Poll

Al Horford: Is now a good time to sell high?

Yes
3 (3.7%)
No
77 (93.9%)
Maybe So
2 (2.4%)

Total Members Voted: 82

Author Topic: Al Horford: Is now a good time to sell high?  (Read 2700 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Al Horford: Is now a good time to sell high?
« Reply #30 on: October 30, 2017, 01:35:35 PM »

Offline arctic 3.0

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2128
  • Tommy Points: 334

Stop this nonsense.
We've made our blockbuster trade,
We've assembled a seriously talented group that will compete for years.
We have young talent, prime talent, and additional valuable draft picks that will extend our window for a decade plus.
I want a moritorium on trade/tank threads.

Re: Al Horford: Is now a good time to sell high?
« Reply #31 on: October 30, 2017, 01:38:44 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • Global Moderator
  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16948
  • Tommy Points: 805
Not sure why there is an assumption that I would vote yes on this hypothetical question.

It's not your vote. It's that you posted such a dumb question in the first place.

This isn't a video game like NBA2K17. There are real-world negative consequences to trading a prime FA that you lured to the city under false representations. Your post doesn't even offer the possibility of those consequences which leads any reader to believe that you don't know the difference between being a video game GM and the constraints placed on a real one.

Granath, it is your opinion it's a dumb question.

Most savvy general managers are thinking 2 to 3 steps ahead of the curve and one could argue that projecting Al's decline with age, the infusion of youth at the center position with next year's deep draft, and Gordon Hayward's injury delaying our true ability to compete a year make for a perfect storm to sell high on Horford.  I'm not one of those people. I think Al has 3 to 4 more years at a very high, fundamentally sound level of competition playing on both sides of the basketball.

I'm just curious, by "sell high", who do you have in mind? (Who are we trading Horford for?)
Sell high means at Horford's peak value, which is probably right now.  I just can't see his value increasing at any point before his contract is up.

I voted no, but if the right trade came along, I think Boston would at least listen.  I have no idea what that trade is though.  I mean it could be a disgruntled star or it could be young players.  It could be Horford's salary as the main piece in a blockbuster.  There are so many possibilities that you just don't know. 
Ohio State 2014/15 National Champions.

Re: Al Horford: Is now a good time to sell high?
« Reply #32 on: October 30, 2017, 02:45:50 PM »

Offline PAOBoston

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2043
  • Tommy Points: 127
Guys, come on. Almost as silly as the would you trade Gordon Hayward thread.

No one is really untradeable but this is kind of silly. Horford has been the team's MVP so far this season and you can argue of last post season as well. He fits this offense perfectly.

Re: Al Horford: Is now a good time to sell high?
« Reply #33 on: October 30, 2017, 02:55:46 PM »

Offline ETNCeltics

  • Gordon Hayward
  • Posts: 613
  • Tommy Points: 68
No one is entertaining the notion of trading Horford, much less Ainge.

Ainge traded AB because he had 1 year left and we couldn't resign him, and immediately, we needed the cap space.

He traded IT because he had the chance to get a younger better player in return, and IT's health was just too risky to max, and IT had made it known he expected a max.

He traded Jae because, well, Jae wasn't that good, he might not have fit with GH taking his spot, and he needed the $ to match salaries.

It's not like Ainge is always looking to jettison good players. He had very good reasons for trading all 3 of the above veterans. But he's going to trade one of the better big men in the Eastern Conference so we can tank? Because the LAL pick might come to fruition next offseason?

This just makes no sense. We couldn't get out of the 1st round of the playoffs without Al. With him, we have a shot against everyone.

Re: Al Horford: Is now a good time to sell high?
« Reply #34 on: October 30, 2017, 02:59:23 PM »

Offline Granath

  • NCE
  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2017
  • Tommy Points: 514
Not sure why there is an assumption that I would vote yes on this hypothetical question.

It's not your vote. It's that you posted such a dumb question in the first place.

This isn't a video game like NBA2K17. There are real-world negative consequences to trading a prime FA that you lured to the city under false representations. Your post doesn't even offer the possibility of those consequences which leads any reader to believe that you don't know the difference between being a video game GM and the constraints placed on a real one.

Granath, it is your opinion it's a dumb question.

Most savvy general managers are thinking 2 to 3 steps ahead of the curve and one could argue that projecting Al's decline with age, the infusion of youth at the center position with next year's deep draft, and Gordon Hayward's injury delaying our true ability to compete a year make for a perfect storm to sell high on Horford.  I'm not one of those people. I think Al has 3 to 4 more years at a very high, fundamentally sound level of competition playing on both sides of the basketball.

It's pretty much general consensus that it's a dumb question.

Again, you've given no consideration to real-world factors and implications of making such a trade. You can list meta data like age and salary but those things aren't the only considerations. Agents, reputation, locker room ramifications and sales/marketing all play a role in any determination. Feel free to enjoy FantasyLand in NBA2K18 but most of us understand that's not the way the real game is played.
Jaylen Brown will be an All Star in the next 5 years.

Re: Al Horford: Is now a good time to sell high?
« Reply #35 on: October 30, 2017, 03:04:23 PM »

Offline Darío SpanishFan

  • Kyrie Irving
  • Posts: 924
  • Tommy Points: 132
After a proposal to trade Hayward, now this. Embarrassing as a fan base.

Re: Al Horford: Is now a good time to sell high?
« Reply #36 on: October 30, 2017, 03:07:09 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16300
  • Tommy Points: 1155
I voted no, but if the right trade came along, I think Boston would at least listen.
This is such a nonsensical statement -- mostly because it's universally true for every team and every player. It's just that in some cases it's rather hard for the "the right trade" to come along.
(Formerly) managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: Al Horford: Is now a good time to sell high?
« Reply #37 on: October 30, 2017, 03:11:58 PM »

Offline Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23291
  • Tommy Points: 985
  • What a Pub Should Be
He's the "linchpin" guy on this team this year.  I sure as heck wouldn't trade that.


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: Al Horford: Is now a good time to sell high?
« Reply #38 on: October 30, 2017, 03:33:52 PM »

Offline crimson_stallion

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5899
  • Tommy Points: 863
No one is entertaining the notion of trading Horford, much less Ainge.

Ainge traded AB because he had 1 year left and we couldn't resign him, and immediately, we needed the cap space.

He traded IT because he had the chance to get a younger better player in return, and IT's health was just too risky to max, and IT had made it known he expected a max.

He traded Jae because, well, Jae wasn't that good, he might not have fit with GH taking his spot, and he needed the $ to match salaries.

It's not like Ainge is always looking to jettison good players. He had very good reasons for trading all 3 of the above veterans. But he's going to trade one of the better big men in the Eastern Conference so we can tank? Because the LAL pick might come to fruition next offseason?

This just makes no sense. We couldn't get out of the 1st round of the playoffs without Al. With him, we have a shot against everyone.

Bingo!

Re: Al Horford: Is now a good time to sell high?
« Reply #39 on: October 30, 2017, 03:42:34 PM »

Offline liam

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7550
  • Tommy Points: 500
I voted no, but if the right trade came along, I think Boston would at least listen.
This is such a nonsensical statement -- mostly because it's universally true for every team and every player. It's just that in some cases it's rather hard for the "the right trade" to come along.

It's nonsense because it's universally true?  :o

Re: Al Horford: Is now a good time to sell high?
« Reply #40 on: October 30, 2017, 03:51:40 PM »

Offline More Banners

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3462
  • Tommy Points: 228
After a proposal to trade Hayward, now this. Embarrassing as a fan base.

It's not the fanbase. Russian operatives sowing dissention.

Re: Al Horford: Is now a good time to sell high?
« Reply #41 on: October 30, 2017, 03:52:11 PM »

Offline SHAQATTACK

  • NCE
  • Tommy Heinsohn
  • *************************
  • Posts: 25352
  • Tommy Points: 1924
another tank thread

Re: Al Horford: Is now a good time to sell high?
« Reply #42 on: October 30, 2017, 03:58:55 PM »

Offline crimson_stallion

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5899
  • Tommy Points: 863
Not sure why there is an assumption that I would vote yes on this hypothetical question.

It's not your vote. It's that you posted such a dumb question in the first place.

This isn't a video game like NBA2K17. There are real-world negative consequences to trading a prime FA that you lured to the city under false representations. Your post doesn't even offer the possibility of those consequences which leads any reader to believe that you don't know the difference between being a video game GM and the constraints placed on a real one.

Granath, it is your opinion it's a dumb question.

Most savvy general managers are thinking 2 to 3 steps ahead of the curve and one could argue that projecting Al's decline with age, the infusion of youth at the center position with next year's deep draft, and Gordon Hayward's injury delaying our true ability to compete a year make for a perfect storm to sell high on Horford.  I'm not one of those people. I think Al has 3 to 4 more years at a very high, fundamentally sound level of competition playing on both sides of the basketball.

It's pretty much general consensus that it's a dumb question.

Again, you've given no consideration to real-world factors and implications of making such a trade. You can list meta data like age and salary but those things aren't the only considerations. Agents, reputation, locker room ramifications and sales/marketing all play a role in any determination. Feel free to enjoy FantasyLand in NBA2K18 but most of us understand that's not the way the real game is played.

Is really not a dumb question.

Kyrie is 25.  Tatum and Brown are showing real signs of breaking out at 19 and 20.  Hayward is 27. Smart and Rozier are around 24 or so.  Horford is 32.  Which of those numbers stands out?

You all talk about "Armchair GMs" and yet what are you all? Exactly that.

You all talk about trades that would never happen...but if somebody made a thread like this 8 months ago suggesting we trade Isaiah for Kyrie the general response would be petty much the same. I can just set the responses now:

- "Danny wouldn't do that, that's not how NBA GMs work in the real world.  He's a 29 PPG scorer. He's the heart of the team.  He just played a day after his sister died.  There's no way Danny would trade him.  Besides why would Cleveland trade Kyrie when they are almost guaranteed to make the finals again? That's a stupid idea. "

But wait...

Fact is you don't know what deals could potentially present themselves,  what if Anthony Davis suddenly becomes available? The you can probably kiss Al goodnight.

The other fact is you don't know what Danny's master plan is.  Does he want to win now? If so then it's unlikely a better player then horford becomes available, so the chance of a trade happening is unlikely. But if his aim is to develop a you team with the aim of contending 2-3 years from now (which is exactly what Wyc is on record saying) then you don't look at the trade in terms of who is better now - you look at it in terms of who is going to be better 2-4 years into the future.  And there are plenty of guys out there who are not as good as horford right now, but will almost certainly be better then him 3 years from now.

Horford so far this year is playing some of the best basketball I've seen him play in the last 3-4 years, but ultimately that probably will average out and his numbers likely will not be sustained at 15/9/5 and will likely settle back down to 14/7/5 with a FG% in the mid 40s - so if Danny WERE to trade him, then (as the OP suggested), now would be the time.  Now when he's putting up peak numbers, looking fresh and nimble, and hasn't just gone through that half of that 82 game grind.

That's not saying that we SHOULD trade him - I'm not saying that at all.  I'm just saying that the OP's question is by no means insane or silly, and I have no doubts in my mind Danny would consider doing so if the right offer came along.

Righr now I would say that Kyrie, Tatum, Hayward and even Brown are all more "untouchable" then Horford is.  This is a team looking firmly towards the future, and Horfords value right now is much stronger then it will be 3-4 years from now.

Re: Al Horford: Is now a good time to sell high?
« Reply #43 on: October 30, 2017, 04:07:51 PM »

Offline Ilikesports17

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7382
  • Tommy Points: 755
Al Horford plays "badly", CelticsBlog: "Al Horford sucks and we are stuck with him for years. Hopefully we could fool some team into eating his contract. Maybe throw in a draft pick?"

Al Horford plays really well, CelticsBlog: "Is now a good time to sell high?"

Big Al cant win lol
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: Is now a good time to sell high?
« Reply #44 on: October 30, 2017, 04:15:51 PM »

Offline Ogaju

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6549
  • Tommy Points: 500
There should be a default option for 'LOL' on all polls