Horford a successful Center?

[exodus]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Because he had played the 3 a lot the previous 3 years. Duh.

So because Smoove was not this good at the 3 when he was 19, 20... Playing next to Al.. You say he's more suited for the 4... This even after everybody here say that Smoove is starting to mature?

Dude, players mature and players mature at positions.

You took an immature Smoove and compared him to a maturing Smoove and state that it has something to do with him being better at the position of 4. I say when you watch Smoove, it doesn't take a brain surgeon to see that he doesn't do PF things. He doesn't want to be a PF. You can't make him be a PF if he doesn't want to be one. He won't be effective.

LOL @ this coming from you.

Smith can't shoot a lick from the perimeter, he can't beat 3s off the dribble, he can't stay in front of them defensively and you say HE CAN'T DO PF THINGS?!

he posted up this past season regularly (everyone can see this but you) and had some success with it which is why he shot 46% in spite of the fact his jumper was a train wreck. He is quick enough to beat 4s off the dribble. He also has a much larger defensive impact at the 4 which is why the Hawks gave up 7 ppg fewer with Smith in the game this past season.

I suppose Smith just magically matured during the 06-07 season when Marvin came back from his injury and Smith moved to the 4. Sure

[A-town Hawks]

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.

The same goes for Josh Smith, Josh is a boderline all-star at he PF position and is just 22 with a whole lot more to improve on. He has proven to us already that he cannot handle playing at the three offensively or defensively, so why move him there? Just to see if Horford would become the borderline allstar at the 4 that Josh currently is? This is a good problem to have.

I say we keep Al where he is because he has shown that he can handle the Center position and can function at high level there. Lets wait to see if he can become the allstar where all hoping he can becoming right where he is. All Horford needs to defend these opposing Centers to add some more bulk to his pretty good frame and more leg/core work. Thats it.

Dont waste the talent of a future star (josh), just to see if another potential star (Al) would have a greater chance of stardom in a different position. Especially if that potential star (Al) shows no signs of not reaching his potential in the spot he's currently in.

[ATLBob]

Quote:

---

This enables us to field an extremely tall and fast lineup if we pick up a center.

That lineup wouldn't be very scary because there would be no offensive spacing, allowing opposing teams to load the box, play help defense, and double JJ.

As Smoove's only scoring option would be slashing and attacking the basket, we would see his TOs increase dramatically.

Additionally, making him defend the 3 puts him in space, allowing quicker players to blow past him, putting Horford and this mystery C in a tough defensive position, while taking away Smith's ability to get as many backside blocks in the paint. Opposing teams would put a shooter in at the 3 and force Smith to guard him, thus keeping him out of the paint.

Josh Smith's strengths are in the paint, not on the perimeter.

[Swish]

Quote:

---

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.

The same goes for Josh Smith, Josh is a boderline all-star at he PF position and is just 22 with a whole lot more to improve on. He has proven to us already that he cannot handle playing at the three offensively or defensively, so why move him there? Just to see if Horford would become the borderline allstar at the 4 that Josh currently is? This is a good problem to have.

I say we keep Al where he is because he has shown that he can handle the Center position and can function at high level there. Lets wait to see if he can become the allstar where all hoping he can becoming right where he is. All Horford needs to defend these opposing Centers to add some more bulk to his pretty good frame and more leg/core work. Thats it.

Dont waste the talent of a future star (josh), just to see if another potential star (Al) would have a greater chance of stardom in a different position. Especially if that potential star (Al) shows no signs of not reaching his potential in the spot he's currently in.

Well spoken!

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

Everybody who consistently watches the Hawks knows that playing Smith at the 3 limits his effectiveness on both ends of the court.

Everybody who consistently watches the Hawks knows that we have no inside offense. Our offense is limited to three point shots.

Why is that? Maybe it is because Horf is high post and Smoove is on the perimeter.. and they are supposed to be our 5 and 4.

The problem Northcyde is that Smoove doesn't want to be an inside post player. You can't have a good PF if he doesn't play inside. Smoove is already playing 3.. we just call him 4.

Moreover, defensively.. I have always said that we can play a zone defense most of the time and allow Smoove to Rover. Similar to what Jordan did instinctively. Smoove is not a good on ball defender weather it's at the 4 or th 3. The only difference is at the 3, he's farther away from the basket and people can see Smoove getting beat off the dribble. Still, you get around Smoove's defensive shortcomings by working to his strengths. Let him rover in a Triangle and 2 or a Diamond and one defensive scheme. Sure there are times he will play Man, but look at how often we play man now? Not often. You point is moot.

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

Skillset matters more than maturity when it comes to defining positions. Come on D, you know that.

I love that you are constantly looking for ways to improve our shooting (seriously).

Putting Smoove at the 3 makes us a horrible shooting team.

The true answer is who can we get at C. There are many Centers who can shoot.

See you're making an argument that moving Smoove to Sf and bringing in a C will be worst than what we have now...

Let's talk skillset...

Marvin shot 10 three point shots last season and he hit 1.

How exactly is that making our shooting less horrible??

The things that Smoove does now offensively doesn't really change if we play him at 3. He's playing three regardless of what we call him.

My contention is let's get Horf at the 4 position (for real) and bring in a Center to give us an inside presence.

[ATLBob]

Actually, we are most effective when Smoove catches on the block and uses his athleticism to get to the rim. That's called interior offense.

If Smoove wants to win (and I think that he does) he will accept this.

[ATLBob]

Quote:

---

See you're making an argument that moving Smoove to Sf and bringing in a C will be worst than what we have now...

Precisely.

Quote:

---

Marvin shot 10 three point shots last season and he hit 1.

How exactly is that making our shooting less horrible??

Marvin has developed a solid mid-range jumper. I am hoping that he can extend his range. If he cannot, however, then it would most likely be in our best interest to replace him with a better shooter, not a worse one. I still think that Marvin can actually do this. You do not. He may not. Ever.

Quote:

---

My contention is let's get Horf at the 4 position (for real) and bring in a Center to give us an inside presence.

That's fine, but Smith would become expendable. We cannot afford an $11 million backup, and he should not start at 3.

[MoonKnight]

"Marvin shot 10 three point shots last season and he hit 1.

How exactly is that making our shooting less horrible?"

Nicely done. We need to worry about scoring in transition and in the paint moreso than taking deep jumpers for spacing needs Starting Al at the 4 and Smoove at the 3 helps in this regard. The Hawk teams during the Fratello gravy days rarely shot threes but got their scoring done in transition and in the post. Yes, Al worked very hard manning the 5 spot and could be an above average center. I would prefer him to be an elite 4.

[crimedog]

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.

[exodus]

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).

Exactly

[Traceman]

Their games are VERY similar and in fact, I seem to recall Smoove saying he wanted to play an all-around game like Kirilenko. Before Boozer, Kirilenko played PF and averaged a Smoove-like 17 ppg, 8 rbg, 3 apg, 3 bpg and 2 spg. Then Boozer came along and Kirilenko's effectiveness slipped dramtically.

If Horford can become Boozer at the 4, it might not be all bad but I wouldn't want to pay Smoove $12M a season for the 11 ppg, 5 rbg, 4 apg, 1.5 bpg, 1.2 spg that Kirilenko averaged last year.

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.

For now, my vote is start them like we start them now and let matchups throughout the game dictate how and where play them. The time MAY come when one of them needs to be traded but I don't think that time is now. Let them grow together and see what happens.

[BusBoyIsBack]

Quote:

---

If you just took the two bolded statements, it's evident that the conclusion has no premise. IF Smith played the three "Hardly at all".. .how do you know he's better suited for the 4.

Moreover, under what circumstances this season did Smoove play the 3?

Obviously, it wasn't under normal circumstances.

If there was ever a case of agenda manning... This is it agenda man!!!

You don't have to look at numbers.

It's common sense.

Josh Smith at the 3 means he's more susceptible to being taken off the dribble and it means he's further away from the basket which takes him away from patrolling the paint by contesting/blocking shots and rebunding.

This is the reason I wanted to see him move there in the first place. By far a Smoove/Horford 4/5 is the best that we could do on either side of the ball.

[crimedog]

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.

[A-town Hawks]

Quote:

---

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.

AGREED

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

If you just took the two bolded statements, it's evident that the conclusion has no premise. IF Smith played the three "Hardly at all".. .how do you know he's better suited for the 4.

Moreover, under what circumstances this season did Smoove play the 3?

Obviously, it wasn't under normal circumstances.

If there was ever a case of agenda manning... This is it agenda man!!!

You don't have to look at numbers.

It's common sense.

Josh Smith at the 3 means he's more susceptible to being taken off the dribble and it means he's further away from the basket which takes him away from patrolling the paint by contesting/blocking shots and rebunding.

This is the reason I wanted to see him move there in the first place. By far a Smoove/Horford 4/5 is the best that we could do on either side of the ball.

I will say this once again.

We don't play a man to man defense now. We use it part of the time.

Why is every argument against Smoove playing 3, talking about what happens in a man to man situation?? That's BS.

I envision we can still play Zone with Smoove being rover.

Also...

IF we bring in a defensive Center, we strengthen our defense beyond measure... because instead of having just all playing back, we'd have two guys playing back and Smoove to add double teams.

[Diesel]

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.

[A-town Hawks]

Diesel, Its not only defensive problems that having Smoove at the SF would bring. Its probably moreso offensively that we would be tampering with his potential in this league.

Smoove is NOT a shooter, and I know you brought up the fact that our current SF Marvin was just 1-10 on 3pt shooting this past season, and he's certainly not a great shooter either. But with that said do you notice how many people on this board has had enough of him? and how many people are only willing to give him 1 more year to improve on this or else its the boot? Having Smith at the SF would be 10x WORSE! as he isnt even near the mid range shooter marvin is allowing the opposing teams SF to sag off of Smith at the 3 and provide help D on the man YOU say would be better at the 4 AL HORFORD! Also the difference between the already bad Marvin Williams at the 3 and the absolutely horrible thought of having Smith at the 3 is that with Marvin being 1-10 on 3pt fg's atleast it says that Marvin cant shoot the 3 and is not willing to shoot the three. Having the trigger happy at times/wild smoove there dont be suprised to see 1-50 on 3pt fg's by the all star break!

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Quote:

---

Their games are VERY similar and in fact, I seem to recall Smoove saying he wanted to play an all-around game like Kirilenko. Before Boozer, Kirilenko played PF and averaged a Smoove-like 17 ppg, 8 rbg, 3 apg, 3 bpg and 2 spg. Then Boozer came along and Kirilenko's effectiveness slipped dramtically.

If Horford can become Boozer at the 4, it might not be all bad but I wouldn't want to pay Smoove $12M a season for the 11 ppg, 5 rbg, 4 apg, 1.5 bpg, 1.2 spg that Kirilenko averaged last year.

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.

For now, my vote is start them like we start them now and let matchups throughout the game dictate how and where play them. The time MAY come when one of them needs to be traded but I don't think that time is now. Let them grow together and see what happens.

Trace, i started a post about this very subject last summer. And I laid out the exact Boozer/Kirilenko scenario for Smoove. My point was if Horford was a better 4 than Smoove, we have 3 options:

1) move Smoove to center, because of his shot blocking prescence

2) move Smoove to SF ( edit: I had said PF at first, but saw my mistake ), but limit what he does on offense

3) bring him off the bench and let him be the "super sub", ala a young Robert Horry, and let him do everything.

While Horford's best position may be the 4, I don't think he's better at that position RIGHT NOW than Smith. And I think a Horford - Smith - Marvin frontline is better than a Zaza - Horford - Smith frontline . . or any other mediocre center you want to put in place of Zaza.

Put Smith at the 3, and you'll have to tell him to scale back his offensive production. If you don't, he's going to revert back to taking even more jumpers that he can't make. When Sloan basically told AK47 to do that, it didn't sit well with him at all . . and AK is actually a better shooter than Smith.

If people remember, Kirilenko went into such a funk offensively, that it affected his mindset defensively, and was making him an ineffective player. Trade rumors swirled all around him a few years back because of his poor play.

It even got to the point to where Sloan was opting to go with Harpring at the end of games, because he could shoot better and wasn't a bad defender.

Could you imagine the khaos on this board, if Smith started to play so bad at SF, that Woody would have to go with Marvin?

So to me, it's not about which player is better at what position, it's about which frontline as a unit is better. Horford and Smith play very well together. Smith just needs to get tougher.

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

Diesel, Its not only defensive problems that having Smoove at the SF would bring. Its probably moreso offensively that we would be tampering with his potential in this league.

Smoove is NOT a shooter, and I know you brought up the fact that our current SF Marvin was just 1-10 on 3pt shooting this past season, and he's certainly not a great shooter either. But with that said do you notice how many people on this board has had enough of him? and how many people are only willing to give him 1 more year to improve on this or else its the boot? Having Smith at the SF would be 10x WORSE! as he isnt even near the mid range shooter marvin is allowing the opposing teams SF to sag off of Smith at the 3 and provide help D on the man YOU say would be better at the 4 AL HORFORD! Also the difference between the already bad Marvin Williams at the 3 and the absolutely horrible thought of having Smith at the 3 is that with Marvin being 1-10 on 3pt fg's atleast it says that Marvin cant shoot the 3 and is not willing to shoot the three. Having the trigger happy at times/wild smoove there dont be suprised to see 1-50 on 3pt fg's by the all star break!

This is fiddle faddle.

Right now... Smoove plays a Sf's game offensively. Think about it. He stands on the perimeter. He drives sometimes. He's left wide open in the midcourt far more than Marvin. He rarely plays in the post. Our offense has struggled because we don't get consistent scoring from down low. Therefore, we go as our shooters go. When JJ and Bibby and Smoove are off, we're off.

If we were able to bring in a post player, our gameplan doesn't change (as it relates to Smoove). He can still do the same things he would do if we called in a 4. The only difference is that we would have another player in the low post who can score and rebound. Moreover, we would take Horf to the high post where I believe he'd be more comfortable.