Jump to content
  • Current Donation Goals

    • Raised $390 of $700 target

Strange JSmoove Quote?


Diesel

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 68
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Premium Member

Ex. Nobody is arguing that size is not important. But size without skills mean nothing. First:

Shaq, Duncan are two of the most skilled big men to play the game... that's with or without size.

Moreover, I have had the chance to meet face to face: Charles Barkley & Charles Oakley (both about 6'4"), Alonzo Mourning and JR Reed (both about 6'7" and Reed dwarfs Morning). I hear that Karl Malone is about 6'8". In terms of size, standing reach or whatever irrelevant statistic you would want to use, these guys are short... However, it's their level of skill that makes the difference.

Also the two people who you've harped on: Diop and Pryz..

Well when Diop played for Steve Smith at Oak Hill, it was evident that although not an offensive great player, Diop had that timing to be a great defender and shot blocker on this level. Sure, you can't teach size... But you can't teach shot blocking timing either. Same with Pryz at Minny. In the big ten, he was a 14 ppg, 8 rpg, 4.0 bpg, 50% FG% player. That's more than just being tall... He had a definite skill level that is more than just size.

Like it or not, Jefferson has a definite skillset. He was a dangerous low post player coming into the league out of HS. Remember, he would averaged 42 ppg, 16 rpg, and 9 bpg in HS. Nobody expected him to do that in the pros, but it just shows what type of skillset he had. And your statement that he was in the same class as Horford is silly. First of all, he was near the top of that class and Horford was what ... ranked about 57th? Secondly, playing in the pros accelerates your growth as a player much better than playing in college. So what do you expect? We're all happy that Horf can do thee rebounding and play some level of defense that's better than Zaza. We realize that just like Jefferson, the NBA will grow Horf. I don't know where you're going but no expert who has seen Horf play is disappointed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote:


Ex. Nobody is arguing that size is not important. But size without skills mean nothing. First:

Shaq, Duncan are two of the most skilled big men to play the game... that's with or without size.

Moreover, I have had the chance to meet face to face: Charles Barkley & Charles Oakley (both about 6'4"), Alonzo Mourning and JR Reed (both about 6'7" and Reed dwarfs Morning). I hear that Karl Malone is about 6'8". In terms of size, standing reach or whatever irrelevant statistic you would want to use, these guys are short...
However, it's their level of skill that makes the difference.


But if two guys have roughly equal skills the bigger guy has the edge. malone and Barkley are top 50 players all time in the NBA. Their skills were vastly superior to those of the vast majority of NBA players.

That isn't the case with Horford. Those guys don't belong in any conversation about Horford. It is funny how the hype on Horford is so far out of whack with reality.

In the 2006 draft the Hawks took Shelden who was widely seen as a reach. His rookie year was a disappointment by almost all accounts.

This past year the Hawks took Horford who was widely seen as a good pick. His rookie season has by many accounts has been impressive.

In reality the only real difference between Shelden's rookie year and Horfords season so far has been playing time. Their per 40s are almost identical across the board. And remember that Shelden played with a bad shoulder for much of last season.

Of course those numbers could change as the season wears on but right now i am not seeing Horford do much that Shelden couldn't do.

In terms of impact Horford obviously hasn't impacted the game offensively. On D i don't see how Shelden would have done much worse than Horford against Garnett, Haywood, or Jefferson.

While i didn't see the Minny game Sekou did. You quoted him as saying Horford got owned.

Direct question for you:

What kind of production would we be getting from Shelden right now if we hadn't drafted Horford and were playing Shelden 32 minutes per game?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Quote:


That isn't the case with Horford. Those guys don't belong in any conversation about Horford. It is funny how the hype on Horford is so far out of whack with reality.


So far Horf is having a better rookie year than any big since Shaq and Morning. Or at least that was what was floated by an annoucer a few games back. If you think about it.. that means, Okafor/Howard/Randolph/ and many others... That might not be top 50 NBA, but really we don't know what that means. I say we just take what we get right now and develop it. who knows, He might be top 50...

Quote:


Direct question for you:

What kind of production would we be getting from Shelden right now if we hadn't drafted Horford and were playing Shelden 32 minutes per game?


Right now, we don't know. Shelden came out of the offseason with a confidence problem (very evident when you watch the games). Seeing that you watch stats and not the games, it easy to understand your misgivings about Horford's ability. Horford is a good rebounder... Shelden rebounds well, but he's not as active as Horf. Comparing the two, Shelden has a better face to the basket game (when his confidence is up) and Horford has a much better back to the basket game. In time, with time & the right coaching, it's possible that both may be good.. However, that may not be with this team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...