The AL Horford Dilemma

[Jamaaliver]

However I will say this, if Al goes to Boston and doesnt produce, lord help him with those fans, we will not be so kind to him .

Yeah, man. Boston, CHI and Philly fans are probably the most...passionate fan bases in the country.


AL throwing up 3 rebound games in the garden...or having limited shot attempts...or missing crucial free throws at end of game situations.

Well, it could drastically change the over-arching narrative of his entire career.

Just ask Bill Buckner.

[jayu70]

Anyone catch the article? Al says it had nothing to do with the fans, it was money. It's so little money though, why couldn't they just give it to him?RealGM mobile app

Yeah, I did see that. Not sure if that makes him look better or worse.

I do get the feeling, from what Jeff, mark and others have written on AJC...that Hawks were still at the table willing to negotitate.

And AL walked away to accept the BOS offer. With Ainge whispering sweet nothings in his ear and flashing those championship rings, and with fresh lottery talent aboard...I can see that being an enticing offer.

While Wilcox and Bud attempted to play hardball over a few million.

I'd love to hear Ressler's actual feelings on his team's Free Agency plans getting blown up so early in the process...over a relatively minor amount.

The Hawks didn't think he was worth the 5yrs/$153, Al came off that and wanted 5yrs/$142, Hawks counted with 5yrs/$136, seems like there was still room to negotiate, but like Jamaal said - "Ainge sold him a bill of goods of Celtics history more so that the present"

[nybluemeadow]

but anyway, we can all agree that Al didn't stay for the Atlanta fans.

No, it has nothing to do with Dwight, Horford said that we suck (fans), that is why he left...He is a #1 douchebag!

I really hope the fans don't pull a very Atlanta thing and cheer for him. It should be straight up boos when he is introduced.

In my opinion, Al is being controlled/HEAVILY influenced by his father.

AL had it easy the fans liked him. Al most not know how much people supported him even though he was playing like crap in the playoffs.

AL's actual on the record comments:

C-Viv: So you are not leaving bitter?

Horford: No, no no. I love the fan base here. I thank coach (Mike Budenholzer) for giving me an opportunity to grow as a player and develop. He always had that confidence in me. I know it’s extremely hard for him. This was a hard decision for me.

C-Viv: ...your dad said some things about one of the reasons you wanted to leave was the fans in Atlanta were not as good as the fans in Boston. Was that true?

Horford: That made me really upset. I was angry when I heard about that because I never felt that way. I’ve been here a long time. They’ve always been great to me. I’ve always been very content and happy with the way they’ve treated me and my family. Parents are sometimes a little more passionate about their sons and daughters. I can relate because I have a son now. So my dad, with him, sometimes he would come to the games and get frustration. His frustrations don’t reflect on me with the fan base.

Here

Comical. Boo Horford? #1 douche bag is Horford? Lololol

Al was all class and I'll miss him.

AL has always said/done the right thing in public. He's NOT above criticism...but so much of the narrative is more emotional now. It seems really short-sighted to slight the man for alleged off-hand comments, made in private. Especially when he's been the epitome of class since the day he got here.

The whole interview was just loaded with politically correct comments. Horford just played nice and played both side. Just like Durant and LMA did the last few years when talking to the press, they didn't say anything but also didn't say anything true at all. I wouldn't trust these interviews. I can't imagine any pro athlete telling the truth until after they retire from their sport.

[HMFFL]

afectar wrote:
AL had it easy the fans liked him. Al most not know how much people supported him even though he was playing like crap in the playoffs.

I believe this to be accurate.
Everybody I know adored Al Horford. They also expected him to be a lifetime Atlanta or to just chase a ring during the final couple of years during his career.
He had it made and I doubt he realizes how much he did. However, time brings on change, and right now I am thankful he's gone, because he clearly had no interest being a Hawk.

[ATL Boy]

Put yourself in his shoes, like I said, his alleged comments , hes not WRONG. EVerything he said was factually correct, but fans dont want to hear that ****.

However I will say this, if Al goes to Boston and doesnt produce, lord help him with those fans, we will not be so kind to him . We can be ferocious cheering you on, we can also absolutely destroy you if you play soft and play like crap. With the local Boston peeps hailing him as "THE SUPERSTAR WE WERE LOOKING FOR" i hope he understands the pressure that town has.

Just touching on that "Star" narrative:

Why is it that while Al was hear all we heard was "Hawks have no star" "The Hawks will never do anything without having a star player" but the moment he goes to Boston I instantly see ESPN and CBS articles proclaiming that the Celtics have found their star.

This media bias against Atlanta is so obvious. Is ESPN salty that Turner Sports, which does a much better job than them when it comes to Basketball coverage, originated and is located in Atlanta?


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[PandaKidd]

Put yourself in his shoes, like I said, his alleged comments , hes not WRONG. EVerything he said was factually correct, but fans dont want to hear that ****.

However I will say this, if Al goes to Boston and doesnt produce, lord help him with those fans, we will not be so kind to him . We can be ferocious cheering you on, we can also absolutely destroy you if you play soft and play like crap. With the local Boston peeps hailing him as "THE SUPERSTAR WE WERE LOOKING FOR" i hope he understands the pressure that town has.

Just touching on that "Star" narrative:

Why is it that while Al was hear all we heard was "Hawks have no star" "The Hawks will never do anything without having a star player" but the moment he goes to Boston I instantly see ESPN and CBS articles proclaiming that the Celtics have found their star.

This media bias against Atlanta is so obvious. Is ESPN salty that Turner Sports, which does a much better job than them when it comes to Basketball coverage, originated and is located in Atlanta?


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Because Boston fans have been told for 3 years that Ainge was amassing all these picks and stuff to get a STAR, and turns out they landed a really good player in AH through FA, so , the local beat reporters are acting like they just got KG again.

its not going to turn out well IMO

[Jamaaliver]

...AL walked away to accept the BOS offer. With Ainge whispering sweet nothings in his ear and flashing those championship rings, and with fresh lottery talent aboard...I can see that being an enticing offer.

While Wilcox and Bud attempted to play hardball over a few million.

I'd love to hear Ressler's actual feelings on his team's Free Agency plans getting blown up so early in the process...over a relatively minor amount.

The Hawks didn't think he was worth the 5yrs/$153, Al came off that and wanted 5yrs/$142, Hawks counted with 5yrs/$136, seems like there was still room to negotiate, but like Jamaal said - "Ainge sold him a bill of goods of Celtics history more so that the present"

Some perspective. One year later:

...as we saw with Al Horford last year, the Hawks realized it was pointless to bid against nobody and pay nearly $40 million in that 5th year for a player who was going to be 37. Atlanta hoped he'd take a hometown discount in that final year. Horford landed in Boston.

The Big Lead

Al Horford left the Atlanta Hawks last offseason to sign a four-year $113 million deal with the Boston Celtics.

"You know Al Horford, they got really close with money," said Wojnarowski. "I can't ever remember a player and a team walking away from each other over less total dollars than Atlanta and Horford. It was only a few million dollars over what would have been a five-year deal."

The Hawks could have offered a five-year, $153 million max deal, but their best offer was a five-year, $136 million deal.

Horford decided to take less guaranteed money after the Hawks were unable to split the difference while having a new opportunity with the Celtics.

Real GM


It's weird to think that a few million dollars cost Wilcox his job and completely changed the trajectory of our franchise.

[MaceCase]

Sounds exactly like the bad contracts Schlenk has preached not getting into.

[D21]

Sounds exactly like the bad contracts Schlenk has preached not getting into.

Not sure, because Horford at 28.4M annualy instead of 27.2 is the pretty much the same tradable player.
Horford ask was for the same money than BOS, that's all, or he would have ask for more than 142M.
BOS was offering 113/4years, he wanted the same annually from ATL, that's all. This exact number he was asking didn't come from nowhere.

OK, it can be overpaid, but a team with Howard-Horford-Millsap had more value than Howard-Millsap-Bazemore.
It would have been better on the floor even with Millsap playing SF (they were forced to do it all game long), and better in term of flexibility because you could trade later Horford or Millsap or both.
Instead, Bazemore was kept, overpaid by more than the overpaying that would have been Horford at 142 instead of 136, and now, Bazemore is less tradable at his salary than Horford would be at 28.4

So avoiding bad contract IMHO would be avoiding Bazemore contract, even if Horford at 142M/5years would not have been a great contract, it would have been better.
Now, the Bazemore was part of a marketing decision, just look at the Hawks twitter account picture. He was a fan favorite last year and it gave him some power in negotiation.

[MaceCase]

Sounds exactly like the bad contracts Schlenk has preached not getting into.

Not sure, because Horford at 28.4M annualy instead of 27.2 is the pretty much the same tradable player.
Horford ask was for the same money than BOS, that's all, or he would have ask for more than 142M.
BOS was offering 113/4years, he wanted the same annually from ATL, that's all. This exact number he was asking didn't come from nowhere.

OK, it can be overpaid, but a team with Howard-Horford-Millsap had more value than Howard-Millsap-Bazemore.
It would have been better on the floor even with Millsap playing SF (they were forced to do it all game long), and better in term of flexibility because you could trade later Horford or Millsap or both.
Instead, Bazemore was kept, overpaid by more than the overpaying that would have been Horford at 142 instead of 136, and now, Bazemore is less tradable at his salary than Horford would be at 28.4

So avoiding bad contract IMHO would be avoiding Bazemore contract, even if Horford at 142M/5years would not have been a great contract, it would have been better.
Now, the Bazemore was part of a marketing decision, just look at the Hawks twitter account picture. He was a fan favorite last year and it gave him some power in negotiation.

Horford had a down year across the board in Boston in nearly every category, failed to make an All Star team, received only one total All NBA vote, and proved to be just as ineffective against Cleveland in both the regular and post-season.

I think you are being incredibly generous in stating that he would be tradable on a 5 year deal at that amount of salary for that kind of production.

You are also being incredibly shortsighted by thinking locking Horford to a 5 year deal while also having Millsap eligible for a 5 year deal one season later would not be defined as anything else but cap hell.

Your thinking would appear to fly in the face of both the current GM's stated strategy and all those that say maxing Millsap would be a bad idea, even letting him walk and replacing him with Horford still leaves you in the same poor position.

[D21]

- double post -

[D21]

That's not exactly what I said or tried to said, yes I think that even at 136M it was overpaying, but I what I thought stupid was that if they were ready to give him 136, or see him walk for nothing, then they should have add that extra million annually because it would have been a better team and it would have avoid Bazemore signing, and not talking about the side effect that the more your team is competitive, the more you have chance to keep players on lower salaries. If it was between offering 100M/4years and 142M, I let him go because it's a different plan, but 136M or 142M, you keep him.

Or better trade him before, or work on sign-&-trade

Other point, if I don't give 28M/yr to Horford, I don't give 23 to Howard and more I dont give 17M to Bazemore

[MaceCase]

That's not exactly what I said or tried to said, yes I think that even at 136M it was overpaying, but I what I thought stupid was that if they were ready to give him 136, or see him walk for nothing, then they should have add that extra million annualy because it would have been a better team and it would have avoid Bazemore signing, and not talking about the side effect that the more your team is competitive, the more you have chance to keep players on lower salaries. If it was between offering 100M/4years and 142M, I let him go because it's a different plan, but 136M or 142M, you keep him.

Or better trade him before, or work on sign-&-trade

Sent from my D5803 using RealGM mobile app

It's an entirely moot point. Bazemore was already agreed to well before negotiations with Horford so you're debating a hypothetical that has no basis in reality.

Clearly they didn't even want Horford at that amount but hesitantly made many concessions. They were willing to bend but not break their back over a deal they knew they'd be saddled with for 5 seasons particularly when they knew they were bidding against themselves. Where was this alleged side effect of guys taking a pay-cut when it came to Horford? He was a barely a year away from the team's best season yet was still trying to bend them over a barrel.

There's no sense in continuing to try and paint Bazemore as a scapegoat either, his deal had zero to do with Horford's. They entered negotiations with Horford knowing full well whom they had tendered deals to. What stopped them was the amount for Horford, not anyone else.

[MaceCase]

Other point, if I don't give 28M/yr to Horford, I don't give 23 to Howard and more I dont give 17M to Bazemore

Isn't even in the same realm. You're talking about a 3 year and 4 year deal each at close to 70 million less than what they offered Horford. That's a big difference.

[Yungsta404]

Keeping Millsap, Howard, and Horford together was never an option.

If we signed Horford, Millsap was gone period. Most likley to the Nuggets for Kenneth Faried.

If we kept all 3 we would most likely be a worst team because those 3 would be disgruntled over playing time, starting positions, playing out of position, shot attempts and overall role on the team. It would have been a political circus.

[Jamaaliver]

Sounds exactly like the bad contracts Schlenk has preached not getting into.

This is definitely an interesting point.

It's worth noting that GSW (with Schlenk on board) was rumored to be interested in Horford last offseason had they not signed Durant, with the understanding that it'd likely take a full max to sign him:

There are only three players who should be expected to get a max offer on the free agent market this summer, but the Warriors could be interested in two. Durant is a well-discussed given.

The other is center Al Horford.

Coming from "Spurs East" in Atlanta, Horford’s style of play would fit the Warriors exceptionally, and his personality is such that it’s unlikely he’d have any problem being the fourth or fifth option in the Warriors’ best lineup...Horford, who hit 88 3-pointers this season, might be the best-suited big man for the modern game.

Fox Sports

According to sources familiar with free agent talks, the Warriors are looking at Al Horford, Joakim Noah and even Hassan Whiteside.

Mercury News

[MaceCase]

Unsourced opinion pieces aside, it would have been difficult for the Warriors to chase Horford after Durant given that Durant announced his signing 3 days after Horford did. It's also not difficult to see the differences between 4 years 113 million and a "discount" of 5 years 142 million nor the 2 years 54 million that the Warriors eventually got Kevin frickin Durant for while he talks of negotiating an even lower contract.

[Jamaaliver]

Unsourced opinion pieces aside, it would have been difficult for the Warriors to chase Horford after Durant...

Oh, no doubt.

My understanding was that had Durant signed elsewhere, GSW would have gone after Horford heavily in Free Agency.

Just interesting to think that the braintrust that Schlenk was a part of last offseason was linked to him.

The fact that Horford was sifting through multiple max offers makes me think he'd still be tradable this summer if necessary.


I also think Travis would never have let Horford reach Free Agency if he didn't want to re-sign him to a max contract. Trading him ahead of time and acquiring assets for a future use in trade.

[MaceCase]

My understanding was that had Durant signed elsewhere, GSW would have gone after Horford heavily in Free Agency.

Just interesting to think that the braintrust that Schlenk was a part of last offseason was linked to him.

Again, this is odd. How would a team pursue a player that had already signed days before their primary option? Doubly odd, Horford met with 4 teams as well as the Hawks.....Golden State wasn't one of them. But aye, speculation is always strong evidence!

The fact that Horford was sifting through multiple max offers makes me think he'd still be tradable this summer if necessary.

This is an interesting take. It bodes well for a Bazemore trade since multiple teams were offering him more than the Hawks!

I also think Travis would never have let Horford reach Free Agency if he didn't want to re-sign him to a max contract. Trading him ahead of time and acquiring assets for a future use in trade.

Doesn't do much in the way of disputing a bad contract if the statement is "he'd have traded him before he had to offer him a bad contract"!

[Jamaaliver]

The fact that Horford was sifting through multiple max offers makes me think he'd still be tradable this summer if necessary.

This is an interesting take. It bodes well for a Bazemore trade since multiple teams were offering him more than the Hawks!

We can only hope!!!

But that Bazemore contract was considered one of the worst in the league just months after he signed.

Again, this is odd. How would a team pursue a player that had already signed days before their primary option? Doubly odd, Horford met with 4 teams as well as the Hawks.....Golden State wasn't one of them. But aye, speculation is always strong evidence!

Touche, my friend.




NOTE: I don't understand the last quote.