Do You Think Dwight Howard Regrets Choosing Rockets over Warriors?

[Dasein]

Do you think he cares more about money or winning a title?

By joining the Warriors he would have had a better shot at winning a ring, but by joining Houston he could make more money because of the no income tax.

Would the Warriors even be better if Howard joined the Warriors? It would have resulted in the Warriors trading away Bogut.

In my opinion I think Howard knew that he would have a better chance of winning a title if he joined the Warriors, but he didn't want to turn down the extra money he could get by joining Houston.

And I don't even think he would be that much of an upgrade over Bogut.

What do you guys think?

[XtotheDeezy]

If Dwight bought into the team concept of what the Warriors are doing, then it would've been a great fit.

[DoubleLintendre]

Any true competitor would at least have the thought cross his mind on the eve of a decisive sweep.

So no, I don't think Dwight has any regrets.

[KobeBryant24]

Dwight prob would of messed up the chemistry

[TheHartBreakKid]

Dwight prob would of messed up the chemistry

This...I cant think of a player that fits in the warriors culture and game worse than Dwight. He's a beast though so they would obviously still be very good...I just don't know if they would be this good.

[ken6199]

Do you think he cares more about money or winning a title?

By joining the Warriors he would have had a better shot at winning a ring, but by joining Houston he could make more money because of the no income tax.

Would the Warriors even be better if Howard joined the Warriors? It would have resulted in the Warriors trading away Bogut.

In my opinion I think Howard knew that he would have a better chance of winning a title if he joined the Warriors, but he didn't want to turn down the extra money he could get by joining Houston.

And I don't even think he would be that much of an upgrade over Bogut.

What do you guys think?

This kind of hindsight is just smh. Typical GM retrospective.

You make this thread a year ago, people laugh at you. Hey at the time Warriors was not really a consideration. Kerr didn't happen, people still have doubts on Curry's ankle, Bogut healthy concern. Harden was having an overall better year than Curry and already elevated his best SG status in the league.

It's also not like GSW can add Dwight by not losing anything. They need to pay Klay, Bogut, Lee, Iggy, Dwight, build a bench, that's mathematically very very hard.

You mentioned no income tax. You know that's only like 41 regular season games right? You pay tax in the city you play in game by game. And you think Dwight's agent won't tell him that, if he builds a better brand by winning, he got lot more endorsements in a better economic area, if warriors was the obvious better choice for him AT THAT TIME?

It's easy to create thread like this to poop on a team just had an embarrassing loss at home, on a player who is universally hated. I am not saying you are a hater, you just bit too obsessed with the hindsight game.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[B_BallReasons]

Wasn't there a story that Dwight chose Houston because it would mean he pays less child support than if he lived in another state? Plus it's Texas. No state Taxes either.

[Chris_SoCal]

Dwight howards Salary 22 million. Andrew Boguts Salary 14 Million.

The Warriors got lucky! Andrew gives the team all they need and at a discount. They got luck theere and not by trading for love!

[TheHartBreakKid]

Do you think he cares more about money or winning a title?

By joining the Warriors he would have had a better shot at winning a ring, but by joining Houston he could make more money because of the no income tax.

Would the Warriors even be better if Howard joined the Warriors? It would have resulted in the Warriors trading away Bogut.

In my opinion I think Howard knew that he would have a better chance of winning a title if he joined the Warriors, but he didn't want to turn down the extra money he could get by joining Houston.

And I don't even think he would be that much of an upgrade over Bogut.

What do you guys think?

This kind of hindsight is just smh. Typical GM retrospective.

You make this thread a year ago, people laugh at you. Hey at the time Warriors was not really a consideration. Kerr didn't happen, people still have doubts on Curry's ankle, Bogut healthy concern. Harden was having an overall better year than Curry and already elevated his best SG status in the league.

It's also not like GSW can add Dwight by not losing anything. They need to pay Klay, Bogut, Lee, Iggy, Dwight, build a bench, that's mathematically very very hard.

You mentioned no income tax. You know that's only like 41 regular season games right? You pay tax in the city you play in game by game. And you think Dwight's agent won't tell him that, if he builds a better brand by winning, he got lot more endorsements in a better economic area, if warriors was the obvious better choice for him AT THAT TIME?

It's easy to create thread like this to poop on a team just had an embarrassing loss at home, on a player who is universally hated. I am not saying you are a hater, you just bit too obsessed with the hindsight game.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

I agree with this post. At the time the Rockets were obviously the more desirable destination (and have been a pretty damn good team this year). I don't like Dwight but it would be unfair to say that he knew the Warriors would be this good.

[Dasein]

Do you think he cares more about money or winning a title?

By joining the Warriors he would have had a better shot at winning a ring, but by joining Houston he could make more money because of the no income tax.

Would the Warriors even be better if Howard joined the Warriors? It would have resulted in the Warriors trading away Bogut.

In my opinion I think Howard knew that he would have a better chance of winning a title if he joined the Warriors, but he didn't want to turn down the extra money he could get by joining Houston.

And I don't even think he would be that much of an upgrade over Bogut.

What do you guys think?

This kind of hindsight is just smh. Typical GM retrospective.

You make this thread a year ago, people laugh at you. Hey at the time Warriors was not really a consideration. Kerr didn't happen, people still have doubts on Curry's ankle, Bogut healthy concern. Harden was having an overall better year than Curry and already elevated his best SG status in the league.

It's also not like GSW can add Dwight by not losing anything. They need to pay Klay, Bogut, Lee, Iggy, Dwight, build a bench, that's mathematically very very hard.

You mentioned no income tax. You know that's only like 41 regular season games right? You pay tax in the city you play in game by game. And you think Dwight's agent won't tell him that, if he builds a better brand by winning, he got lot more endorsements in a better economic area, if warriors was the obvious better choice for him AT THAT TIME?

It's easy to create thread like this to poop on a team just had an embarrassing loss at home, on a player who is universally hated. I am not saying you are a hater, you just bit too obsessed with the hindsight game.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

-Warriors had a much better season and post-season and were CLEARLY the superior team
-Warriors were a 6th seed seed that beat the 3rd seed nuggets to advance to the second round.
-They would have beat the Spurs in the second round if not for injuries to Curry and Bogut and a massive meltdown in game 1 due to Mark Jackson being inept at coaching.
-Rockets were an 8th seed first round exit.
-Harden did NOT have a better season than Curry. I would easily take 23 PPG on 45% FG and 45% 3p over Harden's 25 PPG on 43% FG and 35% 3p
-Your just being a homer

[Smirkin Dirk]

You mentioned no income tax. You know that's only like 41 regular season games right? You pay tax in the city you play in game by game.

Huh?

[ken6199]

Do you think he cares more about money or winning a title?

By joining the Warriors he would have had a better shot at winning a ring, but by joining Houston he could make more money because of the no income tax.

Would the Warriors even be better if Howard joined the Warriors? It would have resulted in the Warriors trading away Bogut.

In my opinion I think Howard knew that he would have a better chance of winning a title if he joined the Warriors, but he didn't want to turn down the extra money he could get by joining Houston.

And I don't even think he would be that much of an upgrade over Bogut.

What do you guys think?

This kind of hindsight is just smh. Typical GM retrospective.

You make this thread a year ago, people laugh at you. Hey at the time Warriors was not really a consideration. Kerr didn't happen, people still have doubts on Curry's ankle, Bogut healthy concern. Harden was having an overall better year than Curry and already elevated his best SG status in the league.

It's also not like GSW can add Dwight by not losing anything. They need to pay Klay, Bogut, Lee, Iggy, Dwight, build a bench, that's mathematically very very hard.

You mentioned no income tax. You know that's only like 41 regular season games right? You pay tax in the city you play in game by game. And you think Dwight's agent won't tell him that, if he builds a better brand by winning, he got lot more endorsements in a better economic area, if warriors was the obvious better choice for him AT THAT TIME?

It's easy to create thread like this to poop on a team just had an embarrassing loss at home, on a player who is universally hated. I am not saying you are a hater, you just bit too obsessed with the hindsight game.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Warriors were a 6th seed seed that beat the 3rd seed nuggets to advance to the second round. They would have beat the Spurs in the second round if not for injuries to Curry and Bogut and a massive meltdown in game 1 due to Mark Jackson being inept at coaching.
Rockets were an 8th seed first round exit. Warriors were CLEARLY the superior team.

I beg to differ.

It's not adding Dwight for nothing. Better team = current talent + salary situation + bunch of other considerations. Rockets were able to absorb Dwight's salary and still have salary flexibility, and on the brink of building a Beverly+Harden+Parsons+Bosh+Dwight team the very next summer. Harden-Howard was the best 1-2 punch (on paper) he could look for at that time, while Curry and Bogut had big injury concerns. Warriors at that time, had to shed a $30m salary AFTER the Dwight trade (Jefferson+Bedriens+???), which was a big unknown during Dwight's shopping period. All other four team had guaranteed salary space at that time plus after moves, only GSW was on pending salary dump.

I believe the priority was Houston > Dallas > Lakers > Atlanta > Warriors. It was really a no-brainer at that time.

[Dasein]

Do you think he cares more about money or winning a title?

By joining the Warriors he would have had a better shot at winning a ring, but by joining Houston he could make more money because of the no income tax.

Would the Warriors even be better if Howard joined the Warriors? It would have resulted in the Warriors trading away Bogut.

In my opinion I think Howard knew that he would have a better chance of winning a title if he joined the Warriors, but he didn't want to turn down the extra money he could get by joining Houston.

And I don't even think he would be that much of an upgrade over Bogut.

What do you guys think?

This kind of hindsight is just smh. Typical GM retrospective.

You make this thread a year ago, people laugh at you. Hey at the time Warriors was not really a consideration. Kerr didn't happen, people still have doubts on Curry's ankle, Bogut healthy concern. Harden was having an overall better year than Curry and already elevated his best SG status in the league.

It's also not like GSW can add Dwight by not losing anything. They need to pay Klay, Bogut, Lee, Iggy, Dwight, build a bench, that's mathematically very very hard.

You mentioned no income tax. You know that's only like 41 regular season games right? You pay tax in the city you play in game by game. And you think Dwight's agent won't tell him that, if he builds a better brand by winning, he got lot more endorsements in a better economic area, if warriors was the obvious better choice for him AT THAT TIME?

It's easy to create thread like this to poop on a team just had an embarrassing loss at home, on a player who is universally hated. I am not saying you are a hater, you just bit too obsessed with the hindsight game.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

I agree with this post. At the time the Rockets were obviously the more desirable destination (and have been a pretty damn good team this year). I don't like Dwight but it would be unfair to say that he knew the Warriors would be this good.

How were the Rockets the more desirable destination? Warriors were clearly the better team; they had a better season and post-season.

[Slava]

Dwight also wanted to be a post scorer, which kind of clashed with the way the Warriors play plus it would have required a sign & trade which the Lakers said they did not want any part of. Apart from that, no one knew Curry would turn into something this consistently good to grab an MVP. Howard isn't the best decision maker but its hard to fault him based on hindsight. In the end Morey just told him all the sweet nothings he wanted to hear to get his signature.

[MaxRider]

Do you think he cares more about money or winning a title?

By joining the Warriors he would have had a better shot at winning a ring, but by joining Houston he could make more money because of the no income tax.

Would the Warriors even be better if Howard joined the Warriors? It would have resulted in the Warriors trading away Bogut.

In my opinion I think Howard knew that he would have a better chance of winning a title if he joined the Warriors, but he didn't want to turn down the extra money he could get by joining Houston.

And I don't even think he would be that much of an upgrade over Bogut.

What do you guys think?

Warriors don't have cap space to sign Howard
it has to be sign and trade
you think Lakers will trade him to division rival without getting at least Thompson and Barnes in return?

[DynastySS]

I was begging and pleading for him not to sign with the Warriors.

Dude is a mental midget.

[ken6199]

Do you think he cares more about money or winning a title?

By joining the Warriors he would have had a better shot at winning a ring, but by joining Houston he could make more money because of the no income tax.

Would the Warriors even be better if Howard joined the Warriors? It would have resulted in the Warriors trading away Bogut.

In my opinion I think Howard knew that he would have a better chance of winning a title if he joined the Warriors, but he didn't want to turn down the extra money he could get by joining Houston.

And I don't even think he would be that much of an upgrade over Bogut.

What do you guys think?

This kind of hindsight is just smh. Typical GM retrospective.

You make this thread a year ago, people laugh at you. Hey at the time Warriors was not really a consideration. Kerr didn't happen, people still have doubts on Curry's ankle, Bogut healthy concern. Harden was having an overall better year than Curry and already elevated his best SG status in the league.

It's also not like GSW can add Dwight by not losing anything. They need to pay Klay, Bogut, Lee, Iggy, Dwight, build a bench, that's mathematically very very hard.

You mentioned no income tax. You know that's only like 41 regular season games right? You pay tax in the city you play in game by game. And you think Dwight's agent won't tell him that, if he builds a better brand by winning, he got lot more endorsements in a better economic area, if warriors was the obvious better choice for him AT THAT TIME?

It's easy to create thread like this to poop on a team just had an embarrassing loss at home, on a player who is universally hated. I am not saying you are a hater, you just bit too obsessed with the hindsight game.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

-Warriors had a much better season and post-season and were CLEARLY the superior team
-Warriors were a 6th seed seed that beat the 3rd seed nuggets to advance to the second round.
-They would have beat the Spurs in the second round if not for injuries to Curry and Bogut and a massive meltdown in game 1 due to Mark Jackson being inept at coaching.
-Rockets were an 8th seed first round exit.
-Harden did NOT have a better season than Curry. I would easily take 23 PPG on 45% FG and 45% 3p over Harden's 25 PPG on 43% FG and 35% 3p
-Your just being a homer

blah blah blah, lots of excuses. what if what if, as soon as you brought this up I lose my remaining respect to your points.

Curry broke his ankle, Harden didn't, so yeah Harden had a better year. I would play with a healthy Bradly Beal rather than a Michael Jordan with ACL injury.

Shooting 45% from 3 is admirable but there are other very good shooters without a injury concerned ankle. Curry was paid $11m for a reason. Credit to Kerr for putting a system in to make him look a lot more lethal compared to Mark Jackson's - who I believe was the coach at that time.

Also your theory is as a FA, you always pick the higher seed when multiple teams are interested in you? No wonder Dwight didn't hire you as his agent.

Look at my other reply on the salary situation, and google 'CBA'.

Also I am not a homer. I am a die hard fan, sometimes very emotional, but no way I am a homer. Go look through my posts if you want. Create a poll if you want. I was just responding to your thread which I don't agree with.

[TheHartBreakKid]

This kind of hindsight is just smh. Typical GM retrospective.

You make this thread a year ago, people laugh at you. Hey at the time Warriors was not really a consideration. Kerr didn't happen, people still have doubts on Curry's ankle, Bogut healthy concern. Harden was having an overall better year than Curry and already elevated his best SG status in the league.

It's also not like GSW can add Dwight by not losing anything. They need to pay Klay, Bogut, Lee, Iggy, Dwight, build a bench, that's mathematically very very hard.

You mentioned no income tax. You know that's only like 41 regular season games right? You pay tax in the city you play in game by game. And you think Dwight's agent won't tell him that, if he builds a better brand by winning, he got lot more endorsements in a better economic area, if warriors was the obvious better choice for him AT THAT TIME?

It's easy to create thread like this to poop on a team just had an embarrassing loss at home, on a player who is universally hated. I am not saying you are a hater, you just bit too obsessed with the hindsight game.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

I agree with this post. At the time the Rockets were obviously the more desirable destination (and have been a pretty damn good team this year). I don't like Dwight but it would be unfair to say that he knew the Warriors would be this good.

How were the Rockets the more desirable destination? Warriors were clearly the better team; they had a better season and post-season.

The Warriors were definitely the better team. However the Rockets seemed to have more potential for growth. Klay was Just considered to be a good shooter, and Curry, despite having his breakout year, ended the season in a bad note with another ankle injury. David Lees contract was pretty bad also. I'm not going to act like they were the far more desirable destination, but at the time Harden seemed to give him another superstar to play with while GS had a pretty good team with many question marks. No one expected the Warriors to become this all time great team, and for Curry to become an all-time great, especially with the way he completely erased all concerns over his ankle. At the time, if I remember correctly,Curry was known to be an injury Prone player, while Harden was a sure thing rising superstar. That was probably the main deciding factor.

[magicmerl]

I wonder why this thread wasn't made last year?

[ken6199]

You mentioned no income tax. You know that's only like 41 regular season games right? You pay tax in the city you play in game by game.

Huh?

Only paying New York state taxes on 41 games is better than 82 games, particularly when you consider that a few of those games will be played in states with no state income tax, such as Florida or Texas. Likewise, the benefit of no state income tax in Texas is reduced when you still have to travel out of state for many of your games.