TRKO wrote:The point isn't Holford or nothing. It's 2 quality guys over one premium guy for this team.
But you're still asking three 21-year olds to do the heavy lifting when you could have a 29-year old four-time All-Star taking a lot of responsibility off their load, allowing the young guys to be even better because there's less pressure on them and not as much defensive attention on them either.
Again, it's the argument of quality over quantity. Deng and Pachulia, or whoever, are nice players, but they're not better than one Horford.
That's not a great argument for horford. Hes never been a heavy lifter in any category. He's a great all around player, but 15 and 8 isn't world altering here. Yes, he would provide a great cog in the middle for defense, but so could a lesser paid player like zaza. While Deng provides matchup flexibility, and good wing defense. The cumulative pros from both of them outweigh what horford brings. Plus, signing them to 2 or 3 year deals vs horfords 5 that he wants will work better. If horford falls off at 31/32 or has a bad injury, then we've crippled our chances of adding talent around our players, and likely crippled our chances of retaining some of them.
Don't let your Florida Gator love blind ya too much!
It also does not have to be Deng or Zaza, i'm just going with those two because they are options in this thread. My main argument is that we need to be building our players in the 6-10 range, not our 1-5 range. As we all should have seen this year, our starting 5 can hang with just about any, and on many nights can beat them. It is our bench that loses a ton of ground. That is where our focus should be. A Rubio, LaVine, Wiggins, Dieng, Towns starting 5 is better than most starting 5's in the NBA. Our bench is not even playing average yet.
Throwing a max around right now is a bad idea, and most of you just want to do it because its the only time we will be able to. I like the potential of having my eggs in 2-3 baskets more so than in 1.
Good post - I completely agree. This is probably going to be Horford's last big contract. Like you, I'd assume he'll be looking for not only big money, but long term deal as well. At age 30, I don't think it would be unreasonable to project a drop off in production over the length of his next contract. And that's assuming he stays healthy. FYI...Rubio came into the league five years ago. Since that time, total games played by both players: Rubio - 278, Horford - 272. So put me in the camp of 2>1. I don't think we need to add another star at this point. We just need to surround our current stars (Towns/Wiggins) with a strong supporting cast. Furthermore, we still have LaVine and our top 5 pick as guys who at least have the potential to be that third star - but for a fraction of the price. Give the current group until the trading deadline under Thibbs. He'll know what he has at that point and will be better prepared to make big moves if needed. But IF, for some reason they do want to go big after a high priced guy, I'd prefer someone younger where I'd have less concern over dropoff/injuries.
IF the Wolves signed Horford I could see him being like when the Pacers signed David west. It's far from a perfect comparison but I always thought that was a big key to that era for the Pacers going forward.
monsterpile wrote:IF the Wolves signed Horford I could see him being like when the Pacers signed David west. It's far from a perfect comparison but I always thought that was a big key to that era for the Pacers going forward.
Pacers signed David West.
Warriors signed Andre Iguodala.
Bobcats/Hornets signed Al Jefferson.
There are other examples of young teams on the verge of turning the corner shelling out big money to productive veterans. We have the cap space to accommodate a player like Al Horford. To not do so if given the opportunity would be a disappointment.
monsterpile wrote:IF the Wolves signed Horford I could see him being like when the Pacers signed David west. It's far from a perfect comparison but I always thought that was a big key to that era for the Pacers going forward.
Pacers signed David West.
Warriors signed Andre Iguodala.
Bobcats/Hornets signed Al Jefferson.
There are other examples of young teams on the verge of turning the corner shelling out big money to productive veterans. We have the cap space to accommodate a player like Al Horford. To not do so if given the opportunity would be a disappointment.
I agree that West, Iguodala and Jefferson were all good signings that helped their new teams. But that seems to support the case of those of us that don't think the Wolves should dole out a max contract at this time, because none of the three of them commanded a max contract and thus didn't hamstring their new teams financially. The deals those three got are more like the deal a guy like Deng will get than Horford.
Plan on being disappointed then. Someone should start a tread on the likelihood of this happening, I would choose 0-5%. The franchises that are run well don't dip into the free agent market often and definitely don't offer max deals to players on the down side of their career.
And generally successful teams don't spend a ton of money on bench players to multi year deals either. They are able to find lesser known players and develop them, and once they hit free agency they let them go because they are over priced. Guys like Bazemore and Batum are good players but in free agency I wouldn't touch them because they will be so over priced. Players like that always find themselves signing with bottom feeders or teams stuck in the middle of the pack.
Duke, I would actually put the chances of signing a free agent to a max deal this summer much higher...maybe as high as 50/50. The elements you need to get a max deal done are:
1) a team that wants to win right now
2) a destination perceived as "attractive"
3) an owner willing to open his wallet.
I would argue that all three of these elements are in place with the Wolves. I'm not in favor of offering any max deals this summer (with the possible exception of Durant), but I wouldn't be surprised if it happens.
monsterpile wrote:IF the Wolves signed Horford I could see him being like when the Pacers signed David west. It's far from a perfect comparison but I always thought that was a big key to that era for the Pacers going forward.
Pacers signed David West.
Warriors signed Andre Iguodala.
Bobcats/Hornets signed Al Jefferson.
There are other examples of young teams on the verge of turning the corner shelling out big money to productive veterans. We have the cap space to accommodate a player like Al Horford. To not do so if given the opportunity would be a disappointment.
I agree that West, Iguodala and Jefferson were all good signings that helped their new teams. But that seems to support the case of those of us that don't think the Wolves should dole out a max contract at this time, because none of the three of them commanded a max contract and thus didn't hamstring their new teams financially. The deals those three got are more like the deal a guy like Deng will get than Horford.
That's not the point. The point is that they gave serious money to serious players and they benefited from it. Had a player of Horford's caliber been willing to sign with them, which there wasn't, and they had the cap space to make such a move, it's fair to assume that they would have done so. It would have bettered their team even more so than the moves they did make. They went in free agency with the mindset to make a serious splash. We should to do the same.
Also, those deals may not have been max contracts, but they were very pricey contracts when they were signed, which is part of why I brought them up in the first place.
monsterpile wrote:IF the Wolves signed Horford I could see him being like when the Pacers signed David west. It's far from a perfect comparison but I always thought that was a big key to that era for the Pacers going forward.
Pacers signed David West.
Warriors signed Andre Iguodala.
Bobcats/Hornets signed Al Jefferson.
There are other examples of young teams on the verge of turning the corner shelling out big money to productive veterans. We have the cap space to accommodate a player like Al Horford. To not do so if given the opportunity would be a disappointment.
I agree that West, Iguodala and Jefferson were all good signings that helped their new teams. But that seems to support the case of those of us that don't think the Wolves should dole out a max contract at this time, because none of the three of them commanded a max contract and thus didn't hamstring their new teams financially. The deals those three got are more like the deal a guy like Deng will get than Horford.
That's not the point. The point is that they gave serious money to serious players and they benefited from it. Had a player of Horford's caliber been willing to sign with them, which there wasn't, and they had the cap space to make such a move, it's fair to assume that they would have done so. It would have bettered their team even more so than the moves they did make. They went in free agency with the mindset to make a serious splash. We should to do the same.
Also, those deals may not have been max contracts, but they were very pricey contracts when they were signed, which is part of why I brought them up in the first place.
GS did a lot of work (gave up multiple picks to the Jazz) to have the money to offer Iggy to get him there so it was not a smaller cost signing. It was both a good move and a puzzling one to me at the time. Now it looks like an absolute genius move. They wouldn't be the Warriors we know now and I don't think they win the title last year without him.
I didn't pick any of the choices. On the higher price end, I'd opt for Noah. He's a better rebounder and interior defender than Horford and he's familiar with Thibs.
Otherwise I'd consider Cole Aldrich at the lower end of the cost meter. Cole's a terrific rebounder on a per minute basis. And I remember Bobby Knight raving about his basetball IQ and passing in college. Oh, did I mention he's from Minnesota. :). He's big and strong.
He's making about a million a year now and has a player option with the Clippers. I expect him to opt out and I think we could get him here at a bargain price.
lipoli390 wrote:I didn't pick any of the choices. On the higher price end, I'd opt for Noah. He's a better rebounder and interior defender than Horford and he's familiar with Thibs.
Otherwise I'd consider Cole Aldrich at the lower end of the cost meter. Cole's a terrific rebounder on a per minute basis. And I remember Bobby Knight raving about his basetball IQ and passing in college. Oh, did I mention he's from Minnesota. :). He's big and strong.
He's making about a million a year now and has a player option with the Clippers. I expect him to opt out and I think we could get him here at a bargain price.
I would also love to have Cole Aldrich as a bench big for us. He has size to push those other big centers lijke Drummond and Jordan and he has improved quite a lot lately in offense and especially in defense. If something like 15 millions (or less) for three years would be enough to get him, he would be great backup for Towns.
