Of course I understand why Horford's salary is so large, but that still doesn't change the fact that he has the 11th highest salary in the league and is no where near the 11th best player in the league.  He is 24% of Boston's cap space this year and based on estimates of next year's cap will be close to 27%, and something like 25% in his final year (if he picks up the option).  Horford is a very good player, but he isn't worth that contract.

You are begging for a false premise:  That league salaries should be ordered in accordance to talent.

They are not.  They are not every going to be.  They are not really even supposed to be.

Whether a player is "worth" a contract is not based on this sort of dubious and contrived ranking.   A player on a rookie contract or a value deal blows that sort of methodology completely away.

Here is the proper way to assess whether a player is 'worth his contract'.

The job of a player is to help his team win.  That is what you are paying him to do.   His value is realized in how well he does that and can be estimated by estimating the share of his team's wins his contributions resulted in.  There are various analytics that estimate this, one of the more commonly known being BBREF Win Shares.

A win has a dollar value.   Based on BRI projections, I'm going to conservatively estimate that a Win Share this season will probably be worth on the order of $4M - $5M.

Horford is on pace to generate about 9 Win Shares this season.  That would put his revenue value at somewhere around $40M, plus or minus some handful of millions, but probably well, well above his salary.

Note, due to the size of Boston's market and the fact that wins on this team will contribute to a playoff run (thus generating playoff revenue), the case can be made that a Win Share is more valuable to a team like Boston than it is to the league on average.   Thus the real number is probably higher.

Thank you for this excellent explanation.



Would the Celts be better off now if they had not signed Al Horford and saved that cap space?  I say no.

Would the Celts be better off if they had used the cap space they used on Horford to sign 1-2 lower cost players who might be more productive in a conventional box score sense?  Again, I say no.

except the Celtics easily could be better off had they not signed Horford.  Perhaps Ainge pulls the trigger on a Cousins, George, or Butler trade since he would still had room to sign a max level free agent like Hayward.  Maybe Boston still has the assets to acquire Irving.  Wouldn't having one of those players instead of Horford be a better position.

And they could also easily be worse off if they made one of those trades.