Leaving the Boston Celtics may have seemed like an easy decision for Al Horford to make last year. The team was going to cut costs, meaning they were likely to cut ties with expensive players like Jrue Holiday and Kristaps Porzingis. That was on top of the likely notion that Jayson Tatum wasn't going to play this season.
Oh, and Golden State could offer more money than Boston could. As strong a legacy as Horford has as a Celtic, it seemed like a pretty common sense decision. Less than a year later, it clearly wasn't, as Horford's track record after leaving the Celtics continues to go as poorly as possible.
It's not like it was his fault, nor was it like the Warriors could have seen what happened coming, but he is one of the NBA's oldest players joining one of the oldest teams, so it comes as no surprise that Golden State was likely doomed from the start. Jimmy Butler's ACL tear and Stephen Curry's balky knee essentially sealed their fate.
What makes this situation a little comical is that it has happened before. Horford's departure from Boston has once again proven to be a major mistake, continuing the trend of his disastrous time as an ex-Celtic.
Horford's first departure was a complete disaster
When Horford left the Celtics for the Philadelphia 76ers, fans were more devastated by that than they were about Kyrie Irving ditching them for the Brooklyn Nets. Making it even worse was how horrible of a fit he was on the Sixers.
Many believed Horford would make Philadelphia's defense so hard to score on and his floor spacing would work well with Ben Simmons and Joel Embiid. Narrator: it went the opposite direction. In fact, it went so badly that Horford got benched, the Sixers had the season from hell, and many believed Horford was washed.
Rubbing salt on the wound for Boston was that Horford's presence was quite literally the difference in the following Eastern Conference Finals, as the Celtics had no big man to check Bam Adebayo, fueling the Heat's victory. Philly basically salary dumped him and had to include a first-rounder just to get him off their payroll (it was actually surprising they only had to give up one)
The following year wasn't much better
Because OKC was in a rebuild, they had no need for Horford. In fact, when no one was noticing, the Thunder actually had to bench Horford because he was making them an average team - interfering with their tanking intentions - so he was on the shelf for a good chunk of the season.
With how bad the Sixers were last season, the common narrative on Horford was that he was cooked, so no one wanted him. That was until Brad Stevens immediately brought him back after he was promoted to his executive role. The rest was history from there, even if the move came with some initial skepticism.
So, to summarise, in his years since departing the Celtics, Horford played a key role in a disastrous season in Philly, then got benched because he was making OKC too good, and now, he had no choice but to see another year of his abilities wasted on a Golden State team that didn't make the playoffs.
Horford's legacy in Boston is good enough that there's a good argument his number should be retired, but just imagine how much stronger it would be if he had stayed in all of the last 10 years.
Add us as a preferred source on Google