Gotcha, thanks.
I meant shots + trips to the free throw line. He gets hacked on a lot of his touches.
The knock on Howard in his prime wasn't that he shot too much; it was that he didn't use his physical superiority to dominate on the offensive end and instead deferred to his mostly mediocre teammates. That trait will probably keep him out of Springfield, but it might make for a smooth transition to a second act as a valuable role player. I wouldn't bet $100mm on that, but I'd certainly give him a well-paid, one-year audition.
Well, many fans may think that but I don't have a problem with what he did with the Magic. They played four out in Orlando with Dwight used to generate open looks for his teammates. And it worked really well. Any system that makes Hedo Turkoglu look like a great player deserves plaudits.
Well, both are true. They had Rashard Lewis at power forward to create more space for Dwight in the post, and the defense collapsing on Dwight meant there was space for guys like Lewis and Turkoglu to hit open threes. All great offenses are built around some kind of "pick your poison" combo.
You won't say that when you see who they sign if they miss out on Horford. Hopefully we never find out.
For Horford to stay in Atlanta, the Hawks probably have to offer five years; Howard is only getting three years. That's your answer. Also, it's not like Horford has thrived in the playoffs for Atlanta; Horford/Millsap has never really looked like a title-winning core, and interior defense plus rebounding has been non-existent in the Budenholzer era. (Go back and check the game threads from the Hawks-Celtics series, or the general summaries of the Hawks-Cavs series, and you'll see a lot more negativity about the idea of the Celtics acquiring Horford than I'm seeing now.)
Maybe, but it could be they are just better punting another season, taking minor strides, and having cap space for next year. It's not the instant payoff everybody wants, but it's really the only way to win big in the NBA.
Yup. A max-money contract for a guy who isn't a game-changer has the potential to spoil an opportunity to get a real game-changer down the road. I was down with a one-year deal with DH if he wanted to reestablish his value for a richer deal next summer; since that's not what he wanted, I'm glad he's going elsewhere. I'm not interested in Horford unless it's part of landing a marquee guy.
And if by next year they still haven't filled the cap space with someone as good as Howard, then what? It's really, really hard to get good players to switch teams in the NBA. I'm not sure they'll have the chance to fill the space with anyone better than Howard in the next three years. Cap space is only helpful when you use it. Hopefully I'm wrong.
What your otherwise clever analysis misses is the whole "fuck Dwight Howard" thing.
Signing mediocre players to expensive deals because you can is a terrible strategy.
He's past his prime, but he's in the best situation for his talents that he's had since his peak Orlando days. He can make that Hawks team a lot better by protecting the rim, crashing the boards, and taking advantage of the occasional mismatch in the post -- all stuff that even his diminished self should be able to do, provided he's reasonably healthy.
