Did Horford deserve to be an All-Star?

[lethalweapon3]

Among the ones who aren't happy with the picks, the InsideHoopsters fussed over:

(a) The forwards that didn't get in ahead of him (Why not Josh Smith?)

(b) Shaq deserving some kind of a mercy award (I like his Jabbawockee stuff too but dang!)

© The centers that didn't get in (Forget Shaq... David Lee deserved it! No, not Lee, he's not a real center either, Bogut! No, not Bogut!)

On the InsideHoops thread, "magnax1" states his location as: The Jennings and Wall bandwagon. We can see where his allegiance was hitched before commenting on "Bogut is better" (with no quantitative argument to show for it).

Nuggs fan "MeLo MvP 15" bases his argument on the Aliznotacenter angle (like say, Nene). He's not a center, but plays center, and still puts up comparable numbers to the handful of "true" centers on a first-place team? All-Star Reserve. Still, the biggest fuss he makes includes "I don't think it's horrible he made it..."

"Rekindled" says David Lee over Horford with a Gallinari avatar on the side.

"browntown" a self-described "decent college freshman" was "pissed" about Horf over both Lee and Bogut.

"catzhernandez" says, "Al Horford making it is a joke. Dude's putting up the same numbers as Jamaal Magloire in 04, yet where's the hate??" Then contradicts his argument immediately with, "And off topic a bit, Magloire beasted in that single AS game he was in. 19/8 in 21 minutes."

"JustinJDW" says, "I thought Shaq would play in this All-Star Game, since it might be his last. He always brings a lot of fun into it. Sucks he isn't in.

**** you Horford." Sounds like an axe to grind that doesn't involve Bogut.

"rfoster24" a Kobe fan, says "c'mon complete joke. so many other forwards to choose from." (focus, Daniel-san!)

"inmypjs" in his first and last ever post, says: "Players who make it because their team has a winning record really does not deserve it as much as those who are playing All-Star numbers with a team losing record. For some reason, the coaches are biased in favor of players on winning teams. Monte Ellis deserves to be an All-Star over Billups or Brooks but his team is 3rd to last in the league so he will never make it." He's getting the picture.

"nolebball" says "Lee over Horford was a given." I'll assume that the Tallahassee guy is not a big fan of either.

Still nothing as to why for any arguments. You should've taken up their cause, ex!

You have anything more than one (and a quarter) threads?

Oddly enough it was Horford who had his most productive month after the break.

I trust you're crunching the numbers and will wait for ya.

~lw3

[exodus]

Again i say where were they arguing with each other? Like i said you were just making stuff up.

And why do they have to give numbers to back it up? They were just giving their opinions and it isn't like Horford had numbers in his favor other than the Hawks record.

And if you think cathernandez contradicted himself then you don't understand the meaning of the word. I didn't bother looking at the whole thread since a lot of it was just predictions. I would be willing to bet no many predicted Horford would make it.

Looking up Horford's monthly splits shouldn't be too hard for you. At least i would hope not.

Edited August 6, 2010 by exodus

[lethalweapon3]

Thank goodness for ESPN (they even have per-48 splits, too). Not the purest of stats in the sense that they have pre-All Star BREAK rather tha pre-All Star SELECTION, but that's just a few games that won't make much difference. Also they didn't show Post All-Star numbers but we can infer.

Pre All-Star Per-Game Splits:

Al's

Pre All-Star (Total)

G 51 (81)

Mins 34.9 (35.1)

FGA-FGM 5.5-9.9 (5.8-10.5)

FG% 56.262 (55.136)

FTA-FTM 2.3-3.0 (2.6-3.3)

FT% 76.316 (78.889)

Stl 0.69 (0.73)

Blk 1.22 (1.12)

TOs 1.5 (1.5)

PF 2.8 (2.8)

OReb 2.7 (2.9)

DReb 6.7 (7.0)

TotalReb 9.4 (9.9)

Asts 2.1 (2.3)

Pts 13.4 (14.2)

Horf shot lower from the field but much better from the stripe after the break. He blocked fewer shots (particularly in March, a season low 0.63 per), but on balance had more points, steals, and rebounds. And Horf's top scoring (February) and rebounding (March and April) months came after the All-Star selection. My assertion that Horf declined after the All-Star break is as false as Grandma Lethal's teeth!

Andrew's

Pre All-Star (Total)

G 45 (69)

Mins 32.3 (32.3)

FGA-FGM 6.9-13.2 (6.9-13.2)

FG% 52.181 (51.978)

FTA-FTM 2.2-3.4 (2.2-3.4)

FT% 63.399 (62.869)

Stl 0.56 (0.57)

Blk 2.18 (2.54)

TOs 2.0 (1.9)

PF 3.3 (3.2)

OReb 3.0 (3.0)

DReb 7.2 (7.1)

TotReb 10.2 (10.2)

Asts 1.9 (1.8)

Pts 16.0 (15.9)

Also correct is exodus' assertion that Bogut's overall numbers did not get immensely better after the Break. In fact... they're eerily similar. The one notable exception is Blocks (by Month: Oct's couple games - 1.00, Nov - 1.88, Dec - 2.00, Jan - 2.67, Feb - 2.79, Mar - 3.14, Apr's couple games before the fall - 3.50). The significant uptick in blocks coupled with the Bucks' rise gave him more prominence among the Centers than earlier in the season. Also, his top rebounding month (January) and his top scoring and assists month (November) was before the All-Star break, not after.

Last thing to highlight is the relative differences in Pre-All-Star game performance. Bogut was the better scorer, rebounder, and shot blocker, and the worse (forgive the verb usage... worser?) in shooting, passing, and avoiding foul trouble. Yet the advantages for Bogut were not enough to sway attention of All-Star fans balloting (at least, not until after the picks are made) or the selectors for the Reserves. That maintains the arguments that winning significantly matters, both before the All-Star Break, and after, when it's All-NBA voting time.

~lw3

[MaceCase]

Actually, I have seen Bogut play Howard to a standstill. Howard shot over 80+% when Horf was on him.

You must of forgotten this day in history.

I'll give the preface

In partnership with the NBA, Synergy Sports finally opened up to the public their extensive database in which they catalog every play of every game played in the 2009-2010 season. Each type of play is attached to a video library where the user can watch what happened on a particular play, who was involved in the play and whether it was a make or a miss.

Now the list on post defense.

http://www.raptorblog.com/100422b.php

Incase you don't want to read truth.

Al Horford was number 1 in pure post defence (defense for us yanks) last season allowing .69 points per possession and held opponents to 36% shooting against him.

Andrew Bogut was 30th allowing .89 points per possession on post ups allowing his opponents to shoot 48.4% from the post.

Your new man crush David Lee was nearly dead last and allowing 1.02 ppp and opponents to shoot 51.2% on him. Unsurprisingly he was posted early and often.

All this is for naught because "The Great One"s opinion of that one time he saw a game beats out both metrics plus coaches' and GMs' opinions.

[exodus]

Thank goodness for ESPN (they even have per-48 splits, too). Not the purest of stats in the sense that they have pre-All Star BREAK rather tha pre-All Star SELECTION, but that's just a few games that won't make much difference. Also they didn't show Post All-Star numbers but we can infer.

Pre All-Star Per-Game Splits:

Al's

Pre All-Star (Total)

G 51 (81)

Mins 34.9 (35.1)

FGA-FGM 5.5-9.9 (5.8-10.5)

FG% 56.262 (55.136)

FTA-FTM 2.3-3.0 (2.6-3.3)

FT% 76.316 (78.889)

Stl 0.69 (0.73)

Blk 1.22 (1.12)

TOs 1.5 (1.5)

PF 2.8 (2.8)

OReb 2.7 (2.9)

DReb 6.7 (7.0)

TotalReb 9.4 (9.9)

Asts 2.1 (2.3)

Pts 13.4 (14.2)

Horf shot lower from the field but much better from the stripe after the break. He blocked fewer shots (particularly in March, a season low 0.63 per), but on balance had more points, steals, and rebounds. And Horf's top scoring (February) and rebounding (March and April) months came after the All-Star selection. My assertion that Horf declined after the All-Star break is as false as Grandma Lethal's teeth!

Andrew's

Pre All-Star (Total)

G 45 (69)

Mins 32.3 (32.3)

FGA-FGM 6.9-13.2 (6.9-13.2)

FG% 52.181 (51.978)

FTA-FTM 2.2-3.4 (2.2-3.4)

FT% 63.399 (62.869)

Stl 0.56 (0.57)

Blk 2.18 (2.54)

TOs 2.0 (1.9)

PF 3.3 (3.2)

OReb 3.0 (3.0)

DReb 7.2 (7.1)

TotReb 10.2 (10.2)

Asts 1.9 (1.8)

Pts 16.0 (15.9)

Also correct is exodus' assertion that Bogut's overall numbers did not get immensely better after the Break. In fact... they're eerily similar. The one notable exception is Blocks (by Month: Oct's couple games - 1.00, Nov - 1.88, Dec - 2.00, Jan - 2.67, Feb - 2.79, Mar - 3.14, Apr's couple games before the fall - 3.50). The significant uptick in blocks coupled with the Bucks' rise gave him more prominence among the Centers than earlier in the season. Also, his top rebounding month (January) and his top scoring and assists month (November) was before the All-Star break, not after.

Last thing to highlight is the relative differences in Pre-All-Star game performance. Bogut was the better scorer, rebounder, and shot blocker, and the worse (forgive the verb usage... worser?) in shooting, passing, and avoiding foul trouble. Yet the advantages for Bogut were not enough to sway attention of All-Star fans balloting (at least, not until after the picks are made) or the selectors for the Reserves. That maintains the arguments that winning significantly matters, both before the All-Star Break, and after, when it's All-NBA voting time.

~lw3

At least you finally have some facts in a post, instead of making something up and pretending it is true. That is progress.

Bogut did not significantly outplay Horford after the break. March was arguably the best month of Horfords career. It isn't like the Hawks were slouches in the win dept either. they finished with the 3rd seed in the east.

If Horford deserved to be picked over Bogut (and Lee) for the All-Star game, then follows it up with strong play after the break, why would he be so far behind them in the All-NBA voting? The winning factor doesn't explain how Lee got over twice as many points as Horford. The Knicks sucked after the break.

Winning certainly helped Bogut but the Bucks won 2 games more than the Hawks after the break. That doesn't explain how Bogut can go from being seen as less valuable than Horford before the break to much more valuable after the season to the tune of 149 to 19.

This can be seen as nothing other than a rebuke to Horford's All-Star selection.

Neither guy can handle Howard. i have seen Bucks fans lamenting Boguts inability to handle Howard and Howard shot 70% against the Bucks on the season.

[lethalweapon3]

Originally Posted by knickballer (replying to that clever tontoz dude arguing for Horford's merits)

But the Knicks also swept the Hawks also you **** bag. Hortford is averaging what 12/9? He's not even the 5th best center in the east probably.

That's also bull**** to cause the Knicks don't play a fast tempo anymore but you just like to speak out of your *ss... His offensive game is on par to every big in the league.

...and of course 'tontoz' (ahem) then told him off pretty darn good, if I may say so.

Poodle replies to knickballer:

whats crazy is horford made it over josh smith. smith is having a unselfish, probably best year since he's been in the league.

plowking says: "Bogut got robbed"

And that's just getting into Page 2 of a thread not named "Did they get it right?" but the far more leading, "David Lee got Robbed". Everybody fusses over 18 pages over who got robbed and no Kum-bi-yas at the end. and once more, no more quantitative factors to back up their individual assertions (like you and I just did over six months later). There are a number of people who agreed with 'tontoz' in that thread as well, but we're focusing only on the disagreements among the ones who said Horf shouldn't make it (D Lee!... no, Bogut!... no, Shaq!, no, Noah! no...) This lack of unanimity among this small sample shows why neither Bogut nor Lee stood out enough to get love from the selectors (now I feel like playing reggae... "Come down!"). And RealGM couldn't find enough of an issue on it to get beyond three pages.

The question to ask KnickSquawkers is, after the All-Star judges (or is it Stern?) had another crack at it, why was Bogut robbed by David Lee?

~lw3

[exodus]

Originally Posted by knickballer (replying to that clever tontoz dude arguing for Horford's merits)

...and of course 'tontoz' (ahem) then told him off pretty darn good, if I may say so.

Poodle replies to knickballer:

plowking says: "Bogut got robbed"

And that's just getting into Page 2 of a thread not named "Did they get it right?" but the far more leading, "David Lee got Robbed". Everybody fusses over 18 pages over who got robbed and no Kum-bi-yas at the end. and once more, no more quantitative factors to back up their individual assertions (like you and I just did over six months later). There are a number of people who agreed with 'tontoz' in that thread as well, but we're focusing only on the disagreements among the ones who said Horf shouldn't make it (D Lee!... no, Bogut!... no, Shaq!, no, Noah! no...) This lack of unanimity among this small sample shows why neither Bogut nor Lee stood out enough to get love from the selectors (now I feel like playing reggae... "Come down!"). And RealGM couldn't find enough of an issue on it to get beyond three pages.

The question to ask KnickSquawkers is, after the All-Star judges (or is it Stern?) had another crack at it, why was Bogut robbed by David Lee?

~lw3

The thread where i was quoting from was the thread where all of the All-Star selections were discussed and in that thread it was the selection of Horford that came under heavy criticism. There were no picks that got close to as much criticism.

The Lee thread is obviously going to attract homers on both sides. The RealGM thread wasn't talking about All-Star selections in general. It was talking specifically about the worst picks all time.

The question you still haven't answered is how did Horford fall so far to become a distant 3rd to Bogut and Lee in the All-NBA vote if he deserved his All-Star spot. His play didn't fall off at all after the break and the Hawks kept winning.

[lethalweapon3]

At least you finally have some facts in a post, instead of making something up and pretending it is true. That is progress.

Bogut did not significantly outplay Horford after the break. March was arguably the best month of Horfords career. It isn't like the Hawks were slouches in the win dept either. they finished with the 3rd seed in the east.

If Horford deserved to be picked over Bogut (and Lee) for the All-Star game, then follows it up with strong play after the break, why would he be so far behind them in the All-NBA voting? The winning factor doesn't explain how Lee got over twice as many points as Horford. The Knicks sucked after the break.

Winning certainly helped Bogut but the Bucks won 2 games more than the Hawks after the break. That doesn't explain how Bogut can go from being seen as less valuable than Horford before the break to much more valuable after the season to the tune of 149 to 19.

This can be seen as nothing other than a rebuke to Horford's All-Star selection.

You and I together provided more facts and corrections in this one post on this subject than anybody cared to back in January anywhere. No shame there.

By your estimation, Bogut not only rebuked Horf's but Chris Kaman's (remember this is All-NBA voting, not just All-Eastern Conference), whose numbers indeed declined as the Clippers rolled off into the sunset. And maybe even Bosh (will explain why in a sec).

And one more big self-correction... the voting for All-NBA is broadcasters and sportswriters (not execs as I suggested earlier), and head coaches vote for the All-Star reserves. So it's the media rebuking the coaches (and to a lesser extent, the fans, if voting counts for anything).

One more factor... do we know for sure that the All-NBA balloting is the same as the All-Star? That is, is Horford listed as a Forward when the sportswriters voted? Splitting votes with Josh and Zach Randolph and Dirk and Crash and Bosh (?) and Boozer (?) brings the number of votes down a ton, and if it's down to Dwight, Amar'e, Bogie, and butkiss among the centers, that would explain the Magic-Hawks-style disparity in votes between Al and Andrew more than insidious rebuking would. Sekou or somebody could probably find this out for us.

~lw3

[exodus]

The media voted for All-NBA First, Second and Third Teams by position with points awarded on a 5-3-1 basis.

http://www.nba.com/2010/news/05/06/all.nba/

Horford played vitually all of his minutes at center so obviously he was a center. If they are going to list Amare as a center they certainly will list Horford as a center.

Given that Bogut got no first place votes it is obvious that he simply got far more votes than Horford.

KG got only 1 vote. :thumbsupsmileyanim:

[lethalweapon3]

SI's Ian Thomsen revealed how he PLANNED to vote a week before the votes arrived... and he anticipated Horford being a Center (Interesting rationale on Bogut, BTW, who he made second team, and snubbed Bosh rather than Horford?)...

http://m.si.com/news/to/to/detail/2525272;jsessionid=331742036BF7FE65D2073C74D6E7DE94.cnnsi1

...but is that how the ballots arrived?

~lw3

[exodus]

SI's Ian Thomsen revealed how he PLANNED to vote a week before the votes arrived... and he anticipated Horford being a Center (Interesting rationale on Bogut, BTW, who he made second team, and snubbed Bosh rather than Horford?)...

http://m.si.com/news/to/to/detail/2525272;jsessionid=331742036BF7FE65D2073C74D6E7DE94.cnnsi1

...but is that how the ballots arrived?

~lw3

I am not a member of the media so i didn't get a ballot. However Horford played virtually all of his minutes at center. I don't see how he could be listed as anything other than a center.

Edited August 6, 2010 by exodus