Shelden Williams vs Al Horford

[bfwolf]

Also, what were these amazing post skills that Horford displayed in college? I watched a few of their games and didn't see any.

[AtLaS]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

That's just more useless jabber that isn't true. Horford is 20x more skilled offensively than Shelden is.

---

That is just stupid, atlas. Prove it or stop using insane hyperbolic phrases. You can't say someone is using useless jabber and then say that. C'mon! He is not 20x better.

---

Sorry for the exaggeration. Obviously he isn't TWENTY times better, but he's definitely MUCH MUCH better offensively than Shelden however you dice it.

[AtLaS]

Quote:

---

I watched a few of their games and

didn't see any.

---

Well then you "didn't see any" of their games.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

Sorry for the exaggeration. Obviously he isn't TWENTY times better, but he's definitely MUCH MUCH better offensively than Shelden however you dice it.

---

...and SW was better both offensively and defensively in terms of substance (statistically). I don't think the minor style improvement found in Horford's offensive "style" was worth a 3rd pick for ANOTHER prototype Pf when the one we have is style-wise better on defense, substance-wise better accross the board, and what we needed was a center (especially one able to play full-time next to JS), a superstar, and/or a Pg.

That's the crux. Is Horford better ENOUGH to justify picking "the player most like SW" in the 2007 draft AND play him OUT OF POSITION. We didn't really vary our skillsets. We didn't get the best talent or player with the most upside. We just got a VERY slightly taller and longer, stylisticly better offensive performer than SW who wasn't stylistically defensively better or offensively and defensively substantively better than SW. That's not a great sell for me. In fact, it's a very bad sell.

W

[AtLaS]

Quote:

---

I don't think the minor style improvement found in Horford's offensive "style" was worth a 3rd pick for ANOTHER prototype Pf when the one we have is style-wise better on defense,

---

You mean the same "stylish" Shelden that can't block a shot to save his life?

Quote:

---

substance-wise better accross the board, and what we needed was a center

---

I guess you still don't understand what it means to be a great NBA prospect. Jameer Nelson is calling and Andre Iguodala just backhanded you.

Quote:

---

Is Horford better ENOUGH to justify picking "the player most like SW" in the 2007 draft AND play him OUT OF POSITION.

---

Who cares if he's "most like" Shelden? If Shelden were taller, longer, more athletic and had a better offensive post game, he'd be a great prospect as well. It's not that hard to understand.

Oh and did you say "play him out of position"? Didn't you just say you thought Shelden could play center because of his strength? If you don't think Horford's skill advantage, height and length advantage, and athleticism don't make up for those "6 extra reps," you are insane. Frankly if you think Shelden can play center and Horford cannot than you are a hypocrite.

[BusBoyIsBack]

Only Hawks fans would be pessimistic/delussional/ridiculous enough to make a serious argument that Shelden Williams is as good or better than Al Horford as an NBA prospect.

My goodness this is ridiculous.

Shelden Williams was a REACH as the fifth pick in an absolutely TERRIBLE draft.

Al Horford was considered the cosensus 3rd best prospect in a loaded draft.

How could this be?

Al Horford didn't bench more than Shelden so he can't be stronger.

Al Horford didn't score more points per game than Shelden or block more shots so he can't be a better defender.

So how could this be?

Or maybe, just maybe, those numbers are blown way out of proportion.

Maybe just maybe NBA scouts were looking at Horford's combination of power and finesse. Maybe they were looking at his fluidity in the way he runs the court and the way he moves in the post. Maybe they saw his broad shoulders and saw a young guy with an NBA-ready body with potential to add even more strength. Maybe they were looking at his ability to hit the 15-17 foot jumper. Maybe they were looking at his high basketball IQ and the way he understands his position as well as the positions around him. The way he knows when to score and when to kick it out. The way he was an anchor to a team that is in NCAA history.

But nah none of those things mean as much as PPG and Bench reps do they?

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I don't think the minor style improvement found in Horford's offensive "style" was worth a 3rd pick for ANOTHER prototype Pf when the one we have is style-wise better on defense,

---

You mean the same "stylish" Shelden that can't block a shot to save his life?

---

Certainly "buyer beware" but SW was a very good college shot blocker. I often see those who are very good college shot blockers not become very good ones in the pros. I don't often see merely (in this case) good ones in college become very good ones in the pros. It's easy to step down when stepping up to the pros. MUCH harder to step up in competition. play OUT OF POSITION, AND step up in production.

Quote:

---

substance-wise better accross the board, and what we needed was a center

---

I guess you still don't understand what it means to be a great NBA prospect. Jameer Nelson is calling and Andre Iguodala just backhanded you.

---

[bfwolf]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I watched a few of their games and

didn't see any.

---

Well then you "didn't see any" of their games.

---

Hilarious.

Every draft preview I read about Horford calls his offensive game "developing" or something like that. He never did anything in college that I saw which suggests he has amazing offensive potential. Now, you can have a different read on the situation and that's fine. This is America. But no need to suggest that I didn't really get a look at Horford or don't know what I'm talking about. It's not like we're talking about a sure-thing like Durant here...time will tell. The only thing I saw Horford do in college which really made me stop and take notice is handle the rock very well in the open court. Unfortunately, this is an exceptionally unuseful skill for somebody who will be asked to play PF/C in the NBA.

By the way, are you going on record saying that Horford will have better performance than Shelden this year?

[AtLaS]

Quote:

---

Hilarious.

Every draft preview I read about Horford calls his offensive game "developing" or something like that.

---

I'm guessing you're one of the Yi apologists? If you think Horford's offense is developing, there isn't a word to describe Yi's. If you're a Conley advocate, I'll understand your point and I was just as high on him.

Quote:

---

He never did anything in college that I saw which suggests he has amazing offensive potential. Now, you can have a different read on the situation and that's fine. This is America. But no need to suggest that I didn't really get a look at Horford or don't know what I'm talking about. It's not like we're talking about a sure-thing like Durant here...time will tell. The only thing I saw Horford do in college which really made me stop and take notice is handle the rock very well in the open court. Unfortunately, this is an exceptionally unuseful skill for somebody who will be asked to play PF/C in the NBA.

---

That's fine, you don't think Horford is a great prospect and I do, we'll see what happens.

Quote:

---

By the way, are you going on record saying that Horford will have better performance than Shelden this year?

---

I never said that. I've always thought Shelden was much better than he's given credit for on this board, but he was just too far down the depth chart to show it. Shelden was a horrible pick for the fact that he was drafted to bench Marvin or Smith (then our 2 best prospects), or be a bench player himself. Regardless, given that knowledge it was a bad decision, unless he had star potential like Durant or such.

I think if Shelden goes to a team where he can be the primary PF, he'll be very successful. Houston would be the perfect place for him, I think he could average a double double.

[Buzzard]

Quote:

---

You really have to ask why Noah played PF

---

You may think this is complicated but I don't. Horford was a much better center than Noah. Unless of course you think Donovan got it wrong and you have it right.

And you are the same Diesel that posted Smoove has the skills to be a superstar at SF and will never be even a good PF? Last year was his breakout year and he did it at PF. Furthermore, its been over three years since you stated what his skill set was and he still cannot take anyone off the dribble or create space for his own shot....

You need to give the I know where this guy should play thing a rest. At least until they start playing for us and you really do know...

[AtLaS]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

You really have to ask why Noah played PF

---

You may think this is complicated but I don't. Horford was a much better center than Noah. Unless of course you think Donovan got it wrong and you have it right.

And you are the same Diesel that posted Smoove has the skills to be a superstar at SF and will never be even a good PF? Last year was his breakout year and he did it at PF. Furthermore, its been over three years since you stated what his skill set was and he still cannot take anyone off the dribble or create space for his own shot....

You need to give the I know where this guy should play thing a rest. At least until they start playing for us and you really do know...

---

I agree with most of what you said, but the bold is wrong. He constantly took the ball to the rack last year, and did it a few times a game. That was the area in which he showed the most improvement.

[Buzzard]

Quote:

---

He constantly took the ball to the rack last year, and did it a few times a game. That was the area in which he showed the most improvement.

---

He did improve a lot last year and this is a good point.

[bfwolf]

Quote:

---

I'm guessing you're one of the Yi apologists? If you think Horford's offense is developing, there isn't a word to describe Yi's. If you're a Conley advocate, I'll understand your point and I was just as high on him.

---

Nope, I didn't want any of them. My position since we got the 3rd pick was that this draft was a failure unless we traded it or one of our forwards for a center. I do like Conley, but just didn't think he was significantly better than Law who we could get at #11.

Quote:

---

I never said that. I've always thought Shelden was much better than he's given credit for on this board, but he was just too far down the depth chart to show it. Shelden was a horrible pick for the fact that he was drafted to bench Marvin or Smith (then our 2 best prospects), or be a bench player himself. Regardless, given that knowledge it was a bad decision, unless he had star potential like Durant or such.

I think if Shelden goes to a team where he can be the primary PF, he'll be very successful. Houston would be the perfect place for him, I think he could average a double double.

---

I'm curious to know what your position is on the OP's question. Who will have a better year this year, Horford or SW? I'm not trying to use this as a club to beat you with--like you said, you think Shelden is OK so you're not saying Horford stinks if you say Shelden will have a better year.

I don't think either Horford or Shelden stinks either, but I also think both of them are just "OK" and not worthy of the positions they were drafted at. But I'm going on record saying that Shelden will have a better year than Horford based on his add'l year of NBA experience.

[AtLaS]

Quote:

---

Nope, I didn't want any of them. My position since we got the 3rd pick was that this draft was a failure unless we traded it or one of our forwards for a center. I do like Conley, but just didn't think he was significantly better than Law who we could get at #11.

---

So since obviously the Amare trade failed, and we inquired about Gasol and Memphis was asking too much, who would you have drafted at #3 since you think the difference between Conley/Law wasn't that great? It would have to be Yi or Horford. Given that information, I don't see how you can be against the Horford pick.

Quote:

---

I'm curious to know what your position is on the OP's question. Who will have a better year this year, Horford or SW?

---

Like you said Shelden has 1 year of NBA experience. Shelden will also turn 24 before the season starts, and Horford just turned 21 about 3 weeks ago. Even so, barring injuries, I'll say Horford will have better per40 numbers since we don't know how many minutes they will play.

[leftwich]

Quote:

---

I don't think Horford suffers physical disadvantages to the extent of any of those guys, and that's 3 in just the last 5 years.

---

At the center position he might. He didn't demonstrate the talent in college to suggest he would over come this level of liability against NBA centers. You don't want your 3rd overall pick center playing "up" 82 games out of 82 games unless he's uber talented and a freak. I never saw remotely THAT level from Horford at UF.

Quote:

---

A lot of people are forgetting that Al Horford is a better basketball player than SW.

---

Who didn't produce hardly as well in college. Hmmm?

Quote:

---

Unlike Sheldon, Horford's got a midrange game that will force guys like Zydrunas Ilgauskus to guard him out to 18 feet, opening things up for JJ, Smoove, and (hopefully) Marvin to slash to the basket.

---

I really haven't seen anything close to that range on Horford. Sorry. Your Pf, maybe, but do you really want to see your center 18' away from the basket anyhow, when JS is your Pf. Talk about a fast break for the other team. Your center shooting 18' bombs while only JS to rebound. Bad idea.

W

---

I'm confident you haven't watched Horford play. Horford has midrange shooting ability, and if he shoots a midrange jumper, then he's in better position to defend the fast break than if he takes a shot from the low block, so terrible logic there. You're also forgetting that if he takes a midrange jumper then it will draw the other team's center out of the paint as well, and Marvin, JS, and Chills are all above average offensive rebounders. And the fact that you called an 18 footer "a bomb" is pretty funny, because that's a step outside of the free throw line.

Shelden Williams did produce better in college as Duke's lone paint presence. Horford, Noah, and Richard shared low post stats. I can't understand how you can't see the difference between how Al Horford can move, run, and lead a fast break and how Shelden is a one dimensional low-post stiff. Shelden's not a bad player, but he doesn't have near the potential of Horford and SW has no potential to be more than a role player.

[BusBoyIsBack]

People are down on Horford because he has been labeled "NBA-ready" and somehow that label has turned into a negative around here.

And more than likely it's because we took Shelden Williams who was labeled "NBA ready" last year and dissapointed.

So people are trying to make the comparison.

In reality there is no comparison in the situation in college or potential in the pros of these two players.

Horford is a significantly better pro prospect.

There isn't one part of Shelden's game that Horford can't acquire.

Although the reverse is certainly not true.

Shelden will never be as fluid of an athlete as Horford or as long.

We're talking about a guy in Horford who has nearly HALF A FOOT in extension over Shelden.

We're talking about the same Shelden Williams who was one of the slowest players at the NBA draft combine in the last 7 years.

We're talking about the same Shelden Williams who although has a lot of skill in the post, is VERY ROBOTIC in nature.

I'll take Shelden over Zaza, but the fact of the matter is, he would be average at best as a starter and def not championship caliber material.

Landing Shelden was the misfortune of the age limit and everyone staying out of school.

Landing Al Horford was the fortune of people coming out of school.

COMPLETELY different situations.

Al Horford is in the mold of a Al Jefferson.

Shelden Williams is in the mold of a Brendan Haywood.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

Al Horford is in the mold of a Al Jefferson.

Shelden Williams is in the mold of a Brendan Haywood.

---

Al Jefferson was drafted out of HS because he dominated (42 PPG average if I remember correctly) HS. Horford didn't dominate anywhere, EVER. Where on earth do you get such a comparison although both are Pfs with Jefferson still being bigger than Horford.

W

[killa3312]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Al Horford is in the mold of a Al Jefferson.

Shelden Williams is in the mold of a Brendan Haywood.

---

Al Jefferson was drafted out of HS because he dominated (42 PPG average if I remember correctly) HS. Horford didn't dominate anywhere, EVER. Where on earth do you get such a comparison although both are Pfs with Jefferson still being bigger than Horford.

W

---

Oden put up 21 and 12 his senior year of high school... he was hardly dominant stat wise, either. Jefferson played absolutely horrible Mississippi competition that skewed his stats. He's obviously talented, but let's no blow his stats out of proportion.

[BusBoyIsBack]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Al Horford is in the mold of a Al Jefferson.

Shelden Williams is in the mold of a Brendan Haywood.

---

Al Jefferson was drafted out of HS because he dominated (42 PPG average if I remember correctly) HS. Horford didn't dominate anywhere, EVER. Where on earth do you get such a comparison although both are Pfs with Jefferson still being bigger than Horford.

W

---

Lmao @ using high school stats in Mississipi at that

[Guest Walter]