I prefer Al Horford over Al Jefferson or Dwight Howard.
This. Horford is the jack of all trades that I think would help the most out of the three. I predict there will be some serious talks between the Hawks and the Celtics before the deadline.
i would prefer Dwight over Horford.
Dwight has declined over the years, but he's still putting up very impressive numbers and still has the ability to be dominant on defense and on the boards, and even occasionally on offense.
Horford has also declined over the last few years, but he's putting up only mildly impressive numbers this year, and is really only 'good' as a rebounder, defender and scorer. Like Dwight, he's also very injury prone.
IMHO Dwight is the bigger impact player - he has the potential to be an absolute game changer in the playoffs because even in his current (declined) state, he still has the ability to completely control the paint.
Horford on the other hand is kinda like a rich man's Kelly Olynyk in that there isn't any one thing that he is really dominant at, but he'll just make your team better by quietly doing a lot of things well.
Given the choice, I'll take the guy who has the potential to dominate. Teams with lots of solid guys but no dominant ones usually do very well in the regular season, and drop off the face of the earth come playoff time - Atlanta being the perfect example. Teams with guys who can dominant certain aspects of the game tend to be the kind of teams that make hard runs in the Playoffs.
With Thomas dominating on offense and Dwight dominating the paint, I think that this team could be really deadly - and a front court duo of Olynyk+Dwight honestly feels like a match made in heaven.
I hear ya and very much respect the opinion. I guess the reason why I prefer Horford is because he can play in crunchtime and space the floor. Two things Dwight can't do. It's a matter of taste. Also, if we had Dwight, we would have to endure through a lot of Hack-a-Dwight episodes in close games which I don't want to watch.
I would welcome Dwight but only at the right price.
I certainly can see the argument for Horford over Dwight - he's a great all rounder who doesn't really have any major flaws in his game.
My only problem is that Horford is a 'nice all round player' and this Boston team always seems to get stuck with 'nice all round players' who don't do enough to move the needle. I fear Horford would be one such player, especially if he continues to decline as he has the last few years.
He's definitely an upgrade for us at either big position, and if he's the best option available I'd take him in a heartbeat. But given the choice of the two, I'd take Dwight any day.
I know his free throw shooting sucks, but compared too some other defensive/rebounding minded bigs (e.g. Drummond, Deandre) his free throw shooting is actually almost borderline respectable haha
Plus Dwight gets to the line like an animal - he has a free throw rate of over 80% (which is ridiculous) and attempts a ton of them, so even if he's only shooting 55% from the line he's still contributing enough points from the line to be a factor.
Also the hack a Dwight thing might work in the regular season, but it may not be so effective at the end of close playoff games. If teams are going to hack him they need to put some scrub on the court who can afford to collect fouls, and that only works in our favor. If they apply this method using their regular rotation guys then we get them into foul trouble, which also works in our favor.
Finally Dwight has actually shot a 57% from the line for his career, and though that is a poor number it's probably high enough to ensure that hacking him isn't going to be sufficiently beneficial.
Oh and at the end of the day, the impact we gain from 30 minutes with Dwight on the court, may well be enough to allow us to rest him in the final 3-5 minutes of close games. If all goes to plan he impacts enough earlier in the game to ensure that the 'close games' happen less frequently, which in turn makes his free throw woes less of a factor.