Horford won't sign a Contract Extension before next summer

[Jamaaliver]

People overrate no state taxes, I think I read that Dwight only saved like &3-$4 mil from his max with Houston from no state taxes.

Is it an advantage? Sure, but not nearly as large as it's made out to be.

True story, Lakers offered Dwight a higher annual salary than Houston. But because TX has no state tax, Dwight actually netted more per year in Texas.

The total value of the contract offered by LAL to D12 offered an additional year and a gross of $30 million dollars more than HOU offered. But even though HOU offered a shorter contract with a lower annual salary, the net difference would have been only $9 million over the life of the contract.

D12 actually made more per year in HOU than in LAL simply because Texas doesn't charge a state tax!!!Here

It's a pretty big deal...

[red96]

People overrate no state taxes, I think I read that Dwight only saved like &3-$4 mil from his max with Houston from no state taxes.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Has everything to do with the fact that you're still paying jock and other income taxes everywhere else you play but Florida, DC and Texas. Is it an advantage? Sure, but not nearly as large as it's made out to be.

The amount of savings varies from state to state, but I think his savings in comparison to high tax stages like NY and California on his $20ish million per was about 3 million a year. Not a huge amount of cash, but that %15 adds up over 4-5 years. With the new $30+M max contracts the saving could be around 5M per year. I think it applies to endorsements as well. If $ is a players top priority, its a very real advantage.

[MaceCase]

People overrate no state taxes, I think I read that Dwight only saved like &3-$4 mil from his max with Houston from no state taxes.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Has everything to do with the fact that you're still paying jock and other income taxes everywhere else you play but Florida, DC and Texas. Is it an advantage? Sure, but not nearly as large as it's made out to be.

The amount of savings varies from state to state, but I think his savings in comparison to high tax stages like NY and California on his $20ish million per was about 3 million a year. Not a huge amount of cash, but that %15 adds up over 4-5 years. With the new $30+M max contracts the saving could be around 5M per year. I think it applies to endorsements as well. If $ is a players top priority, its a very real advantage.

Precisely, the Dwight comparison isn't appropriate because it's an extreme case, California leads the entire nation with a high state income tax rate over 13% versus Georgia at around 6%. That amount is even less than Horford's max percentage raises of 7.5%.

Let's look at the numbers more, on a 5 year $118mil contract Dwight would have paid $15.5mil in California state taxes whereas on a 5 year $145million contract Horford would pay only 8.7 million in Georgia state taxes. Subtract that ~9 mil from $145mil and you're still 30 million ahead of the 107 mil (not subtracting jock taxes) that any other team can offer, which is also 21 million more than Dwight left on the table. That's a rather large difference in situations that surely mitigates whatever tax advantages Florida may have while also making any comparisons to Dwight's situation moot.

This also is not taking into account that Horford would be downgrading further than Dwight did in terms of market size (Dwight went from LA (2nd) to Houston (10th) while Horford would be going from Atlanta (9th) to Orlando/Daytona Beach/Melbourne (18th).) which would affect his endorsement potential.

Orlando doesn't have the advantage of ties into the Chinese markets that the Rockets do either (look no further than Dwight's new deal with Peak) to mitigate the drop in market size so if the argument goes that Horford would prefer a larger Hispanic market well the difference in the Hispanic population between both cities is less than 20k according to the last census which stated there were 562k in Orlando (of which only 33k are Dominican) vs. 546k in Atlanta and their rankings are 18th and 19th nationwide.

So yea, not a big deal at all.

[td00]

IMO, the Hawks will have to pay Al because they won't be able to justify the high prices with him no longer on the roster.
Should he return to the Hawks, it locks them down for the next 5-7 years of trying to stay competitive.

We still don't look like we're doing everything we can to win a title. Al is not enough of a diff maker to justify him being paid as a Top 10 player. This looks like another Joe Johnson scenario.

[Jamaaliver]

ESPN Insider ponders AL future in Free Agency:

Could the Hawks lose Al Horford?

According to Kevin Pelton, the East team that should be most concerned about the risk it faces [from Free Agency] is Atlanta. After opting against any big moves at the deadline, the Hawks need to be competitive the rest of the season. Otherwise, they risk Horford walking in free agency.

Here

Anybody here have ESPN Insider and willing to 'summarize' what the panel predicts AL's options will be this summer?

Do our struggles at this point of the season have any impact on whether AL chooses to re-sign here?

Should we make him more of a focal point of the offense this spring to ensure he can handle being a #1 option moving forward?

[jayu70]

ESPN Insider ponders AL future in Free Agency:

Could the Hawks lose Al Horford?

According to Kevin Pelton, the East team that should be most concerned about the risk it faces [from Free Agency] is Atlanta. After opting against any big moves at the deadline, the Hawks need to be competitive the rest of the season. Otherwise, they risk Horford walking in free agency.

Here

Anybody here have ESPN Insider and willing to 'summarize' what the panel predicts AL's options will be this summer?

Do our struggles at this point of the season have any impact on whether AL chooses to re-sign here?

Should we make him more of a focal point of the offense this spring to ensure he can handle being a #1 option moving forward?

Some of our struggles are related to Al's play. If he plays like he did against Golden State we'd win more than we lose.
It's not a matter of making Al the focal point, it's a matter of Al deciding he wants to be aggressive and focused.

[Jamaaliver]

Some of our struggles are related to Al's play. If he plays like he did against Golden State we'd win more than we lose.
It's not a matter of making Al the focal point, it's a matter of Al deciding he wants to be aggressive and focused.

I'm just not sure I agree.

AL Horford is not above criticism. He has played soft, his offensive game is still as robotic and limited as it was in year 2. But I've never seen anything to make me question his focus.

My larger issue, we can't pay him $25 million to just be another guy. To not lead the team in scoring, rebounding, or assists...or in FG Attempts...or even in FT Attempts.

If we're investing $100+ million in the player...we have to make him the guy. If he signs a huge contract to stay and then puts up more mediocre production...the fanbase will turn on him. We've seen it happen before. Expectations increase with a pay raise. And AL's approaching the age where his production likely won't. This is the dilemma.

Horford has meant as much to this franchise as any player since Mutombo roamed the paint. Maybe more, since AL was drafted here.

If we go all out to keep him here...he has to be the focal point. Or a year from now we'll be discussing a massive Horford contract with the same disdain we once regarded that massive Joe Johnson contract.

[Jamaaliver]

Horford was on Russillo and Kanell on ESPN Radio today and discussed impending Free Agency, the concern of being traded and other issues...

HERE Interview begins around the 22:00 minute mark.


I love AL Horford, but his interviews...are not interesting.

Mentions he didn't think he was getting traded, believes in new ownership, sees ATL as a destination team in the near future.

Nothing Earth shaking.

[Jamaaliver]

In reference to a recent Zach Lowe piece on the Hawks:

Read on Twitter

There are definite risks to maxing out Horford for the rest of his career. We should have spent the last couple of years collecting assets to be used to acquire a top star to play next to AL.

I love AL, but committing $30 million per year to the guy...leaves us vulnerable to never getting off the treadmill again. <sigh>

With some minor personnel changes in the last 3 years...this team could be trending up with Horford as the cornerstone. But, seems like we're just another team again. Good, but not great.

[simon24]

In reference to a recent Zach Lowe piece on the Hawks:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/BuddyGrizzard/status/712537759194460162[/tweet]


There are definite risks to maxing out Horford for the rest of his career. We should have spent the last couple of years collecting assets to be used to acquire a top star to play next to AL.

I love AL, but committing $30 million per year to the guy...leaves us vulnerable to never getting off the treadmill again. <sigh>

With some minor personnel changes in the last 3 years...this team could be trending up with Horford as the cornerstone. But, seems like we're just another team again. Good, but not great.

Maybe he becomes an even better 3 point shooter?

[Jamaaliver]

Maybe he becomes an even better 3 point shooter?

I think I'd rather see Horford focus more of his game on inside play. As he's moved his offensibe game further from the basket...his FG%, Rebounding rate and FTAs have all decreased.

For the season, AL is avg fewer free throw attempts than our backup PG. That's bad. His ability to get opposing big men in foul trouble could be a benefit if he'd only play like a big.

[Jamaaliver]

The Hawks plan to offer the maximum salary to Al Horford when he becomes a free agent this summer, as Chris Vivlamore of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution confirmed on the CSNNE.com Celtics Talk podcast Thursday...though whether the Hawks are prepared to make a full five-year max offer to the big man who turns 30 in June remains to be seen.

The starting salary in a max deal for Horford, a ninth-year veteran, will be around $25MM, with a salary cap expected to be at least $90MM. The Hawks, with close to $52MM in guaranteed salary already committed, would have a tight squeeze to re-sign fellow soon-to-be free agent Kent Bazemore if they bring back Horford at the max.

Here

[HMFFL]

^
I fully expect us to offer him a max offer and he accepts.
Having Horford around for another 5 years will be nice and it will be one of those rare moments where a guy stays with one team for so long.

[simon24]

^
I fully expect us to offer him a max offer and he accepts.
Having Horford around for another 5 years will be nice and it will be one of those rare moments where a guy stays with one team for so long.

He's the Hawks best and most realistic option at C for the next couple of years since they aren't going to tank. I just wonder do they expect Hardaway to be their Kawhi, as in the guy who can carry the franchise as the vets (Teague/Millsap/Horford) play into their 30s.

[atlantabbq99]

^
I fully expect us to offer him a max offer and he accepts.
Having Horford around for another 5 years will be nice and it will be one of those rare moments where a guy stays with one team for so long.

He's the Hawks best and most realistic option at C for the next couple of years since they aren't going to tank. I just wonder do they expect Hardaway to be their Kawhi, as in the guy who can carry the franchise as the vets (Teague/Millsap/Horford) play into their 30s.

That is a little dramatic and way too delusional. I think the Hawks see Hardaway as their version of Marco Belinelli, Brent Barry, or Danny Green.

The two realistic options to improve would be to get Harrison Barnes or trade for Jaylen Brown.

[Jamaaliver]

Read on Twitter

Yet more drama with AL's representation as he approaches the biggest payday of his life.

I'm picturing a 'Jerry Maguire' scenario where this guy goes out of his way to 'SHOW AL the MONEY' as a means to cement his status as a power broker.


...or it could have no impact at all. But this marks the third (fourth?) major status change in AL's representation in a year. Crazy instability for one of the most steady, consistent guys in the Association.

[Jamaaliver]

...Overpaying and letting him walk away are not the only two options. Packaging him with other assets in trade could likely bring us good value. Though this is not an avenue I want to pursue, the option should at least be considered.

My point overall is: Horford will have suitors next summer. Should he walk away, we get right back on the treadmill.

I don't want AL to leave...at all. But if we fear/suspect he might walk away for nothing...or if we get a Godfather offer from a contender...we'd be foolish not to even consider it.

I do not want to trade AL. His motivation for reaching FA is, understandably, financial. But teams are going to woo him like crazy next summer. Unless he pulls a Marc Gasol and completely refuses to meet with any other teams in Free Agency, there's always the possibility (however slight) that he could be wooed elsewhere.

So, I mentioned my concerns last year regarding AL walking away for nothing. What occurred this past weekend was literally my worst case scenario. Our top player for the past decade walking away for nothing.

By all accounts, we had him on the trading block last February. We held off from making any major moves (AL or Teague) and four months later we are left with only Taurean Price in exchange for the pair of them. AL's departure is made worse by the fact he goes to a EC rival and the reported difference in salary was a relatively small one.


In hindsight, I simply wish we had traded him for even a loss last Feb. Our team, today, could be stronger if we had. I think you make the decision in Feb regarding AL's status. Either you make decision to keep him here, at all costs...or you make the decision to move him for value.


I bring this up because we are approaching a similar situation with Millsap this season.

I hope the Front Office takes a lesson from this off-season's developments.

AL leaving this team wasn't necessarily a wrong move...

AL walking away for absolutely nothing in return is the issue. And it's the same one we made with Josh Smith.

We have to learn from these mistakes moving forward. or we'll be doomed to repeat them.

[MaceCase]

Saying you lost a player for nothing is like saying your car was stolen and all you got is an insurance payment for more than the car was worth.

[atlantabbq99]

...Overpaying and letting him walk away are not the only two options. Packaging him with other assets in trade could likely bring us good value. Though this is not an avenue I want to pursue, the option should at least be considered.

My point overall is: Horford will have suitors next summer. Should he walk away, we get right back on the treadmill.

I don't want AL to leave...at all. But if we fear/suspect he might walk away for nothing...or if we get a Godfather offer from a contender...we'd be foolish not to even consider it.

I do not want to trade AL. His motivation for reaching FA is, understandably, financial. But teams are going to woo him like crazy next summer. Unless he pulls a Marc Gasol and completely refuses to meet with any other teams in Free Agency, there's always the possibility (however slight) that he could be wooed elsewhere.

So, I mentioned my concerns last year regarding AL walking away for nothing. What occurred this past weekend was literally my worst case scenario. Our top player for the past decade walking away for nothing.

By all accounts, we had him on the trading block last February. We held off from making any major moves (AL or Teague) and four months later we are left with only Taurean Price in exchange for the pair of them. AL's departure is made worse by the fact he goes to a EC rival and the reported difference in salary was a relatively small one.


In hindsight, I simply wish we had traded him for even a loss last Feb. Our team, today, could be stronger if we had. I think you make the decision in Feb regarding AL's status. Either you make decision to keep him here, at all costs...or you make the decision to move him for value.


I bring this up because we are approaching a similar situation with Millsap this season.

I hope the Front Office takes a lesson from this off-season's developments.

AL leaving this team wasn't necessarily a wrong move...

AL walking away for absolutely nothing in return is the issue. And it's the same one we made with Josh Smith.

We have to learn from these mistakes moving forward. or we'll be doomed to repeat them.

In hindsight, if the Hawks traded Horford last year or a few months ago, and got assets in return, then the Hawks would have taken in salary in return and wouldn't have been able to sign Dwight. Cap space is an asset.

the only trade that would have benefited the Hawks and still get Dwight would be trading Horford for only draft picks. Which nobody would have done in the first place

[Jamaaliver]

Saying you lost a player for nothing is like saying your car was stolen and all you got is an insurance payment for more than the car was worth.

Not when you're a franchise that routinely struggles to bring in commensurate talent in Free Agency or Trade.

We had two top assets 4 days ago. Instead of adding another top asset (Dwight) and having three top assets...we still only have two.


The best example of this is PORTLAND.

In 2015, they lost their best player (Aldridge) in Free Agency and since...have been unable to even get meetings with top Free Agents to replace that top talent.


Years prior, though, they traded an expiring Gerald Wallace and received a top draft pick and contracts. They used that draft pick on top prospect D Lillard, a franchise player they wouldn't otherwise have the opportunity to acquire.



A more recent example: Hawks traded Teague for a lottery pick. Had he walked next summer, we'd get cap space. Now we get a draft pick AND cap space to pursue additional roster help.