Premium Member Diesel Posted July 10, 2007 Premium Member Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 In the Horford standup questionaire, a lot of people said that we desparately needed rebounding so we drafted Horford. THAT'S NOT TRUE.. Rebounding wise, we were ranked 15th in differential. Our differential last year was -0.4. That means that on the average we almost broke even rebounding. More specifically we made 40.1 rpg and gave up 40.5 rpg. To keep things into even more perspective: San Antonio = 40.7 rpg. Orlando = 40.7 rpg. Denver = 43.4 rpg. Detroit 40.5 rpg Miami = 40.8 rpg. Houston = 43.3 rpg. These teams have some of the best Bigs in the league and we're right there with them. So as a team, rebounding wasn't a major problem.. At least not so much that we had to rush out and spend #3 overall on a guy whoose claim to fame is rebounding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BusBoyIsBack Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 Yeah because the only thing Al Horford can do is rebound. That's more the scouting report on the guy deemed a ROLE PLAYER Shelden Williams. Al Horford is a guy who will contribute on both ends of the basketball court. And there is more than rebounding on defense. It's called playing defense to create a rebounding opportunity. Currently we have no starting caliber post player who can defend the 5. Our best chance at a 5 before Horford was Josh Smith and clearly that's not an option at this point San Antonio didn't lead the league in rebounding but they led the league in PPG Against. In fact look at all the teams in the top of the league in PPG against. There is no coincidence those are all playoff teams including the two championship representatives in the top 5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Diesel Posted July 10, 2007 Author Premium Member Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 Quote: Yeah because the only thing Al Horford can do is rebound. Your attempt at Sarcasm is really truth. You see busy... if you want to talk about (IN CONCRETE TERMS) what Al can do, it will leave you looking for excuses and pointing blame. When Brand/Boozer/Okafor/Mourning or whoever else came out, there were no excuses for their play because there was nothing to excuse... However, if you want this conversation.... 1. Explain 13 ppg. 2. Explain: Oden 25 pts, Morris 18 pts, D. Arther (Kansas 19 pts), JWright 21 pts, Thornton 28 pts, Courtney Lee (W. Kentucky) 16 pts, Darian Townes (Arkansas) 18 pts (Avg = 8 ppg), Shan Foster (Vanderbilt) 24 pts (Avg = 15). You can try to divert attention to something else... But I dare you to try to explain that. Just about everybody Horford faced had a career day!!! Damn??!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesheedera Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 Can you explain all the career days guys had on the landlord in college? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GHook4 Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 Diesel, you must think it's really weird that the consensus #1 pick only averaged 15 PPG. Stats are of secondary importance when predicting a player's success in the NBA. You have to look at what elements of their games will translate from college to the pros. My example is Shelden Williams. He was dominant in college because his brute strength alone was enough to position himself in the paint to score and rebound against college competition. He had incredible stats, but when he came into the NBA the flaws in his game (lack of athleticism, no low post game, bad footwork, etc.) were exposed, and he wasn't able to get by on brute strength anymore. Horford is the opposite of Shelden in many ways. Horford is explosively athletic, runs the floor well (he brought the ball down the court for Florida several times a game), he handles the ball well and has good hands, his post game (while still developing) has the potential to be devastating, he doesn't only finish well after contact but I read a scouting report (on Draftexpress I think) that he almost looks for contact, which makes him much more of a banger than Shelden, he passes well, he can step out and hit the 15-20 foot jumper, he's already 6'10 250 and has the frame (and the drive) to add more muscle, the list goes on. I could get into the whole thing about Florida having 5 options on offense, Horford wasn't the #1 option on offense like Shelden, etc. etc. but it's all been said before and apparently it doesn't sink in with Diesel, Walter, and some other posters. Horford will be the better all around player than Yi not only this season but their entire careers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachx Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 Quote: In the Horford standup questionaire, a lot of people said that we desparately needed rebounding so we drafted Horford. THAT'S NOT TRUE.. Rebounding wise, we were ranked 15th in differential. Our differential last year was -0.4. That means that on the average we almost broke even rebounding. More specifically we made 40.1 rpg and gave up 40.5 rpg. To keep things into even more perspective: San Antonio = 40.7 rpg. Orlando = 40.7 rpg. Denver = 43.4 rpg. Detroit 40.5 rpg Miami = 40.8 rpg. Houston = 43.3 rpg. These teams have some of the best Bigs in the league and we're right there with them. So as a team, rebounding wasn't a major problem.. At least not so much that we had to rush out and spend #3 overall on a guy whoose claim to fame is rebounding. As a team, rebounding was not a problem b/c our guards and wings were asked to crash the board to make up for our pathetic rebounding from the center position. A good rebounding center would allow our wings to run the floor and play at a quicker tempo in transition which we all want to see. Deisel how did our rebounding rank from the center position ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Diesel Posted July 10, 2007 Author Premium Member Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 If Landlord was the subject Maybe... But let's stick to the subject! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Diesel Posted July 10, 2007 Author Premium Member Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 NObody picked Oden with the purpose for picking him being a dominant scorer??? If you think so, find it. However, many people said we picked a 13 ppg college player because we felt that he will somehow emerge into a 18 ppg player in the NBA post? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Diesel Posted July 10, 2007 Author Premium Member Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 This is eye opening... from 82games.com I'm taking the top 3 Center position players. The percentage of Center position minutes they played.. then their rebounds per 48... This is interesting and proves a point! Zaza..... 48%.......11.7 rpfe Wright....26%.......10.0 rpfe Shelden...14%.......14.8 rpfe. Miami Shaq......28%........12.6 rpfe. Mourning..38%........10.7 rpfe. Doleac....15%........10.6 rpfe. Dallas Damp.......48%........14.2 rpfe. Diop.......37%........14.2 rpfe. Dirk.......9%..........12.9 rpfe. Chicago Wallace......68%.......14.6 rpfe. Allen........6%.........7.0 rpfe. Sweetney.....7%........14.4 rpfe. I think you can figure out what it really says! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GHook4 Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 Quote: NObody picked Oden with the purpose for picking him being a dominant scorer??? If you think so, find it. However, many people said we picked a 13 ppg college player because we felt that he will somehow emerge into a 18 ppg player in the NBA post? He was picked #1 overall and he isn't expected be a dominant scorer? Are you joking? People in Portland view him as a savior. While it may not be the case, there are many predictions that in a few seasons Oden will average 20+ points a game. I don't know what makes you think we picked Horford to be a dominant scorer. Like Sekou said in one of his blogs, Shelden turned out to be much more of a finesse player than we all imagined. So the need for an athletic banger down low who can rebound and block shots is still a huge need for the Hawks. Horford fits that bill perfectly. Now that you mention it though, I think Horford can score between 15-20 points a game with some experience. In an interview with the AJC Horford said he's going to surprise people at how good he is on offense. This has been said a million times, but Florida always had 5 options on offense, so Horford's stats were not padded like a Yi Jianlian or a Shelden Williams, both players who had the luxury of being the #1 option on offense at all times. I agree with Horford, a lot of people are going to be surprised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djcorley Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 Check the defensive rebounding stats...ZaZa, Chillz and Smoove are all better offensive rebounder than defensive...Defensive rebounding is where we struggled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BossTweed Posted July 11, 2007 Report Share Posted July 11, 2007 Quote: This is eye opening... from 82games.com . . . I think you can figure out what it really says! Diesel, you should look for some stats that show the percentage of rebounds they get. The Hawks shoot a bad percentage, and a lot of those rebounds are offensive (Zaza gets about 2 off his own misses almost every game). I know there is some sort of "rebound rate" stat, but I don't know what it shows. There is also one that shows the percentage of the rebounds you get while you are in the game or something. I don't know more, but I do know that the Hawks aren't one of the top rebounding teams in the league at the center position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BusBoyIsBack Posted July 11, 2007 Report Share Posted July 11, 2007 Exhibit A http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/statistics?s...=pg&pos=all (Notice where our big man ranks in overall rebounding) Exhibit B http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/statistics?s...=pg&pos=all (Notice where our big man ranks in overall defensive rebounding) 30th in rebounding 50th in defensive rebounding Yeah I'd say that's a pretty big problem We're in good shape with our 3/4 man in Josh Smith who ranked 14th and 15th respectively in the entire league in those categories. And that is probably what makes our team rebounding stats look average. But 30th and 50th from the Center position is not average. That is piss poor. So yes WE DID need rebounding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Diesel Posted July 11, 2007 Author Premium Member Report Share Posted July 11, 2007 Uhm... Gord... You have to look at rebounding as a Normalized unit and not a individual unit because we don't have a consistent rotation for bigs. When you used normalized value, we're 18, 33... That's not so bad and more reflective of our 15 rebounding as a team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BusBoyIsBack Posted July 11, 2007 Report Share Posted July 11, 2007 Quote: Uhm... Gord... You have to look at rebounding as a Normalized unit and not a individual unit because we don't have a consistent rotation for bigs. When you used normalized value, we're 18, 33... That's not so bad and more reflective of our 15 rebounding as a team. Your "normalized unit" theory is garbage trying to use Smoove's rebounding stats to pad our overall total Point is we don't have a starting Center. Zaza is the guy who gets the overwhelming majority of minutes at C and the overwhelming majority of big men in the league outrebounded him He even got out rebounded by SWINGMEN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GHook4 Posted July 11, 2007 Report Share Posted July 11, 2007 Quote: Uhm... Gord... You have to look at rebounding as a Normalized unit and not a individual unit because we don't have a consistent rotation for bigs. When you used normalized value, we're 18, 33... That's not so bad and more reflective of our 15 rebounding as a team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Diesel Posted July 11, 2007 Author Premium Member Report Share Posted July 11, 2007 Quote: Your "normalized unit" theory is garbage trying to use Smoove's rebounding stats to pad our overall total Huh?? Smoove was ranked 40 something under normalized conditions?? What are you talking about??? Again, the point is that we use a rotation of centers... so to compare their rpg with players who play Center full time is useless. Let me make the example so that you can understand: At your job, you can scrub 5 bathroom floors in a night (8 hours). Another 3 man crew works that same 8 hour shift and they scrub 17 bathroom floors together. Are you the best floor scrubber? There's no way to know unless you can normalize the amount of work and gather it in the same time frame for each person. You're doing that very same thing in your argument. You are not respecting the fact that we have a rotation of centers and you're comparing individual players rpg with guys who play that position for their team solely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BusBoyIsBack Posted July 11, 2007 Report Share Posted July 11, 2007 The fact that we have to have Center by committee doesn't make us look good. Neither does the PG by committee Zaza Pachulia sucks at D any way you slice it. That's why we NEEDED a more stable position. THAT is why Horford is a need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now