Author Topic: Al Horford agrees to 4-year, $113M deal with the Boston Celtics!!  (Read 36800 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Al Horford agrees to 4-year, $113M deal with the Boston Celtics!!
« Reply #285 on: July 03, 2016, 02:42:58 AM »

Offline Ilikesports17

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8181
  • Tommy Points: 810
Hawks fans really despise us after visiting Peach Tree Hoops lol. They still think their current roster can beat us.

Well, had Bradley and Olynyk not been injured I'm pretty sure we would've taken Game 1, and left the Hawks dead in 6 games before getting ousted by the Cavaliers.

Now that we added Al Horford (and a few more to come) to play under Brad Stevens system, this team will demolish the Atlanta Hawks.

It definitely can and probably will, as of right now, imo.
They beat us in 6, but since then weve added Avery Bradley, Kelly Olynyk(basically), Al Horford, and Jaylen Brown while losing Evan Turner. They lost Teague and Horford and got back Prince Howard and splitter(?) Also take into account the fact that we were the younger team and its pretty logical to say we have a superior roster to them at this point.

And none of that even takes into account the fact that Crowder was hobbled pretty badly that series
They didn't "lose" Teague -- they got rid of him because Schroder made him redundant. Other than that, they replaced Horford with Howard. Injuries or no injuries, our roster is not any more superior than it was last season. Probably less.

Is this for real? Did you read the title of this thread? We got Al horford. They lost al horford.
Right. They also signed Dwight Howard. And we lost Evan Turner. We'll probably end up losing other rotation guys, too. Come back to talk when the free agency high wears out.
Teagues a bigger loss than Turner is. I'd imagine that's a fairly uncontroversial statement. Also Sully for Horford is a clear win and since we are dismissing injuries i suppose we have to use regular season records to compare. Both teams won 48 games since then Bostons improved more than Atlanta ergo Bostons roster is superior to Atlanta's
Did you miss the part where they VOLUNTARILY traded away Teague? As in, they didn't want him? That's how much of a loss they thought he was.

You may think that Sullinger to Horford is a greater upgrade than Horford to Howard. You're welcome to your opinion. As I said, come back when the "ohmigodwesignedhorfordz" wears out.
The Hawks had Schroeder and knew they didn't need 2 point guards especially because Teague was coming up to get paid so keeping the two of them would be an inefficient use of cap space. Instead they chose to get a lottery pick which they used to select a SF which made sense because at that point they were at risk of losing Bazemore and their other high minute wing (korver) is 34.

Just because they felt it was best for the long term to trade Teague does not mean it isn't a loss. Surely you can see that. We have cap space and we voluntarily let Turner walk does that mean we won't miss his production? No. Cmon this argument is dumb.

Horford doesn't make us a true contender but he gives us a better roster than the Hawks.
Quote from: George W. Bush
Too often, we judge other groups by their worst examples while judging ourselves by our best intentions.

Re: Al Horford agrees to 4-year, $113M deal with the Boston Celtics!!
« Reply #286 on: July 03, 2016, 02:45:55 AM »

Offline alldaboston

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4170
  • Tommy Points: 324
Hawks fans really despise us after visiting Peach Tree Hoops lol. They still think their current roster can beat us.

Well, had Bradley and Olynyk not been injured I'm pretty sure we would've taken Game 1, and left the Hawks dead in 6 games before getting ousted by the Cavaliers.

Now that we added Al Horford (and a few more to come) to play under Brad Stevens system, this team will demolish the Atlanta Hawks.

It definitely can and probably will, as of right now, imo.
They beat us in 6, but since then weve added Avery Bradley, Kelly Olynyk(basically), Al Horford, and Jaylen Brown while losing Evan Turner. They lost Teague and Horford and got back Prince Howard and splitter(?) Also take into account the fact that we were the younger team and its pretty logical to say we have a superior roster to them at this point.

And none of that even takes into account the fact that Crowder was hobbled pretty badly that series
They didn't "lose" Teague -- they got rid of him because Schroder made him redundant. Other than that, they replaced Horford with Howard. Injuries or no injuries, our roster is not any more superior than it was last season. Probably less.

Is this for real? Did you read the title of this thread? We got Al horford. They lost al horford.
Right. They also signed Dwight Howard. And we lost Evan Turner. We'll probably end up losing other rotation guys, too. Come back to talk when the free agency high wears out.
Teagues a bigger loss than Turner is. I'd imagine that's a fairly uncontroversial statement. Also Sully for Horford is a clear win and since we are dismissing injuries i suppose we have to use regular season records to compare. Both teams won 48 games since then Bostons improved more than Atlanta ergo Bostons roster is superior to Atlanta's
Did you miss the part where they VOLUNTARILY traded away Teague? As in, they didn't want him? That's how much of a loss they thought he was.

You may think that Sullinger to Horford is a greater upgrade than Horford to Howard. You're welcome to your opinion. As I said, come back when the "ohmigodwesignedhorfordz" wears out.

I swear, you can never please some people. What did you want dude? Did you want Towns and LeBron and Steph and Kawhi to join us?
I could very well see the Hawks... starting Taurean Prince at the 3, who is already better than Crowder, imo.

you vs. the guy she tells you not to worry about

Re: Al Horford agrees to 4-year, $113M deal with the Boston Celtics!!
« Reply #287 on: July 03, 2016, 02:47:34 AM »

Offline Beat LA

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8190
  • Tommy Points: 875
  • Mr. Emoji
Hawks fans really despise us after visiting Peach Tree Hoops lol. They still think their current roster can beat us.

Well, had Bradley and Olynyk not been injured I'm pretty sure we would've taken Game 1, and left the Hawks dead in 6 games before getting ousted by the Cavaliers.

Now that we added Al Horford (and a few more to come) to play under Brad Stevens system, this team will demolish the Atlanta Hawks.

It definitely can and probably will, as of right now, imo.
They beat us in 6, but since then weve added Avery Bradley, Kelly Olynyk(basically), Al Horford, and Jaylen Brown while losing Evan Turner. They lost Teague and Horford and got back Prince Howard and splitter(?) Also take into account the fact that we were the younger team and its pretty logical to say we have a superior roster to them at this point.

And none of that even takes into account the fact that Crowder was hobbled pretty badly that series

Nolynyk gives us nothing, imo, but let's break it down as of right now -

Boston -

IT, Bradley, Serena Williams, Horford, and I have no idea who is going to play center for us, unless of course you want to put Horford, there, leaving, who, Amir or Swedish Meatballs as our starting 4?  Great (sarcasm) ::).

Bench - Smart, Rozier, Jackson, Hunter, Young, Bentil, and Brown.  I didn't list Zizic and Yabusele because idk if either or even one of them will be playing with us at any point this year.

Atlanta -

Schroeder, Korver, Bazemore, Millsap, and Howard.  I could very well see the Hawks moving Ashton Kutcher to the bench, Bazemore to the 2, and starting Taurean Prince at the 3, who is already better than Crowder, imo.

Bench - Deandre Bembry (great pick, imo), Tim Hardaway Jr, Mike Muscala, Mike Scott, Sefolosha, and Splitter.  I apologize if I've forgotten anyone, so feel free to add to this list.

Based on all of that, Atlanta clearly has a better defensive team with their starters, imo, and their bench is pretty strong, as well.  Probably the best way to counter Millsap would be starting Bentil, imo, but still, they have more size, especially at point guard and center, so we're still going to have trouble rebounding, most likely, and they have more shooting as well as a better playmaker off of their bench in Bembry than we do, assuming, of course, that Jackson gets zero court time, this year.  Sigh.

Anyway, yeah, I'd give the edge to Atlanta as of right now.   

Re: Al Horford agrees to 4-year, $113M deal with the Boston Celtics!!
« Reply #288 on: July 03, 2016, 02:49:04 AM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
Hawks fans really despise us after visiting Peach Tree Hoops lol. They still think their current roster can beat us.

Well, had Bradley and Olynyk not been injured I'm pretty sure we would've taken Game 1, and left the Hawks dead in 6 games before getting ousted by the Cavaliers.

Now that we added Al Horford (and a few more to come) to play under Brad Stevens system, this team will demolish the Atlanta Hawks.

It definitely can and probably will, as of right now, imo.
They beat us in 6, but since then weve added Avery Bradley, Kelly Olynyk(basically), Al Horford, and Jaylen Brown while losing Evan Turner. They lost Teague and Horford and got back Prince Howard and splitter(?) Also take into account the fact that we were the younger team and its pretty logical to say we have a superior roster to them at this point.

And none of that even takes into account the fact that Crowder was hobbled pretty badly that series
They didn't "lose" Teague -- they got rid of him because Schroder made him redundant. Other than that, they replaced Horford with Howard. Injuries or no injuries, our roster is not any more superior than it was last season. Probably less.

Is this for real? Did you read the title of this thread? We got Al horford. They lost al horford.
Right. They also signed Dwight Howard. And we lost Evan Turner. We'll probably end up losing other rotation guys, too. Come back to talk when the free agency high wears out.
Teagues a bigger loss than Turner is. I'd imagine that's a fairly uncontroversial statement. Also Sully for Horford is a clear win and since we are dismissing injuries i suppose we have to use regular season records to compare. Both teams won 48 games since then Bostons improved more than Atlanta ergo Bostons roster is superior to Atlanta's
Did you miss the part where they VOLUNTARILY traded away Teague? As in, they didn't want him? That's how much of a loss they thought he was.

You may think that Sullinger to Horford is a greater upgrade than Horford to Howard. You're welcome to your opinion. As I said, come back when the "ohmigodwesignedhorfordz" wears out.
The Hawks had Schroeder and knew they didn't need 2 point guards especially because Teague was coming up to get paid so keeping the two of them would be an inefficient use of cap space. Instead they chose to get a lottery pick which they used to select a SF which made sense because at that point they were at risk of losing Bazemore and their other high minute wing (korver) is 34.

Just because they felt it was best for the long term to trade Teague does not mean it isn't a loss. Surely you can see that. We have cap space and we voluntarily let Turner walk does that mean we won't miss his production? No. Cmon this argument is dumb.

Horford doesn't make us a true contender but he gives us a better roster than the Hawks.
They traded away Teague because Schroder could and has fully replicated his production in the past.

We let Turner walk not because we think an erratic third year player and a 19-year old rookie can replace his production, but because his contract is the proverbial "good intention" on the road to cap hell.

One is a basketball decision. The other one is a business decision. See the difference? SMH.
(Formerly) managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: Al Horford agrees to 4-year, $113M deal with the Boston Celtics!!
« Reply #289 on: July 03, 2016, 02:51:01 AM »

Offline alldaboston

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4170
  • Tommy Points: 324
Taurean Prince is already better than Jae? Just when I thought I'd heard it all.

If we had picked him would he still be better than Jae? Or would Danny have made a terrible move since he drafted a guy who projects to be maybe as good as Jae, and hence would be redundant?
I could very well see the Hawks... starting Taurean Prince at the 3, who is already better than Crowder, imo.

you vs. the guy she tells you not to worry about

Re: Al Horford agrees to 4-year, $113M deal with the Boston Celtics!!
« Reply #290 on: July 03, 2016, 02:54:42 AM »

Offline Ilikesports17

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8181
  • Tommy Points: 810
Hawks fans really despise us after visiting Peach Tree Hoops lol. They still think their current roster can beat us.

Well, had Bradley and Olynyk not been injured I'm pretty sure we would've taken Game 1, and left the Hawks dead in 6 games before getting ousted by the Cavaliers.

Now that we added Al Horford (and a few more to come) to play under Brad Stevens system, this team will demolish the Atlanta Hawks.

It definitely can and probably will, as of right now, imo.
They beat us in 6, but since then weve added Avery Bradley, Kelly Olynyk(basically), Al Horford, and Jaylen Brown while losing Evan Turner. They lost Teague and Horford and got back Prince Howard and splitter(?) Also take into account the fact that we were the younger team and its pretty logical to say we have a superior roster to them at this point.

And none of that even takes into account the fact that Crowder was hobbled pretty badly that series
They didn't "lose" Teague -- they got rid of him because Schroder made him redundant. Other than that, they replaced Horford with Howard. Injuries or no injuries, our roster is not any more superior than it was last season. Probably less.

Is this for real? Did you read the title of this thread? We got Al horford. They lost al horford.
Right. They also signed Dwight Howard. And we lost Evan Turner. We'll probably end up losing other rotation guys, too. Come back to talk when the free agency high wears out.
Teagues a bigger loss than Turner is. I'd imagine that's a fairly uncontroversial statement. Also Sully for Horford is a clear win and since we are dismissing injuries i suppose we have to use regular season records to compare. Both teams won 48 games since then Bostons improved more than Atlanta ergo Bostons roster is superior to Atlanta's
Did you miss the part where they VOLUNTARILY traded away Teague? As in, they didn't want him? That's how much of a loss they thought he was.

You may think that Sullinger to Horford is a greater upgrade than Horford to Howard. You're welcome to your opinion. As I said, come back when the "ohmigodwesignedhorfordz" wears out.
The Hawks had Schroeder and knew they didn't need 2 point guards especially because Teague was coming up to get paid so keeping the two of them would be an inefficient use of cap space. Instead they chose to get a lottery pick which they used to select a SF which made sense because at that point they were at risk of losing Bazemore and their other high minute wing (korver) is 34.

Just because they felt it was best for the long term to trade Teague does not mean it isn't a loss. Surely you can see that. We have cap space and we voluntarily let Turner walk does that mean we won't miss his production? No. Cmon this argument is dumb.

Horford doesn't make us a true contender but he gives us a better roster than the Hawks.
They traded away Teague because Schroder could and has fully replicated his production in the past.

We let Turner walk not because we think an erratic third year player and a 19-year old rookie can replace his production, but because his contract is the proverbial "good intention" on the road to cap hell.

One is a basketball decision. The other one is a business decision. See the difference? SMH.
Are you really claiming that Atlanta will lose nothing by trading Teague for Prince? This seems ridiculous to me.
Quote from: George W. Bush
Too often, we judge other groups by their worst examples while judging ourselves by our best intentions.

Re: Al Horford agrees to 4-year, $113M deal with the Boston Celtics!!
« Reply #291 on: July 03, 2016, 02:56:41 AM »

Offline Ilikesports17

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8181
  • Tommy Points: 810
Taurean Prince is already better than Jae? Just when I thought I'd heard it all.

If we had picked him would he still be better than Jae? Or would Danny have made a terrible move since he drafted a guy who projects to be maybe as good as Jae, and hence would be redundant?
My personal favorite was the implication that it our only hope would be to play Jackson and Bentil.
Quote from: George W. Bush
Too often, we judge other groups by their worst examples while judging ourselves by our best intentions.

Re: Al Horford agrees to 4-year, $113M deal with the Boston Celtics!!
« Reply #292 on: July 03, 2016, 02:58:08 AM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
Hawks fans really despise us after visiting Peach Tree Hoops lol. They still think their current roster can beat us.

Well, had Bradley and Olynyk not been injured I'm pretty sure we would've taken Game 1, and left the Hawks dead in 6 games before getting ousted by the Cavaliers.

Now that we added Al Horford (and a few more to come) to play under Brad Stevens system, this team will demolish the Atlanta Hawks.

It definitely can and probably will, as of right now, imo.
They beat us in 6, but since then weve added Avery Bradley, Kelly Olynyk(basically), Al Horford, and Jaylen Brown while losing Evan Turner. They lost Teague and Horford and got back Prince Howard and splitter(?) Also take into account the fact that we were the younger team and its pretty logical to say we have a superior roster to them at this point.

And none of that even takes into account the fact that Crowder was hobbled pretty badly that series
They didn't "lose" Teague -- they got rid of him because Schroder made him redundant. Other than that, they replaced Horford with Howard. Injuries or no injuries, our roster is not any more superior than it was last season. Probably less.

Is this for real? Did you read the title of this thread? We got Al horford. They lost al horford.
Right. They also signed Dwight Howard. And we lost Evan Turner. We'll probably end up losing other rotation guys, too. Come back to talk when the free agency high wears out.
Teagues a bigger loss than Turner is. I'd imagine that's a fairly uncontroversial statement. Also Sully for Horford is a clear win and since we are dismissing injuries i suppose we have to use regular season records to compare. Both teams won 48 games since then Bostons improved more than Atlanta ergo Bostons roster is superior to Atlanta's
Did you miss the part where they VOLUNTARILY traded away Teague? As in, they didn't want him? That's how much of a loss they thought he was.

You may think that Sullinger to Horford is a greater upgrade than Horford to Howard. You're welcome to your opinion. As I said, come back when the "ohmigodwesignedhorfordz" wears out.
The Hawks had Schroeder and knew they didn't need 2 point guards especially because Teague was coming up to get paid so keeping the two of them would be an inefficient use of cap space. Instead they chose to get a lottery pick which they used to select a SF which made sense because at that point they were at risk of losing Bazemore and their other high minute wing (korver) is 34.

Just because they felt it was best for the long term to trade Teague does not mean it isn't a loss. Surely you can see that. We have cap space and we voluntarily let Turner walk does that mean we won't miss his production? No. Cmon this argument is dumb.

Horford doesn't make us a true contender but he gives us a better roster than the Hawks.
They traded away Teague because Schroder could and has fully replicated his production in the past.

We let Turner walk not because we think an erratic third year player and a 19-year old rookie can replace his production, but because his contract is the proverbial "good intention" on the road to cap hell.

One is a basketball decision. The other one is a business decision. See the difference? SMH.
Are you really claiming that Atlanta will lose nothing by trading Teague for Prince? This seems ridiculous to me.
What seems ridiculous to me is that people think that Atlanta is worse at this point than it was at the end of this season.
(Formerly) managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: Al Horford agrees to 4-year, $113M deal with the Boston Celtics!!
« Reply #293 on: July 03, 2016, 03:04:00 AM »

Offline tankcity!

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1901
  • Tommy Points: 129
Hawks fans really despise us after visiting Peach Tree Hoops lol. They still think their current roster can beat us.

Well, had Bradley and Olynyk not been injured I'm pretty sure we would've taken Game 1, and left the Hawks dead in 6 games before getting ousted by the Cavaliers.

Now that we added Al Horford (and a few more to come) to play under Brad Stevens system, this team will demolish the Atlanta Hawks.

It definitely can and probably will, as of right now, imo.
They beat us in 6, but since then weve added Avery Bradley, Kelly Olynyk(basically), Al Horford, and Jaylen Brown while losing Evan Turner. They lost Teague and Horford and got back Prince Howard and splitter(?) Also take into account the fact that we were the younger team and its pretty logical to say we have a superior roster to them at this point.

And none of that even takes into account the fact that Crowder was hobbled pretty badly that series
They didn't "lose" Teague -- they got rid of him because Schroder made him redundant. Other than that, they replaced Horford with Howard. Injuries or no injuries, our roster is not any more superior than it was last season. Probably less.

Is this for real? Did you read the title of this thread? We got Al horford. They lost al horford.
Right. They also signed Dwight Howard. And we lost Evan Turner. We'll probably end up losing other rotation guys, too. Come back to talk when the free agency high wears out.
Teagues a bigger loss than Turner is. I'd imagine that's a fairly uncontroversial statement. Also Sully for Horford is a clear win and since we are dismissing injuries i suppose we have to use regular season records to compare. Both teams won 48 games since then Bostons improved more than Atlanta ergo Bostons roster is superior to Atlanta's
Did you miss the part where they VOLUNTARILY traded away Teague? As in, they didn't want him? That's how much of a loss they thought he was.

You may think that Sullinger to Horford is a greater upgrade than Horford to Howard. You're welcome to your opinion. As I said, come back when the "ohmigodwesignedhorfordz" wears out.
The Hawks had Schroeder and knew they didn't need 2 point guards especially because Teague was coming up to get paid so keeping the two of them would be an inefficient use of cap space. Instead they chose to get a lottery pick which they used to select a SF which made sense because at that point they were at risk of losing Bazemore and their other high minute wing (korver) is 34.

Just because they felt it was best for the long term to trade Teague does not mean it isn't a loss. Surely you can see that. We have cap space and we voluntarily let Turner walk does that mean we won't miss his production? No. Cmon this argument is dumb.

Horford doesn't make us a true contender but he gives us a better roster than the Hawks.
They traded away Teague because Schroder could and has fully replicated his production in the past.

We let Turner walk not because we think an erratic third year player and a 19-year old rookie can replace his production, but because his contract is the proverbial "good intention" on the road to cap hell.

One is a basketball decision. The other one is a business decision. See the difference? SMH.
Are you really claiming that Atlanta will lose nothing by trading Teague for Prince? This seems ridiculous to me.
What seems ridiculous to me is that people think that Atlanta is worse at this point than it was at the end of this season.

Honestly, it just feels like you're negative no matter what happens. What would you have like the Celtics to do?

Also, if the Celtics beat the Hawks in the playoffs next year, you'll still be complaining. By the way, you do realize Howard's team last year was like 500 right? They also had Harden on that team. Never seen anyone overrate Howard more than you. He's a shell of himself...

Re: Al Horford agrees to 4-year, $113M deal with the Boston Celtics!!
« Reply #294 on: July 03, 2016, 03:05:01 AM »

Offline LarBrd33

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20308
  • Tommy Points: 1831
This is what I had to say about Al Horford in an article I wrote in May about why Durant should choose the Celtics over Oklahoma.

Quote
Take Al Horford, for instance.  Horford has been the key player in an Atlanta Hawks team that has made the playoffs nine straight years.  No, Horford is not a superstar on the level of guys like Durant and LeBron, but his addition could still be significant.  Itís easy to take his impact for granted when thereís no Horford-less Hawks team to compare to.  Our best sample size is the 2013-14 season in which Horford was limited to just 29 games.   The Hawks managed to go 16-13 in games Horford played (a 45 win pace right in line with their previous season).   In games Horford missed, the Hawks had a losing record of 22-31 (a 34 win pace).


Naturally, Horford has seem some decline since 2013-14.  Despite this, heís been a key contributor to a Hawks team that won 60 games last season and knocked off the Celtics in the first round of the playoffs this year.  One could make a reasonable case based on the 2014-15 season that Horford adds roughly 11 wins to that Hawks team.

http://clnsradio.com/boston-celtics-news/item/13861-why-kevin-durant-should-choose-the-boston-celtics-over-the-oklahoma-city-thunder-in-free-agency

Adding Horford is huge for us regardless of whether or not we sign Durant.  This team has elite defensive guards.  It desperately needs an elite defensive big man.   That's Al Horford.  We should be a top 5 defensive team next year unless something goes very wrong.  And Boston was actually Top 5 last year in points scored.  If we're Top 5 in both categories, you're looking at a team that could threaten to win 55 games next season without even adding a phenom like Durant (his addition could get us 65+ wins).

Re: Al Horford agrees to 4-year, $113M deal with the Boston Celtics!!
« Reply #295 on: July 03, 2016, 03:08:02 AM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
Honestly, it just feels like you're negative no matter what happens. What would you have like the Celtics to do?

Also, if the Celtics beat the Hawks in the playoffs next year, you'll still be complaining. By the way, you do realize Howard's team last year was like 500 right? They also had Harden on that team. Never seen anyone overrate Howard more than you. He's a shell of himself...
I have complained? That's news to me.

Pointing out that the conclusion that our roster somehow became vastly superior to Atlanta's overnight is the result of free agency euphoria is not complaining.
(Formerly) managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: Al Horford agrees to 4-year, $113M deal with the Boston Celtics!!
« Reply #296 on: July 03, 2016, 03:08:47 AM »

Offline TheSundanceKid

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2234
  • Tommy Points: 185
Hawks fans really despise us after visiting Peach Tree Hoops lol. They still think their current roster can beat us.

Well, had Bradley and Olynyk not been injured I'm pretty sure we would've taken Game 1, and left the Hawks dead in 6 games before getting ousted by the Cavaliers.

Now that we added Al Horford (and a few more to come) to play under Brad Stevens system, this team will demolish the Atlanta Hawks.

It definitely can and probably will, as of right now, imo.
They beat us in 6, but since then weve added Avery Bradley, Kelly Olynyk(basically), Al Horford, and Jaylen Brown while losing Evan Turner. They lost Teague and Horford and got back Prince Howard and splitter(?) Also take into account the fact that we were the younger team and its pretty logical to say we have a superior roster to them at this point.

And none of that even takes into account the fact that Crowder was hobbled pretty badly that series

Nolynyk gives us nothing, imo, but let's break it down as of right now -

Boston -

IT, Bradley, Serena Williams, Horford, and I have no idea who is going to play center for us, unless of course you want to put Horford, there, leaving, who, Amir or Swedish Meatballs as our starting 4?  Great (sarcasm) ::).

Bench - Smart, Rozier, Jackson, Hunter, Young, Bentil, and Brown.  I didn't list Zizic and Yabusele because idk if either or even one of them will be playing with us at any point this year.

Atlanta -

Schroeder, Korver, Bazemore, Millsap, and Howard.  I could very well see the Hawks moving Ashton Kutcher to the bench, Bazemore to the 2, and starting Taurean Prince at the 3, who is already better than Crowder, imo.

Bench - Deandre Bembry (great pick, imo), Tim Hardaway Jr, Mike Muscala, Mike Scott, Sefolosha, and Splitter.  I apologize if I've forgotten anyone, so feel free to add to this list.

Based on all of that, Atlanta clearly has a better defensive team with their starters, imo, and their bench is pretty strong, as well.  Probably the best way to counter Millsap would be starting Bentil, imo, but still, they have more size, especially at point guard and center, so we're still going to have trouble rebounding, most likely, and they have more shooting as well as a better playmaker off of their bench in Bembry than we do, assuming, of course, that Jackson gets zero court time, this year.  Sigh.

Anyway, yeah, I'd give the edge to Atlanta as of right now.   

Right now I'd be inclined to agree with you, although it's close. You do a disservice to some of our guys. However our simmer is not over even if we miss out on Durant. We would still be able to massively increase our front court with someone like Gasol

Re: Al Horford agrees to 4-year, $113M deal with the Boston Celtics!!
« Reply #297 on: July 03, 2016, 03:09:35 AM »

Offline tankcity!

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1901
  • Tommy Points: 129
Honestly, it just feels like you're negative no matter what happens. What would you have like the Celtics to do?

Also, if the Celtics beat the Hawks in the playoffs next year, you'll still be complaining. By the way, you do realize Howard's team last year was like 500 right? They also had Harden on that team. Never seen anyone overrate Howard more than you. He's a shell of himself...
I have complained? That's news to me.

Pointing out that all that the conclusion that our roster somehow became vastly superior to Atlanta's overnight are the result of free agency euphoria is not complaining.

Bro, in earlier posts you said Horford was a bad contract. Stop contradicting yourself. You also ignore great counters other people have made to your arguments. And stop ignoring my point about Howard.

Re: Al Horford agrees to 4-year, $113M deal with the Boston Celtics!!
« Reply #298 on: July 03, 2016, 03:10:14 AM »

Offline Ilikesports17

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8181
  • Tommy Points: 810
Hawks fans really despise us after visiting Peach Tree Hoops lol. They still think their current roster can beat us.

Well, had Bradley and Olynyk not been injured I'm pretty sure we would've taken Game 1, and left the Hawks dead in 6 games before getting ousted by the Cavaliers.

Now that we added Al Horford (and a few more to come) to play under Brad Stevens system, this team will demolish the Atlanta Hawks.

It definitely can and probably will, as of right now, imo.
They beat us in 6, but since then weve added Avery Bradley, Kelly Olynyk(basically), Al Horford, and Jaylen Brown while losing Evan Turner. They lost Teague and Horford and got back Prince Howard and splitter(?) Also take into account the fact that we were the younger team and its pretty logical to say we have a superior roster to them at this point.

And none of that even takes into account the fact that Crowder was hobbled pretty badly that series
They didn't "lose" Teague -- they got rid of him because Schroder made him redundant. Other than that, they replaced Horford with Howard. Injuries or no injuries, our roster is not any more superior than it was last season. Probably less.

Is this for real? Did you read the title of this thread? We got Al horford. They lost al horford.
Right. They also signed Dwight Howard. And we lost Evan Turner. We'll probably end up losing other rotation guys, too. Come back to talk when the free agency high wears out.
Teagues a bigger loss than Turner is. I'd imagine that's a fairly uncontroversial statement. Also Sully for Horford is a clear win and since we are dismissing injuries i suppose we have to use regular season records to compare. Both teams won 48 games since then Bostons improved more than Atlanta ergo Bostons roster is superior to Atlanta's
Did you miss the part where they VOLUNTARILY traded away Teague? As in, they didn't want him? That's how much of a loss they thought he was.

You may think that Sullinger to Horford is a greater upgrade than Horford to Howard. You're welcome to your opinion. As I said, come back when the "ohmigodwesignedhorfordz" wears out.
The Hawks had Schroeder and knew they didn't need 2 point guards especially because Teague was coming up to get paid so keeping the two of them would be an inefficient use of cap space. Instead they chose to get a lottery pick which they used to select a SF which made sense because at that point they were at risk of losing Bazemore and their other high minute wing (korver) is 34.

Just because they felt it was best for the long term to trade Teague does not mean it isn't a loss. Surely you can see that. We have cap space and we voluntarily let Turner walk does that mean we won't miss his production? No. Cmon this argument is dumb.

Horford doesn't make us a true contender but he gives us a better roster than the Hawks.
They traded away Teague because Schroder could and has fully replicated his production in the past.

We let Turner walk not because we think an erratic third year player and a 19-year old rookie can replace his production, but because his contract is the proverbial "good intention" on the road to cap hell.

One is a basketball decision. The other one is a business decision. See the difference? SMH.
Are you really claiming that Atlanta will lose nothing by trading Teague for Prince? This seems ridiculous to me.
What seems ridiculous to me is that people think that Atlanta is worse at this point than it was at the end of this season.
Does Atlanta lose anything with the loss of Schroeder
Is Horford over Sully a bigger upgrade than Howard over Horford
Are the far younger Celtics more likely to say internal improvement than the much older Hawks.

These 3 questions provide enough grounds to suggest that the 48 win celtics have improved more than the 48 win Hawks who depending on your interpretation of their offseason which saw them lose 2 of their 3 best players and bring in one of the most controversial post players in the NBA whom their own FO valued lower than Horford (look at reported deals ATL was willing to pay Horford more $ at more years) you could make a well reasoned argument that they are worse than they were last year.

stop acting like you are clearly in the right here. Atlanta may be better than us still hit it sure as hell Kant obvious.
Quote from: George W. Bush
Too often, we judge other groups by their worst examples while judging ourselves by our best intentions.

Re: Al Horford agrees to 4-year, $113M deal with the Boston Celtics!!
« Reply #299 on: July 03, 2016, 03:12:42 AM »

Offline tankcity!

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1901
  • Tommy Points: 129
Hawks fans really despise us after visiting Peach Tree Hoops lol. They still think their current roster can beat us.

Well, had Bradley and Olynyk not been injured I'm pretty sure we would've taken Game 1, and left the Hawks dead in 6 games before getting ousted by the Cavaliers.

Now that we added Al Horford (and a few more to come) to play under Brad Stevens system, this team will demolish the Atlanta Hawks.

It definitely can and probably will, as of right now, imo.
They beat us in 6, but since then weve added Avery Bradley, Kelly Olynyk(basically), Al Horford, and Jaylen Brown while losing Evan Turner. They lost Teague and Horford and got back Prince Howard and splitter(?) Also take into account the fact that we were the younger team and its pretty logical to say we have a superior roster to them at this point.

And none of that even takes into account the fact that Crowder was hobbled pretty badly that series
They didn't "lose" Teague -- they got rid of him because Schroder made him redundant. Other than that, they replaced Horford with Howard. Injuries or no injuries, our roster is not any more superior than it was last season. Probably less.

Is this for real? Did you read the title of this thread? We got Al horford. They lost al horford.
Right. They also signed Dwight Howard. And we lost Evan Turner. We'll probably end up losing other rotation guys, too. Come back to talk when the free agency high wears out.
Teagues a bigger loss than Turner is. I'd imagine that's a fairly uncontroversial statement. Also Sully for Horford is a clear win and since we are dismissing injuries i suppose we have to use regular season records to compare. Both teams won 48 games since then Bostons improved more than Atlanta ergo Bostons roster is superior to Atlanta's
Did you miss the part where they VOLUNTARILY traded away Teague? As in, they didn't want him? That's how much of a loss they thought he was.

You may think that Sullinger to Horford is a greater upgrade than Horford to Howard. You're welcome to your opinion. As I said, come back when the "ohmigodwesignedhorfordz" wears out.
The Hawks had Schroeder and knew they didn't need 2 point guards especially because Teague was coming up to get paid so keeping the two of them would be an inefficient use of cap space. Instead they chose to get a lottery pick which they used to select a SF which made sense because at that point they were at risk of losing Bazemore and their other high minute wing (korver) is 34.

Just because they felt it was best for the long term to trade Teague does not mean it isn't a loss. Surely you can see that. We have cap space and we voluntarily let Turner walk does that mean we won't miss his production? No. Cmon this argument is dumb.

Horford doesn't make us a true contender but he gives us a better roster than the Hawks.
They traded away Teague because Schroder could and has fully replicated his production in the past.

We let Turner walk not because we think an erratic third year player and a 19-year old rookie can replace his production, but because his contract is the proverbial "good intention" on the road to cap hell.

One is a basketball decision. The other one is a business decision. See the difference? SMH.
Are you really claiming that Atlanta will lose nothing by trading Teague for Prince? This seems ridiculous to me.
What seems ridiculous to me is that people think that Atlanta is worse at this point than it was at the end of this season.
Does Atlanta lose anything with the loss of Schroeder
Is Horford over Sully a bigger upgrade than Howard over Horford
Are the far younger Celtics more likely to say internal improvement than the much older Hawks.

These 3 questions provide enough grounds to suggest that the 48 win celtics have improved more than the 48 win Hawks who depending on your interpretation of their offseason which saw them lose 2 of their 3 best players and bring in one of the most controversial post players in the NBA whom their own FO valued lower than Horford (look at reported deals ATL was willing to pay Horford more $ at more years) you could make a well reasoned argument that they are worse than they were last year.

stop acting like you are clearly in the right here. Atlanta may be better than us still hit it sure as hell Kant obvious.

It's really hard to conclude Atlanta is better than us at this point. He keeps ignoring the fact that we are a young team as well and none of our players except Horford have hit their Primes. You could maybe make a case for Thomas, who is only 27 right now.

I mean Horford stretched the floor for them as a center, something Howard can't do and it will effect them offensively. I mean it's pretty crystal clear.