Horford Extended

Effigy · Post #1 » by **Effigy** » Mon Nov 1, 2010 6:32 pm

Per wiretap. No $$ figures yet. No years either, presumably the max number of years allowed for an extension. They just beat the deadline.

Post #2 » by **HMFFL** » Mon Nov 1, 2010 6:35 pm

The Hawks and center Al Horford have agreed to a five-year contract extension worth around $60 million. Marc Spears (Twitter)

It's good that both sides reach an agreement and now we can look forward.

evildallas · Post #3 » by **evildallas** » Mon Nov 1, 2010 7:01 pm

Agree. The price tag seems fair and the core is settled.

ATL DirtyBird · Post #4 » by **ATL DirtyBird** » Mon Nov 1, 2010 7:39 pm

Good for Big Al.

Post #5 » by **Tommy Udo 6** » Mon Nov 1, 2010 8:43 pm

Same contract as Noah in total.

Al, Noah & Durant are the only Lottery picks from that draft class that received an extension.

Awoooga · Post #6 » by **Awoooga** » Mon Nov 1, 2010 9:10 pm

Very fair deal.

parson · Post #7 » by **parson** » Mon Nov 1, 2010 9:12 pm

Nice. Now we can focus on either keeping Jamal or trading him.

Horford's one of those guys you have to have to win a championship: talented, yet amazingly reasonable. He could EASILY have tried to hold management up.

ATL DirtyBird · Post #8 » by **ATL DirtyBird** » Mon Nov 1, 2010 9:34 pm

parson wrote:Nice. Now we can focus on either keeping Jamal or trading him.

Horford's one of those guys you have to have to win a championship: talented, yet amazingly reasonable. He could EASILY have tried to hold management up.

Signing Jamal would put us in the luxury tax. Doubt we are willing to go there, so I expect a trade.

evildallas · Post #9 » by **evildallas** » Mon Nov 1, 2010 10:46 pm

I expect Jamal to play out the year. If the team does well in post-season then maybe he gets a new deal and luxury tax be damned. If not then I expect him to be allowed to walk. A trade doesn't help with the luxury tax. He already expires and anyone we take back in a trade with close to matching salary likely puts us over the cap next year. Walking makes the most financial sense to the Hawks.

If anything signing Al early helps the odds (slightly) of keeping Jamal because the alternative was likely to match an RFA offer in a weak free agent crop (after the lockout). Depending on the CBA that could have meant even less room available for other players.

D21 · Post #10 » by **D21** » Mon Nov 1, 2010 10:52 pm

ATL DirtyBird wrote:
parson wrote:Nice. Now we can focus on either keeping Jamal or trading him.

Horford's one of those guys you have to have to win a championship: talented, yet amazingly reasonable. He could EASILY have tried to hold management up.

Signing Jamal would put us in the luxury tax. Doubt we are willing to go there, so I expect a trade.

The way owners worked this past season, I would except keeping Crawford and letting expire, then use part of all the full MLE depending on what will be th tax threshold.
Maybe if the team under perform this season, they will try to make a trade for less salary but better impact on other position, or use Crawford as part of a big trade.

Now, Horford contract is fair, and I would say that him and Josh have contract to help ATL building a good core, with good player for good contract. Unfortunately, Joe is hurting, and if you compare his contract to Josh and Horford ones, he surely doesn't deserve more than 90M/6yrs, and certainly not 124M/6yrs

He's the one that makes extending Crawford (or trading him for same salary) impossible.

FCNATL85 · Post #11 » by **FCNATL85** » Tue Nov 2, 2010 2:37 am

Hats off to big Al. He could have commended more money and could have hold us hostages. Great player but great person 1st.
Almost make up for JJ's salary.

parson · Post #12 » by **parson** » Tue Nov 2, 2010 4:11 am

ATL DirtyBird wrote:
parson wrote:Nice. Now we can focus on either keeping Jamal or trading him.

Horford's one of those guys you have to have to win a championship: talented, yet amazingly reasonable. He could EASILY have tried to hold management up.

Signing Jamal would put us in the luxury tax. Doubt we are willing to go there, so I expect a trade.

What I meant is that now we can work on the situation.

Before, I'm sure all our time had to be spent on Horford (or I'd have thought Sund a fool). Now the Jamal question is the main one to be answered. Personally, I agree on trading him. Jordan Crawford is not close to being the same player, but he's pretty good as a backup, especially if we added an asset by trading Jamal. If we added a pick (or 2) by trading Jamal, then we could maybe make a better package for an impact player. I've got to think the Chris Paul issue will come up again for NO. Maybe we could package Smoove, the picks and more for Carmello Anthony. Would the owners pay the luxury tax for CA? I'd hope so. Otherwise, we'd have to dump salary (Marvelous, I know...) to stay under.

Macho Man · Post #13 » by **Macho Man** » Tue Nov 2, 2010 5:10 am

Is it alright that upon reading the news, I jizzed alittle?

Harry10 · Post #14 » by **Harry10** » Tue Nov 2, 2010 10:35 am

this is extremely cheap for a young all star center with alot of playoff experience. with this contract and Josh's cheap contract, this is looking good for the Hawks.

after what Al Jefferson, Okafor, Eddy Curry, Chandler, and Dalembert got paid, this is a great contract for the team.

Post #15 » by **dms269** » Tue Nov 2, 2010 1:28 pm

Macho Man wrote:Is it alright that upon reading the news, I jizzed alittle?

Nope.

Skyhawk1 · Post #16 » by **Skyhawk1** » Tue Nov 2, 2010 6:05 pm

They finally got one right, it would have been crazy to let him test the FA market even if he was restricted. One of the best deals in the league to balance one of the worst in JJ's.

zapatasblood · Post #17 » by **zapatasblood** » Tue Nov 2, 2010 8:08 pm

Thats a good deal and at least they did not overpay for him like they did for Joe Johnson