The Celtics losing Al Horford was a disaster for them

Moderators: ken6199, Dirk, Yuri Vaultin, Domejandro, zimpy27, bwgood77, BombsquadSammy, PockyCandy, Prez

User avatar
Bad-Thoma
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,134
And1: 3,598
Joined: Feb 22, 2006
Location: Still riding proud on the C's bandwagon

Re: The Celtics losing Al Horford was a disaster for them 

Post#141 » by Bad-Thoma » Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:42 am

giberish wrote:
Bad-Thoma wrote:
bran muffin wrote:


If the Sixers keep Horford for 4 years, they pay him $109M. If they keep him for 3 years, they pay him $97M.

There is no scenario where the Sixers pay Horford $97M for 4 years of service. So stop pretending like this is a $97M 4-year contract, because it isn't.


The 4th year is partially guaranteed, it's low 4/97, high 4/109.

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/philadelphia-76ers/al-horford-2199/


It's $97M over 4 years only if Horford is waived before the 4th year. The money is still spread out over 4 years, with the 4th year being a $14.5M dead weight contract hit without Horford on the roster. That's what a partial guarantee means. If Horford is playing under the contract during the 4th year he gets paid $26.5M.

This is just not complicated. It's how partially guaranteed deals work. It's not new or unusual.


We're really just arguing semantics here, I get how it works. I did mildly misunderstand what Bran was trying to say, but hey, at least he gets Westeros in the end.
FlatearthZorro
RealGM
Posts: 15,422
And1: 7,282
Joined: Feb 12, 2010
Location: Somewhere in Boston
     

Re: The Celtics losing Al Horford was a disaster for them 

Post#142 » by FlatearthZorro » Wed Aug 14, 2019 6:51 am

John Murdoch wrote:
FlatearthZorro wrote:True. He is a big loss we couldnt pay Horfie over 25 mils a year. Danny wast going to do it. I do agree that we might trade for Sabonis or Turner.

Why would Indy help u guys tho , feels unlikely



I don't see Indy having a legit SF. One who can guard here and there. We will see tho, but Indy with Dipo and Brogdon are fairly small. Both guys are 6'3, 6'4. Not sure if Warren is a starter on a team looking to win, we will find out tho.
Good assessment:

PLO wrote:Tatum played OK - took advantage of a few mismatches - decent on the defensive end. He is what we thought he was going into the season - a technically very proficient player operating close to his career ceiling as a rookie.
Snotbubbles
Rookie
Posts: 1,024
And1: 833
Joined: Feb 26, 2014
       

Re: The Celtics losing Al Horford was a disaster for them 

Post#143 » by Snotbubbles » Wed Aug 14, 2019 1:23 pm

bran muffin wrote:
stormi wrote:The Horford contract is 4/97 with a $12 million bonus if Philadelphia wins a championship once during those years, so it's totally fair.

I don't think that's right.

The $109M 4-year contract is partially guaranteed in the 4th season. If the Sixers cut him after the 3rd season, they will have paid him $97M. But then he will have played only 3 years. So you can say this contract is $109M/4 or $97M/3. But you can't say $97M/4.

In the 4th season of that contract, Horford is scheduled to make $26.5M at age 36. It is guaranteed for $14.5M. So if they waive him they will save only $12M. That $14.5M guarantee will become $19.5M if the Sixers reach the NBA Finals at any point during the next 3 years.


Year 1: $28.0M
Year 2: $27.5M
Year 3: $27.0M
Year 4: $26.5M ($14.5M guaranteed, $5M more if they make Finals, fully guaranteed if they win Finals)

Guaranteed money at signing: 4 years, $97.0M with the possibility to be $109M.
Curmudgeon
RealGM
Posts: 27,858
And1: 8,790
Joined: Jan 20, 2004
Location: Boston, MA

Re: The Celtics losing Al Horford was a disaster for them 

Post#144 » by Curmudgeon » Wed Aug 14, 2019 2:23 pm

Soulyss wrote:I don't see how Boston doesn't try to pry Steven Adams away from OKC somehow... He would be the perfect salve for the loss of Horford


People keep bringing up Steven Adams, but he and Horford have completely different skillsets, and Adams is a terrible fit for the offense that Stevens runs. Plus, he's overpaid.

The Celtics currently have a committee at the five spot. It may actually work if Vincent Poirier adapts well to the NBA or if Robert Williams continues to progress.
"Numbers lie alot. Wins and losses don't lie." - Jerry West
"You are what your record says you are."- Bill Parcells
"Offense sells tickets. Defense wins games. Rebounding wins championships." Pat Summit
Showdown
Pro Prospect
Posts: 879
And1: 616
Joined: Feb 15, 2019

Re: The Celtics losing Al Horford was a disaster for them 

Post#145 » by Showdown » Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:01 pm

I don't think so, Tacko Fall is going to be huge factor for them in exceeding expectations this season.
User avatar
Stannis
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 10,282
And1: 3,107
Joined: Dec 05, 2011
Location: United States
         

Re: The Celtics losing Al Horford was a disaster for them 

Post#146 » by Stannis » Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:21 pm

Losing Horford was a disaster in itself. Getting Kanter is a 2nd disaster.
#Yang2020

R.I.P. magnumt :beer:

robillionaire wrote:
DaT WaVeY RiCaN wrote:Cheapest place to get Knicks tickets?

when they play at the barclays center :lol:
JRoy
Freshman
Posts: 56
And1: 28
Joined: Feb 27, 2019

Re: The Celtics losing Al Horford was a disaster for them 

Post#147 » by JRoy » Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:49 pm

Boston is in a strange place, must be very disappointing after the high hopes of last summer.

It might be that Ainge prized his trade assets too highly and got nothing for them.
User avatar
Johnny Bball
RealGM
Posts: 20,521
And1: 19,009
Joined: Feb 01, 2015
 

Re: The Celtics losing Al Horford was a disaster for them 

Post#148 » by Johnny Bball » Wed Aug 14, 2019 4:45 pm

Curmudgeon wrote:
Soulyss wrote:I don't see how Boston doesn't try to pry Steven Adams away from OKC somehow... He would be the perfect salve for the loss of Horford


People keep bringing up Steven Adams, but he and Horford have completely different skillsets, and Adams is a terrible fit for the offense that Stevens runs. Plus, he's overpaid.

The Celtics currently have a committee at the five spot. It may actually work if Vincent Poirier adapts well to the NBA or if Robert Williams continues to progress.


Because he's the one good centre likely to be traded. And no, he's not a bad fit at all. But I don't see how they match salary unless they trade Hayward. But if they didn't do that before when it was probably best, they sure as shooting won't re-evaluate and do it now.

If they have to hope to rely on Poirier or Williams to become a breakout player in any way, it's going to be a long year.
Curmudgeon
RealGM
Posts: 27,858
And1: 8,790
Joined: Jan 20, 2004
Location: Boston, MA

Re: The Celtics losing Al Horford was a disaster for them 

Post#149 » by Curmudgeon » Wed Aug 14, 2019 5:30 pm

Johnny Bball wrote:
If they have to hope to rely on Poirier or Williams to become a breakout player in any way, it's going to be a long year.


That's way too negative. Both of those guys have the physical tools to be successful. As for Kanter, he will score and rebound. Defensiovely he will have to go under every pick and drop to cover the roll man, but that's ok against centers like Adams and Drummond who have no range.
"Numbers lie alot. Wins and losses don't lie." - Jerry West

"You are what your record says you are."- Bill Parcells

"Offense sells tickets. Defense wins games. Rebounding wins championships." Pat Summit
User avatar
Johnny Bball
RealGM
Posts: 20,521
And1: 19,009
Joined: Feb 01, 2015
 

Re: The Celtics losing Al Horford was a disaster for them 

Post#150 » by Johnny Bball » Wed Aug 14, 2019 5:50 pm

Curmudgeon wrote:
Johnny Bball wrote:
If they have to hope to rely on Poirier or Williams to become a breakout player in any way, it's going to be a long year.


That's way too negative. Both of those guys have the physical tools to be successful. As for Kanter, he will score and rebound. Defensiovely he will have to go under every pick and drop to cover the roll man, but that's ok against centers like Adams and Drummond who have no range.


Going under has nothing to do with the Kanter and everything to do with the guards. And it doesn't matter who the centre is, guards are going to go off on Kanter as he drops way back in the PNR, and when they score, it will be 100% because of Kanter and not the guards.

And neither of those guys can learn even an small amount of Hordford's skills in one summer.
ProcessDoctor
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,938
And1: 1,836
Joined: Jul 02, 2006
   

Re: The Celtics losing Al Horford was a disaster for them 

Post#151 » by ProcessDoctor » Wed Aug 14, 2019 6:55 pm

I agree, but I still think they’re the clearcut 3rd-best team in the conference. They could upset Milwaukee or Philly if the stars align imo.
2019-2020 Philadelphia 76ers:

Simmons/Burke/Neto/Milton
Richardson/Smith/Korkmaz
Harris/Ennis/Thybulle
Horford/Scott/Bolden
Embiid/O’Quinn
Fencer reregistered
RealGM
Posts: 18,943
And1: 6,712
Joined: Oct 25, 2006

Re: The Celtics losing Al Horford was a disaster for them 

Post#152 » by Fencer reregistered » Wed Aug 14, 2019 8:50 pm

israelfirst wrote:kanter is a bigger, younger, and better version of horford.


Except on defense, where he's nothing like Horford and far inferior, and on offense, where he's nothing like Horford but also good.
Fencer reregistered
RealGM
Posts: 18,943
And1: 6,712
Joined: Oct 25, 2006

Re: The Celtics losing Al Horford was a disaster for them 

Post#153 » by Fencer reregistered » Wed Aug 14, 2019 8:54 pm

jabron47 wrote:Offensively, I think the loss of Horford won't be as noticeable as some people might think. While we don't really have a big who can replace his skill set (Theis is the closest which isn't good), I think Hayward will step up and be the guy who creates for everyone else, which Horford did a lot of.

Defensively is where the Celtics will miss him, but not for the reason you might expect. Horford's best skill wasn't guarding guys like Embiid, it was his ability to switch onto a guard and stay in front of them. While I'm hopeful that guys like Time Lord and Poirier can guard bigs, I'm worried that they don't have the ability or the IQ to know how to guard smaller players.

Like others have said, only time will tell if the Celtics have an ample Horford replacement currently on the team. Nevertheless, they Celtics made the right move by not signing him to a deal that big.


You nailed it. Great first post. The only thing you didn't address was whether he still was last year, or in the future will be, the guy who could defend perimeter players as well as excellent perimeter defenders could. He was amazing at that, with any inadequacy in quickness being minor enough that he compensated for it with his smarts and length.
Fencer reregistered
RealGM
Posts: 18,943
And1: 6,712
Joined: Oct 25, 2006

Re: The Celtics losing Al Horford was a disaster for them 

Post#154 » by Fencer reregistered » Wed Aug 14, 2019 8:55 pm

itrsteve wrote:It’s not a disaster, what the experts overlook are the cap ramifications and the timing of deals.

This is important to make note of:
Kyrie leaving didn’t open the space for Kemba, this was not a 1 for 1 swap on the cap sheet. Kemba is only here because Al dropped off the books.

Kemba was the concession prize for Al leaving NOT Kyrie

What would have been disastrous is if he stayed on the books or extended. Boston would have never had a shot at Kemba and Rozier would be running point. The RFA’s would have been ran back as well. But instead they get a max contract slot for an All NBA player, not shabby.

Don’t get me wrong, al is the best, but given the timing implications and his age, I’m okay without locking him up on a 4 year deal. They’ll be fine.


Oversimplified, because we perhaps could have bribed Brooklyn into helping S&T Kemba.
Fencer reregistered
RealGM
Posts: 18,943
And1: 6,712
Joined: Oct 25, 2006

Re: The Celtics losing Al Horford was a disaster for them 

Post#155 » by Fencer reregistered » Wed Aug 14, 2019 8:56 pm

queridiculo wrote:
The Chief wrote:We still love Al but he's on the back end of his career and we couldn't justify giving him the contract Philly gave him.


Trying to understand the logic here, it's not like there's any immediate answer on the horizon for the Celtics.

What are/were they holding out for that would justify not making the same kind of commitment the Sixers made to him?

Any sort of salary cap flexibility they have is going to be wiped out next year if Brown recaptures some of the production he showed in 2017/18 and a lot of the savings from Haywards expiring deal are going to be wiped out by the offer sheet some team is invariably going to prepare for Tatum that season.

The Celtics may as well have bit the bullet and doubled down on their roster for the next 4 seasons.


I think the logic is mainly about luxury tax repeater penalities.
User avatar
The Chief
Senior
Posts: 606
And1: 325
Joined: Jun 30, 2009
   

Re: The Celtics losing Al Horford was a disaster for them 

Post#156 » by The Chief » Wed Aug 14, 2019 9:04 pm

queridiculo wrote:
The Chief wrote:We still love Al but he's on the back end of his career and we couldn't justify giving him the contract Philly gave him.


Trying to understand the logic here, it's not like there's any immediate answer on the horizon for the Celtics.

What are/were they holding out for that would justify not making the same kind of commitment the Sixers made to him?

The Celtics may as well have bit the bullet and doubled down on their roster for the next 4 seasons.


It would simply be money poorly spent on an aging non-star player who isn't going to lead us anywhere. It's also important to remember that he decided he wanted to leave Boston, so why offer $100 million to a player who isn't committed.
killmongrel
Senior
Posts: 523
And1: 238
Joined: Sep 18, 2018
 

Re: The Celtics losing Al Horford was a disaster for them 

Post#157 » by killmongrel » Wed Aug 14, 2019 9:54 pm

What is the plan in Boston? Is it to hope that you build a squad that can compete in 2 years while Kemba is still in his prime, etc? I don't see any team in the East being able to compete with the Bucks and Philly if the East stays as is with no significant shift. Brooklyn could be a monster when KD returns in 2020 and be the favorites if and when he hits his stride in 2021. Will Boston have the cap room to get better or is everything banking on Tatum becoming a star, etc? Curious. Because even if Horford is a horrible contract in the last two years of his salary, it would still have given Boston a two year window to compete as possible favorites in the East. And if Horford has declined by the third year of his contract, Boston could have retooled and maybe trade Kemba for pieces and assets during the last few years of Horford's contract. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Curmudgeon
RealGM
Posts: 27,858
And1: 8,790
Joined: Jan 20, 2004
Location: Boston, MA

Re: The Celtics losing Al Horford was a disaster for them 

Post#158 » by Curmudgeon » Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:29 pm

The plan in Boston is to win now with the players they have. They have the best wing rotation in the EC and a couple of pretty good guards (Walker and Smart). They will certainly miss Horford at the five, but he didn't want to play there anyway, and if you play him at the four he takes minutes away from Tatum, Brown and/or Hayward.

Stevens has two options. The first is to rotate his four bigs (Kanter, Time Lord, Theis, Poirier) and go with the hot hand and/or the best matchup on a given night. The second is to play small ball a la Golden State with undersized but strong physical specimens like Ojeleye or Grant Williams at the five. And don't sleep on Daniel Theis, who plays taller than 6-9 (long arms) and who can hit the outside shot.

If neither approach works, they will be in the market for a center in February, and they probably have the assets to get a decent one. That Memphis first rounder could be pure gold.
"Numbers lie alot. Wins and losses don't lie." - Jerry West

"You are what your record says you are."- Bill Parcells

"Offense sells tickets. Defense wins games. Rebounding wins championships." Pat Summit
chrisab123
General Manager
Posts: 8,163
And1: 4,730
Joined: Jul 07, 2012
         

Re: The Celtics losing Al Horford was a disaster for them 

Post#159 » by chrisab123 » Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:50 pm

JRoy wrote:Boston is in a strange place, must be very disappointing after the high hopes of last summer.

It might be that Ainge prized his trade assets too highly and got nothing for them.


Eh not really. You have pretty well regarded youth before last season that hopefully got a reality check. Rozier is gone. Kyrie is gone. So the locker room isn't divided anymore. Stevens let the Kyrie vs Rozier fued go on all year. They'll probably finish a game or two better than last year then who knows
killmongrel
Senior
Posts: 523
And1: 238
Joined: Sep 18, 2018
 

Re: The Celtics losing Al Horford was a disaster for them 

Post#160 » by killmongrel » Wed Aug 14, 2019 11:05 pm

Curmudgeon wrote:The plan in Boston is to win now with the players they have. They have the best wing rotation in the EC and a couple of pretty good guards (Walker and Smart). They will certainly miss Horford at the five, but he didn't want to play there anyway, and if you play him at the four he takes minutes away from Tatum, Brown and/or Hayward.

Stevens has two options. The first is to rotate his four bigs (Kanter, Time Lord, Theis, Poirier) and go with the hot hand and/or the best matchup on a given night. The second is to play small ball a la Golden State with undersized but strong physical specimens like Ojeleye or Grant Williams at the five. And don't sleep on Daniel Theis, who plays taller than 6-9 (long arms) and who can hit the outside shot.

If neither approach works, they will be in the market for a center in February, and they probably have the assets to get a decent one. That Memphis first rounder could be pure gold.


So whose contract would you be shipping out and for who?

Return to The General Board


cron