crimedog

On top of that, I think this whole "character" thing is getting a little retarded. From what I can tell, Beasley played a prank in high school and boasts about how good he is and that makes him a bad kid and Rose cries when he loses. I'm sure Beasley is immature, as he probably should be. Rose is the one that said he would "hate it" if he got drafted by Miami - I guarantee you that if Beasley said that it would be another example of his immaturity but when Rose says it, he's just selling himself to Chicago.

Quote: Well if they make a good trade using him it may be " The over .500 factory " or the " Smart Shot Factory" or even the " Guard my man Factory" and last but not least how about " The Box my man out Factory". To be fair his shooting efficiency wasn't bad this year even including that atrocious first month (around the same shooting efficiency as LaMarcus Aldridge who most people seem to be shooting their load over), his man defense isn't elite but it is as good as pretty much anyone else on our team's, and no, he doesn't box out well enough but his defensive rebound rates are above average for a PF and its hard to box out when you don't have another player with the ability to contest shots. I know Smith has a lot of flaws but focusing exclusively on weak points is probably a bad way to evaluate a player considering that Shaq would have more "cons" than "pros" if you were to enumerate them in the above matter.

Quote: Quote: Chris Paul and Deron Williams were better college players than Derrick Rose I realize that you are probably using the "eye-test" here, but this is an interesting statement none-the less. By most any statistical analysis this statement doesn't have much support. All were starters as freshman. Deron's ppg were much lower that Rose and Paul's, who are basically a wash (14.9 v. 14.8). Assist numbers are similar for all three, advantage Paul if forced to choose. Rose rebounded at a far superior rate than either of the other two. Paul shot a better percentage from 3. FG%'s are a wash. All have intangibles, and are consummate leaders. Obviously, I disagree strongly with your assessment. I too watched all three play in college, and would place them all in the same upper echelon. Rose will have a similar impact as these two, and any team would be very lucky to have any one of these players. Quote: I like Rose, I see why he is a top 2 pick, but he isn't Paul or Williams in terms court vision or shooting ability This is interesting, too. Court vision seems subjective, so (I think his court vision roughly equals theirs as freshman) ... Paul has a much higher 3% as a freshman, and has the highest FG% as well. Rose and Williams are close in 3%, slight advantage Williams. Rose actually had a higher FG% than Williams, though, and a much much higher FT%. (Paul wins FT% too). So, while you could make the argument that Paul was a superior shooter at the same stage in his development, you cannot argue the same for Williams nearly as successfully. Rose shot more, and made more as a freshman. He was a more aggressive player than Williams as a freshman ... and Williams turned out pretty good, didn't he. I'm not sold on Beasley's leadership or maturity, so gimme Rose. (I'd also take Chris Paul or Deron Williams over Durant ... crazy, I know). Appreciate the analysis. You caught me, I was definitely comparing freshman Rose to the older incarnations of the other two, however that is all you can really do right? In terms of court vision, you are right, its subjective. I just didn't see "dynamic playmaker" when I watched Rose. I saw "dominant athlete with enough vision and unselfishness to take advantage of the mismatches he created" but I didn't see pure point-guarding like I did with the other two. The problem, obviously, is that you can't extrapolate and say that "since the other two improved to X degree statistically, Rose would have too". Rose was one of the most physically developed freshman point guards I've ever seen. As far as Williams FT%, that screams anomoly, but you are right Rose' was better. Anyway, I'll agree with you on the Durant thing. Although I like Beasley better as a prospect because, unlike KD, he has broader shoulders than most middle schoolers.

I think to a large extent "worth" is determined by context. The example I like to use is Mike Redd. Last year his team was terrible and as the most highly compensated player, the responsibility fell on him. You heard choruses of "he's not worth the money, he's not worth the money!!!". However, if Cleveland swings a trade to get him next to Bron' and he becomes the second best player on a 57 win team, he's suddenly going to be "worth it" because its hard to find elite scorers in this league and people recognize your value when you win but your faults when you lose. ... and I don't even like Redd. With regards to Josh, I'm of the opinion that you almost always have to overpay for the elite talents. I think Smith's shotblocking ability and ability to pass and draw fouls at his position will allow him to become one of those elite talents that you overpay for (just as we had to overpay for what JJ provided when we signed him). What that means is that you have to be very astute with the rest of your signings. Going off the Redd example above, Redd isn't good enough to drag a team of average and below average players to the playoffs but maybe he wouldn't have to if his management hadn't committed $16m a year to Bobby Simmons and Dan Gadzuric, see where I'm going here? That philosophy makes me a little wary of committing to Chil/Marv until I know how they fit in around our talent core which is JJ, Smith, (hopefully) Al.

Quote: If I remember correctly, just about everybody I know was all for the firing of Billy Knight because he consistently drafted forwards (except for Acie)... Yet, alot of people on here are for taking Beasley over Rose or Mayo? Hmmm... 7 a) Chris Paul and Deron Williams were better college players than Derrick Rose b) Michael Beasley was a faaaaaaaaaaar better college player than Marvin Williams (he put up numbers as a freshman that simply blew away any other freshman season - including Melo and Durant) c) Paul/Williams were better than Marv, Marv may have had more potential in some peoples eyes but Beasely is better than Rose and its hard to say that Rose has more potential than Beasley and d) Beasley is a better prospect than any of the forwards BK drafted, by a considerable margin. I like Rose, I see why he is a top 2 pick, but he isn't Paul or Williams in terms court vision or shooting ability. He certainly has decent court vision but he isn't a passing prodigy. He is ubelievably quick and has one of the nastiest crossovers I've ever see but Beasley really is the total package.

There are rabid Hawks fans that think Josh Smith should walk this season. There are rabid Hawks fans that think Joe Johnson is a whiner who dogged it for 2/3s of this season and then turned it on when management got a vet sidekick. There are real Hawks fans that though we would have been better off w/ Yi than Al. They are all Hawks fans and they are all probably wrong, but you can't tell someone they aren't a Hawks fan because they have a different opinion about a certain player, even if they are probably wrong.

If Pat Riley doesn't take Beasley, I think its about time to put him in a home. I know Wade likes Mayo, but Kobe wanted to play with Kidd at the expense of Bynum even though it was obvious to everyone that Kidd was washed up as hell and he can't shoot well enough to be a big time threat in the triangle (disregard who good Bynum got). Can't let your players make your personnel decisions because they are even more clueless than GMs. Beasley is going to be a double-double, or near double-double player from the start. He has the same standing reach as Al, he is as strong as any player in the draft, he has great handles and a jumper... he is the perfect PnR partner for DWade.

Quote: Quote: I think that's true and simply hilarious. He's the one I like. Esp. compared to Steven A and bilas etc. The main point is that letting Smith go would be a pr disaster and they can't afford anymore of those. they already re-upped an unpopular coach. Unless a high performing, well known name is acquired, I really don't think this city would take to kindly to the idea of letting a blossoming, 22 year old, possible budding star go. Honestly, I heard a lot of fringe Hawks fans talking about Smith during the playoffs. If you're going to let him walk, surely you'll replace him with a star. That's the only alternative. I believe the anti-Smith people out there are really underestimating the impact of losing this guy could have on an already shaky fan-base. I live in NYC now and the people who follow basketball in my office say things along the lines of, "Josh Smith is the future of that team... [insert comment they read on sports guy's blog about BK picking forwards and Atlanta having no fans]".

Quote: I think it IS conceivable that the pounding that Horford will take guarding players who are bigger than he is (most Centers) COULD affect his offense to some degree by wearing him down throughout the course of the game. How much (or little), I don't know. I agree that if Horford becomes as good as Boozer, he will be able to score against ANYBODY whether they be Centers, PFs or any other position. as far as I am concerned. I must have missed something that someone else said earlier in the thread. You said that if Horford could be as good as Boozer we should move him to PF, I said that Boozer plays against centers so the comparison is moot. Must have been a misunderstanding somewhere.

I put 12 but I'd probably go higher now that I think about the alternatives. The big problem with this poll is that it doesn't say what we'd be getting back if we didn't sign him. I wouldn't let him walk if he was offered more. I'm fine with letting role players walk, Chil helps this team but if he gets signed to a $7.5m offer sheet and the other team doesn't blink when we threaten to resign, I'd let him walk instead of resigning. Smith, wouldn't let him walk.

Quote: Since you are new i should explain something about Diesel. He thinks Marvin is the devil and the majority of his posts (in this case moving Horford to the 4 and Smith to the 3) can be traced to his Marvin hate. Your point, no matter how well stated, will fall on deaf ears. Haha. Thanks for the tip. I'm not the biggest Marv fan myself, I wouldn't mind moving him now for the right peices instead of worrying about paying him later. 'Course, I'd rather have Marv-Smith-Al than Smith-Al-Pryz or something like that.

Quote: I don't think we can make a call on Horf's skillset just yet. He's still maturing as an NBA player. However, he has been effective face to the basket moreso than back to the basket. At Center, he's pushed to do more back to the basket and that has not been his game historically. He doesn't spot the doubles coming. We're hurting him. The video clearly depicts that even though we don't see it quite enough, when he faces up, he does have some of those abilities that you speak of. I know he has those abilities, I'd just like to see him use them more to create mistmatches. As traceman said, too often when he is facing up against a center he holds the ball and looks to pass when he should be driving in for a dunk or getting fouled. He wasn't primarily a face-up scorer in college so I'm not sure where you are getting that from (or if you are saying that at all). I've seen exodus say the same sort of thing that traceman and I just said, he doesn't assert himself nearly enough when he has a quickness mismatch in the high post, he seems to still want to back guys down but he can't always do that in the NBA because he isn't the biggest guy on the court anymore. I agree with you that we can't make a definitive call on his skills just yet but its not like we are forcing him into a role that he can't handle, half of his shots are jumpers... he isn't sitting in the post all day. I think Al will be fine on offense regardless of the position he plays but it isn't going to matter either way until he either gets more aggressive when he faces up or he refines his low post game to the point of consistency (or hopefully both). Like I said, Brand and Boozer have NO problem playing centers on offense, why will Al?

Quote: My point is that IF Horford could be as good as Boozer at PF ( a perennial All Star), then we probably need to figure out a way to play him there. I am well aware that sometimes he might be guarded by Centers if he plays PF. Horford's skills are still developing. His mid range J from the high post is getting better but it is a work in progress and needs to be more consistent. He is also showing the ability to hit a little turnaround J on the baseline. He needs to contine to work on his drop step and his jump hook in the low post but he did execute both moves at times last year. As for facing up and driving by bigger/slower players, I think that will come but putting the ball on the floor in traffic is obviously not within his comfort zone yet. When the opportunity presented itself last year, he seemed to settle for the J or pass the ball rather than force the issue. As his game develops, I think he will improve on that as well. My point is that Boozer plays with Memhet Okur and AK47 in the frontcourt. Boozer always gets defended by a center. If Horford ever becomes as good as Booz on offense, he will be able to do it against centers. Therefore, having any debate about Horford's offensive ability being massively hindered because he has to guard centers is pointless because in many cases there is no fundamental difference on offense b/w a power forward and center. Do you get my point now?

If anything that is good news. If he comes out and flatly says that Dre isn't Jordan and therefore isn't getting something off the hook, he wouldn't do it for Smith either. There was never a question about whether the Sixers would consider Smith, that he said this doesn't mean they are any more or less of a threat than a year ago when people were hypothesizing about this sort of stuff happening. Thanks for the updates by the way.

Quote: Put yourself in Memphis' spot. You just traded Pau Gasol for Capspace and a shot at the top of the NBADRAFT Board. You get screwed in the lottery and end up 5th. That means No Beasley, No Mayo. So...You recoup. You make a deal for Marc Gasol. It cost you 9 million. Now Philly Comes along to drop off their unwanted contract Willie Green so that they can get Smoove. What is Willie Green. He's a Swingman. You have Gay. Why do you want Green? You have Miller. Why do you want Green? Moreover, he's signed for the next 3 years. Sure you want to move up in the draft. But the reports are that you've worked out a deal with Denver to send them Kyle Lowry and #28 for Kleiza and #20. Again, why do you want Green?? The only way that Memphis takes Green is if Philly takes Cardinal. Right, I don't see any compelling reasons for Memphis to do this. Heisley has wanted to sell the team for a minute now, seems like his biggest goal is to not lose millions of dollars a year on a losing team. This, like everything else we've been hearing, is probably one of those, "Philly wants Smith, Atlanta will probably match anything they can offer, if they could offer more we don't know if Atlanta will match, how could they offer more? - boom, its a rumor" situations.

Lots of logic saying we would resign. Ownership could have let AJ/Lue/Lo come off the books and signed Smith w/out worrying about cap space, instead they got Bibby so we could make the playoffs and get extra revenue. Smith is far more important to the team's present and future than Bibby. Why would they sign off on Bibby if they knew it would prevent us from signing Smith? Why would they risk the good faith they got from the fans by winning 3 home games by losing Smith, who was off the charts in the wins? Logically, they wouldn't. Of course logic would dictate that Shelden Williams was a fringe first rounder so...

Quote: Saw that rumor. Oneal's injury history would scare me away. Yeah, JO's injury history and contract situation are big turn-offs. I think it would be fair if the dinos took that pick out. Its a pretty big gamble, it could be the move that pushes them into the top 2 in the conference or it could be a franchise wrecking move that sets them back another couple years. IF O'Neal can come back healthy and play at a fairly efficient 17-9-2.5 level, this move makes them one of the more complete teams in the east as JO's girth and shotblocking are a great complement to Bosh. If JO comes in out of shape and gets injured halfway through the season, they are stuck because his gargantuan contract will prevent them from making any substantive moves. I'd probably do it in the end, but I don't know enough about his health right now to say for sure.

Quote: How do you ever expect Al to progress in his most natural position of PF if all you ever play him at is C? He's a PF. Period. We're playing him at Center out of convenience to satisfy what was a BK mistake. However, He's a PF. Even if all the things you say are true about his skillset. He's still capable of being a 15/10 player at PF. Why are we playing him at Center?? First off, nobody ever said that he'd do better against PFs in the low post? At least I have said that I think he'd do better as a High post PF with a Center that plays low post or a Center who can clear out the low post. Al doesn't have a back to the basket game. IN the low post, he's easy to double team. He has a face up offense. We should be playing him at PF. All that stated though Crime Dog... we need more honesty on the board. We're not playing Al at Center because of his skillset or lack of Athleticism. Be Honest. We're playing him there because we have a log jam at our forward positions and Center was open. He's not a Center. My mentioning Karl Malone was never about weather or not Horf has his skillset. It was about the stupidity of playing a natural PF at Center. Even though Utah could have done that, they rather go out and get the Mark Eaton's or the Isaac Austin's and play them there and allow Malone to stay at PF. I completely agree that if we had a better center on the roster but not a better power forward, we would be playing Al at PF. I also think that in this era (and past ones) Al would be classified as an F/C on any team. Now my question was what are the functional differences Al would enjoy on offense if we played him as a PF instead of a C? I think most people will agree that Al's problem on offense is that he doesn't want to face-up and drive by slower centers from the high post even when he has the chance, I'm not sure why he would want to do it against quicker and more athletic PFs. I figured that you were in the camp that Al would have a size/strength advantage against most PFs so he would be able to overpower them down low and I was just pointing out that if he did have that advantage but still wasn't taking advantage of his quickness against centers, he'd be defended by centers. Now if you think Al would benefit from playing next to a dominant low post scorer who could draw the double, sure, I agree. You aren't going to get a guy like Yao, Duncan, Dwight, or Oden for anyone on our roster though and the other dominant low post scorers in this league are guys that you would probably label as PFs who don't have to play with more dominant low post players to be effective (Boozer, Jefferson, Brand). Mark Eaton and Karl Malone reinforce my point that playing Al at PF would help him on D. Malone wasn't a great shotblocker, Eaton was. Eaton was a non-factor on offense. A coach would never game plan for Mark Eaton, Malone would be guarded by the best man for the job whether it was a center or a PF and Eaton would get points off of doubles to him.

Quote: You are asking the same question. Either you can or cannot win with that combo. You think this is as high as Horfords value is ever going to be? Seriously? The guy got better and better as the year went on and even if we traded him right now we would be extremely limited in the players we could take back unless we started including other players. Sure Josh Smith makes more exciting plays, but Horford is already a better defensive player. Smith is an average at best man defender and constantly gets beaten off the dribble because he tries to block the shot from behind. Horford doesn't have nearly the shot blocking ability that Smith has but he is light years better fundamentally and I'd even say the same thing on offense. He puts himself in a position to succeed, unlike Smith who too often floats around the 3pt line where he shouldn't be. They are both very talented players and we might be better off with them as our 4/5 combo, or we might not. It appears that more people here believe Smith should be the one that we trade. Horford is not a better defender than Smith. He is a better rebounder, which is part of defense, so in a way you are correct, but it is a stone cold fact that our defense was impacted by Smith's presence or absence by huge margins more than anyone else. I'm not sure where this mythology came from that Horford locks his man down but Smith is some sort of liability but the only reason didn't have a layup line for 48 minutes as Bibby's man was allowed to walk to the basket and open lanes was because Smith was an eraser. On offense, neither Horford nor Smith put themselves in position to succeed much. Smith took too many long jumpers and turned it over too much but at the end of the day Horford scored 7 fewer points on 4% better shooting and that small difference was tempered by the fact that Smith took over twice as many FTs a game. On the surface Smith had 1.3 more TOs a game which seems like alot but when you consider he also had more points and twice as many assists, he actually turned it over at a lower rate than Al. Look, I love what Al did but people are getting carried away by saying he is a better offensive and defensive player. Smith has his flaws. He takes jumpers he can't hit, he dribbles through crowds he shouldn't dribble through, he makes passes he shouldn't make, he can drift in man defense (much improved in this regard), and he can lose his cool. The important thing is to see the things that are positive too. He has one of the best rates of assists for PFs, he draws a good amount of fouls (gives him the same scoring efficiency of Lamarcus Aldridge who is worse at every other aspect of the game), he is a solid defensive rebounder, he is the best transition defender in the league, he defends the PnR well for a PF, he is one of the best help defenders in the league. I think ex has it right. You are looking at what Smith is and comparing it to what Horford could be but both of them improved over the course of the year because they are the same age with the same amount of bball experience in their lives.

Quote: Quote: If Al ever wants to be anything on offense he's going to have to become a lot more aggressive facing up. The only way you can get away with not exploiting that mismatch is if you are a true low post beast, and unfortunately for Al, he doesn't have the size (Yao), athleticism (Dwight), or post facility (Duncan) to be an elite offensive player without a very good faceup game (which Yao and Duncan have by the way). You don't limit a guy to an unnatural position simply because you don't believe that he can play a certain way. Al's natural position is PF. Period. We do him a disservice playing him out of position. Period. I say you put him High Post ala Karl Malone and you see what he can do. What are you talking about? The entire problem with Al's offensive game is that he doesn't show enough aggression in the high post so people assume that if he was listed as a power forward he would be able to play against power forwards in the low post. If you put Zydrunas Ilgauskas on Karl Malone, Malone would laugh and then drive right by him. When Z was iso'd against Al, he stood in the high post and waited for someone to pass to. His problem right now is that he isn't exploiting mistmatches, he feels most comfortable on offense in the post but his post game is based mainly on power, not finesse, and in the NBA most 6'10 power post players get defended by centers unless they can make them pay. You brought up Karl Malone, if you watched Karl Malone (and I know you did) you would have seen a player who was far more aggressive and proficient facing up than Al. You would have seen a "power forward" who was often defended by centers. Same thing with Boozer, Jefferson, McHale, and Brand. Al Horford, at this point in his NBA career, does not like to face up and drive by slower players. He has to do that if he wants to be a good offensive player. That has nothing to do with position, it has to do with size, athleticism, and skillset.

Quote: In my opinion the only logical reason to keep them both is if you believe that you can win with an Al Horford / Josh Smith 4-5 combo. The money should be a very small consideration as winning is the bottom line. If you can win with those two guys playing the 4-5 then you keep them. If not, then you decide which one to move. I'd flip that around and say "the only logical reason NOT to keep both of them is if you believe you CAN'T win with an Al Horford/Josh Smith 4-5 combo." Look, you can go back through the history of the NBA and find a few consistencies in title winning teams. The biggest consistency is the teams with the most talent usually win. The second biggest consistency is the team with the best player usually wins. There is no consistency that says that every title team needs to have some standardized notion of "balance" if it is going to win. Yes, having a dominant low post center has led to success for the Spurs (Duncan), Lakers (Shaq), and Rockets (Hakeem) but trading Smith for Chris Kaman doesn't approximate what those cats give you. You trade Horford/Smith if you think you have a more talented team afterwards. Now, in the hypothetical that I somehow HAD to trade one of them for some reason I'd probably trade Horford. I think his value is as high as its ever going to be because he hasn't been playing long enough for his flaws to show (untested as a stopper on D or go-to weapon on offense) and he's on the second year of his rookie deal instead of going into FA. As players, Smith has a much bigger impact on defense and he creates a lot of shots for both himself and his teamates of offense whereas Horford is too tentative to be a creator and was therefore mainly just a finisher this season. Don't get me wrong, Horford could certainly improve rapidly and eclipse Smith in a season or two but its not something that I would take for granted because "he's a winner" or something like that. I think both should stay on this team unless someone comes and blows us away with an offer but neither the numbers nor visual observation tells me that Horford contributes more to this team today and neither tells me that he has any more upside than Smith left to explore.

Quote: We certainly have a dliemna if indeed Horford could be Boozer at PF. That said, I think Smoove is going to be a LOT bigger and stronger than Kirilenko ever was at PF and he might end up being better than Boozer at PF too, just different. Did you watch the playoffs in 07'? Do you know who was guarding Boozer? Yao Ming, the biggest center in the league. Boozer DESTROYED him because he took him out about 15 feet and then went right by him, if Yao didn't want to play that Booz just nailed his open j and trotted back to play his terrible D. THE OPPOSING TEAM ISN'T JUST GOING TO LET HIM POST UP A GUY WHO IS SMALLER THAN HIM BECAUSE WE WANT THEM TO. He has to get a lot facing up and backing down (he doesn't have a great post game right now, that should definitely change though) so that he makes anyone guarding him a liability.

Quote: Quote: This question is relevant mainly to defense, can Horford defend centers? I disagree and circle takes the square. The question is not limited to defense. Let me ask you this. IF Utah had found out that Karl Malone can do a credible Job playing Center... Do you think it would have been in their best interest to move him from PF to C? This is what you guys who say he does OK at Center are saying. You're saying... to hell with Horf ability as a PF, he does OK at C. I say, he might be an allstar PF. We have to play him at his natural position to find out how good he really is. It's a disservice to do otherwise. Karl Malone faced centers all the time. Any team that was stupid enough to guard Malone with a center would end up fouling out a ton because Karl was ultra-aggressive and would go right by a center. He had a very good faceup game. McHale was always being guarded by centers like Kareem or Moses in the finals. Boozer and Al Jefferson get guarded by centers almost exclusively because they don't play next to real post threats. You look at Amare this season and say "wow, look what happened when HE moved to PF". The same [censored] was being said when he switched to C and his points jumped by 5.5 with a 9% increase in FG%. The difference was he was being single covered by a PF as he faced up instead of constantly being doubled. The mechanics of it work like this. Unless you have an even greater post threat next to you, you are going to draw the defensive assignment from the opposing team's best post defender. If we had Biedrins, or Dalembert, or Chandler, or.... the strongest post player is going to guard Al because he is waaaay more likely to try and back them down. Hell, if we had Brad Miller or Zydrunas Ilgauskas you'd have the same result because neither one of those cats play down low any more. If Al ever wants to be anything on offense he's going to have to become a lot more aggressive facing up. The only way you can get away with not exploiting that mismatch is if you are a true low post beast, and unfortunately for Al, he doesn't have the size (Yao), athleticism (Dwight), or post facility (Duncan) to be an elite offensive player without a very good faceup game (which Yao and Duncan have by the way). Look at Moses Malone. When he started out he was smaller than Al, he put on muscle but Al certainly has the frame to. Moses did his damage by being ultra aggressive against centers, he didn't need another guy next to him so he could back down power forward. Elton Brand gets guarded by centers and he's a lot shorter than Al, he pulls them away and drives by them. Al is nothing like Karl Malone when he came into the league. Not to say Al can't gain that aggressiveness but you make it seem like calling a guy "power forward" means that he can only be guarded by power forwards.

Quote: Quote: Nobody "matched" up against Gerald Wallace last year. He owns every player on our team who guards him. Smoove played in less than 20 minutes vs the Bobcats, the one game Wallace played. Although Wallace scored 27pts....Smoove wasn't on the floor. I distinctly remember Smoove having about 3 or 4 blks on Wallace when he was in the game. Marvin was matched up Wallace along with Joe...for the most part. Yeah, GWallace scored 5pts while Smith was in the game in that one.

This question is relevant mainly to defense, can Horford defend centers? So far its pretty uncertain, he was a rookie last season and he wasn't really a lock-down defender when he was matched up against guys smaller than him either - but I think that is mainly because he was just getting used to the speed of the game. I'd like to see what he can do when he comes back, he needs to spend a lot of time in the gym working out his legs and core and then watch a lot of tape from guys like Rodman, Oakley, and Kurt Thomas on how to defend guys who are bigger than you (Horford is a lot closer to C size than those guys though, especially w/ regards to weight and frame).