There is NO Comparison Between Horford and Shelden

[BusBoyIsBack]

Please put this nonsense to rest.

READ the Profiles of Al Horford. Pay attention to the list of weaknesses. From reading the list of weaknesses of a player you can tell what type of ceiling/floor they have. It gives you an idea of what type of physical limitations they have.

1st Profile

Positives:

Horford has an NBA ready body, is physically strong and takes advantage of that in the post, particularly defensively when he pushes opposing offensive players out of position. Horford can run the floor and take it to the basket. He is an excellent defender and shotblocker utilizing his instincts and long arms. He's developed a bit of a mid-range shot, which adds a certain dimension to his offensive ability.

Negatives:

Horford needs to work on his offensive moves down in the box and take full advantage of his strength and quickness. He doesn't try to take over games and will defer to his teammates. Horford's aggressiveness on defense tends to lead him to get into foul trouble.

Overview:

Horford is physically gifted to play this game. It's all about working out some basketball mechanics and he'll be good to go. He's raw offensively, but in his years with Florida, has shown some real improvement, which is a good sign. Horford should do very well in the NBA his rookie season, especially since he can draw information and wisdom from his father, former NBA player Tito Horford.

Look at the weaknesses they list

Unlike a Shelden Williams who a negative is he is immobile and robotic in nature, a negative on Al Horford is that HE DOESN'T TAKE ADVANTAGE OF HIS QUICKNESS. Or the way he defers to his teammates which could explain why his PPG total isn't as high even though he shot such a great percentage. It also says that although he is showing improvement in the post that his post game is raw. And that he needs to work on his aggression on defense.

So if I didn't know any better and that was the only weaknesses that they listed for a player, I'd say that player had a helluva lot of upside!

[BusBoyIsBack]

2nd Profile

Strengths: NBA body – long arms, strong athletic build. Can get up and down the court well for a guy his size. Fantastic rebounder. Great post scorer. Decent range on his jump shot. Very good shotblocker. Very tough defender downlow. Great passer for a player his size and position. Has big game experience. Hardworker and very smart player – always looking to improve.

Weaknesses: Needs to improve his free throw shooting. His last college game wasn’t his best – he was dominated by Greg Oden (nothing to be too ashamed of). Has to get used to playing against bigger, stronger players that the NBA possesses.

Consensus: Despite being overshadowed by his flashier, more vocal teammate Joakim Noah, Horford is probably the better NBA prospect. His size, athleticism, toughness and post skills will go far in the pros. On the pro stage Noah shouldn’t be overshadowing him anymore.

So let's see. This profile says that he needs work on his free throw shooting and that his last college game wasn't his best. Although (18/12/2) is a pretty good stat line if I do say so myself and the last time I checked most of those numbers game in meaningful time and not garbage time unlike a few baskets by you know who.

But I digress, it goes on to say he has to get used to playing against bigger and stronger players. Which is why I suggested he could use 15 pounds of muscle.

But again, any physical limitations listed that will hinder him from success?

None at all!

Again, sounds like a guy with a lot of upside to me!

[BusBoyIsBack]

3rd Profile

Strengths/weaknesses: He's part of a huge winning tradition they've built down there. He does a lot of dirty work, but I think he's a lot more skilled than people think he is. He can run the floor very well. He's physically strong, but his overall feel for the game needs to improve. His post game needs to develop. He'll be a real solid NBA player for a long time. His intangibles are that he's a tough, hard-nosed guy who plays hard all the time.

Best case/worst case: His best-case probably that he's a really strong starting power forward for a really successful team. Worst case is he's a role player at power forward, but I don't see that happening

So he says the only physical weaknesses of Horford are that he should get a better feel of the game (although he's often credited for having one of the best basketball IQs in the nation) and that his post skills need to improve.

Again where are the physical limitations and the weaknesses that are going to hold him back from being great?

This guy doesn't even list a weakness that can't be improved upon and states that his floor is a role player which is the floor of EVERY PLAYER. Actually a floor can even be worse than that

So again sounds like a guy with a pretty dang high ceiling to me

[BusBoyIsBack]

4th profile

Possesses a long, athletic body that is ready for the NBA. Has excellent toughness and doesn't shy away from banging in the paint. A very strong post defender as he’s able to use his body strength to disrupt opposing players from setting up. A solid shot blocker thanks to his timing and great anticipation skills. Attacks the basket with aggression and power. A surprisingly good ball handler and passer for a player his size. Has the ability to hit the 12-15 foot jumper from mid-range. Very quick for a big guy and is able to beat most forwards down the court. Shows an excellent basketball IQ. Offensive skills are raw, with not much of a perimeter game outside 15 feet. He needs to improve his post skills, and has a tendency to be overly aggressive, leading to foul trouble.

So the only thing they can say bad about him in addition to having raw post skills and being overly aggressive on defense is that he doesn't have a perimeter game OUTSIDE 15 FEET

A big man and they are complaining about range like that?

Don't you see?

Al Horford is one of those prospects where they just have to try to find something wrong with.

There isn't a laundry list of weaknesses and none of the weaknesses they list are something that he can't improve or that anyone hints at that he won't improve

[BusBoyIsBack]

5th Profile

Of all the talented players that returned to Florida this past season to lead the Gators to a second straight NCAA title, Horford probably helped his stock the most. He could have jumped to the NBA as a sophomore after 2005-06, but developed post moves, started using his left hand and increased his range so much that he now hits 17-foot jumpers with regularity. That improvement will likely place him among the top five selections in the draft. The son of former NBA player Tito Horford had 18 points and 12 rebounds as he bodied up with potential No. 1 pick Greg Oden against Ohio State in the title game. Averaged 13.2 points and a team-high 9.5 rebounds and 1.8 blocks on a squad that had five players average double figures in scoring this past season. Extremely tough and efficient in the paint _ attacks the basket with aggression. Has long arms and the body and skills to play in the NBA right away. A quintessential NBA power forward, with the quickness to beat most of the league's big men down the floor. Great on-court intelligence. Was nicknamed "The Godfather" by Florida coach Billy Donovan because _ like the character Don Corleone _ Horford doesn't "say a whole lot but has great presence." Although his post skills have greatly improved, still needs a little more polish. Footwork in the post is sometimes choppy. Will be much more effective in the paint if he improves in that area. Often deferred to his teammates instead of establishing his presence when getting hot, but that could have been the product of the Gators having so many options on offense. Improved at the free-throw line throughout his career, but still shot just 64.4 percent this past season. One of the most NBA-ready players in the draft. Should contribute right away.

If Im hiding the weaknesses of Horford, then so is EVERYBODY.

Another profile with nothing really bad to say about him that will hinder him from being great in the NBA. Once again, more of the exact opposite.

Once again they touch on the fact that he deferred to his teammates but they then admit that wasn't such a bad thing because of how talented our team was (which is why we led the nation in FG%)

This article goes on to say that he has choppy footwork in the post as a problem with his raw post game.

But again nothing hinting that he can't improve that area.

And of course, again it mentions the FT shooting needs improvement.

But do they make it sound like he is a player with no upside with physical limitations? Absolutely not

[BusBoyIsBack]

6th profile

Strengths

Horford is physical inside on offense and defense, and he dominated opponents in the NCAA Tournament. Last season, he developed a consistent mid-range jump shot that made him even tougher to guard. He's one of the best rebounders to play at UF, and he runs the floor and passes like a wing player.

Weaknesses

He only shot 62.4 percent from the free-throw line, so that must improve.

What they're saying about Horford

Florida coach Billy Donovan: "He's kind of a silent assassin. He doesn't really say a lot, and he doesn't show a lot of emotion, but as far as a competitor and a guy whose offense has grown and developed ... the way he rebounds and defends and his intelligence level - he's it."

An NBA scout, who requested anonymity because he didn't want to divulge his team's draft strategy: "He looks like a guy that would possibly be a double-double guy. ... He has to continue to improve his skill set, [but he] always plays with tremendous intensity."

Skill set and FT shooting

Again nothing new. No real problematic areas

[BusBoyIsBack]

7th profile (most critical weakness list you can find)

Strengths: Runs extremely well, able to beat most forwards down the court … Is blessed with an NBA ready body and good strength … Defensively Horford is a very strong post defender able to use his body strength to disrupt opposing players from setting up … Solid shot blocker thanks to his timing and great anticipation skills … Attacks the basket with aggression and power … A surprising ball handler and passer for his size … This enables him to pass out of double teams with relative ease … Is physical in the low post and does a good job of drawling fouls from opposing defenders … Usually he is able to use his upper body strength and finish after contact … Really makes a big impact on the glass where he uses his body strength to box out … Has proven to be a very coachable player with a solid work ethic … Possesses a calm presence, doesn’t let his emotions get the best of him … Shows good court awareness, rarely does he try moves that are beyond his skill level … Has shown the ability to hit the 12-15 foot jumper from mid-range … Maintains good body control and balance absorbing contact well from opposing post defenders … Rarely bobbles or fails to catch passes thrown into the post thanks to his soft hands …

Weaknesses: Offensively, Horford lacks consistent shooting from mid-range and the perimeter … Defensively Horford tends to get into foul trouble at times due to his aggressiveness … Although his back to the basket skills are greatly improved, they are still in need of refinement … Post footwork can be choppy. By improving this, Horford will become a lot more effective post player … Has a tendency to defer to his teammates instead of establishing his presence in the game … Still hasn’t played with the consistency that you except with someone of his talent … Can drift at times during games. Will have one dominating game followed by several so-so performances …fails to get rebounds out of his position the way he should … Below average free throw shooting prevents him from taking full advantage of the foul shots he creates …

So if you made a laundry list of Horford's weaknesses it would be

1)Lacks consistent shooting from perimeter

2)Too aggressive defensively

3)Needs to refine his back to the basket skills

4)Needs work on his footwork in the post

5)Defers to his teammates a lot

6)Needs to play with more consistency

7)Should rebound more out of position

8)Below average Free throw shooter

Wow this site could point out 8 weaknesses!

So Horford is exposed as a fraud right?

Well let's examine those weaknesses and see if any of them hint at any physical limitations

1)Lack of consistent midrange and perimeter jump shot? No (Unless you have shown no signs of improving which is not the case)

2)Aggressiveness on defense? Nope

3)Raw back to the basket skills? Nope (Unless you have shown no signs of improving which is not the case)

4)Post footwork? Nope (unless you're talking about an immobile player which it lists as the complete opposite)

5)Deferring to your teammates Nope (Not when you admit you are willing to take on a bigger role if the team NEEDS you too which wasn't the case at Florida)

6)More overall consistency Nope (Unless you have a bad work ethic which is not the case)

7)Better positioning on rebounding Nope (Unless again you don't put in the work to improve)

8)Free Throw shooting Maybe (See: Ben Wallace, Shaq etc)

So the only weakness on a laundry list of weaknesses for Horford that is not definitely something that can always be improved with a greak work ethic is Free Throw shooting.

The reason I say that is because it's not like Shaq and Ben Wallace don't try to improve that area, they just don't have it. And usually if you are a poor FT shooter in college, you can be one in the league.

All the other weaknesses that Horford has are weaknesses that several players have turned into strengths with a great work ethic.

THAT is why I say the sky is the limit for this young fellow. The only real weaknesses that people can list are things that are vastly improved with enough work put into him.

No physical limitations whatsoever to stop Horford from being a great player in this league.

And THAT is why he was a great pick and is a significantly better PRO prospect than Shelden Williams.

[Diesel]

I think it would be better for you to go practice your excuses. I suggest that you borrow some of the same excuses that you use for Marvin..

For in a few days, there will be no reason to read profiles and look at measurements... People will see what we who watch college basketball already know!

[BusBoyIsBack]

Quote:

---

I think it would be better for you to go practice your excuses. I suggest that you borrow some of the same excuses that you use for Marvin..

For in a few days, there will be no reason to read profiles and look at measurements... People will see what we who watch college basketball already know!

---

NOW HERE IS THE PROFILE OF SHELDEN WILLIAMS

Offensively he is a bit robotic in his movements, not being the most fluid player in the world and often looking a bit mechanical in certain things he does. He often relies too much on his strength to score around the paint, not having too much finesse to his game. Most of his points come off layups, dunks, free throws and short jump-hook shots around the basket. It’s unlikely that he will be able to maintain the same scoring production at the NBA level where everyone is bigger, more athletic and often just as strong as he is. The lack of legit size and skill in NCAA is a concern when you try to project him to the NBA, as he is truly a man amongst boys. At times will try to force his way to the hoop using his brute strength, either traveling in the process or being called for an offensive foul.

His face-up game in general is extremely unpolished, being a center in a power forward’s body for the most part, maybe even a tweener. He has shown very little ability to shoot the ball outside of 15 feet, although this is just not his role at Duke so it’s hard to get a very accurate read on this. His ball-skills are just as raw.He dribbles with his head down, looking very stiff. You really don’t want him doing much ball-handling outside of 12 feet, but he has never really had to in his career.

Comparing the player Williams was as a junior to the one we see as a senior, there aren’t really that many noticeable differences. It wouldn’t be a stretch to say that he is fairly close to reaching his maximum potential as a player.

Playoff teams or teams on the cusp of making the playoffs won’t mind that that much, since Williams is a 6-9 warrior that is ready to come in and battle for them immediately, butGMs drafting in the mid-high lottery who are looking to swing for the fences for a homerun pick could decide to shy away in their never-ending search for a player to build a team around. That’s the probably the worst thing you could say about Williams, HE'S A ROLE PLAYER IN EVERY SENSE OF THE WORD.

[BusBoyIsBack]

Rigid. Williams lacks great fluidity running the floor, his movements could be described as stiff or mechanical ... Lacks the ability to improvise much in the open floor: catching and dribbling/passing before a shot, he's a lot more comfortable with set plays or crashing the glass ... Offensive game may be limited on next level due to lack of spontaneity (the Duke computer chip in his head runs best in half court set) ... Lacks great vision or passing ability ... His body is very rigid partly due to his muscle mass ... High school incident not considered indicative of his true character, especially after Duke retained his scholarship. He's been a model citizen ever since (accusation) and comes from strong family background ... Has given up a number of big games to post players as a senior, partly due to Duke's perimeter defensive approach ...

These comparison to Horford are A JOKE.

Look at the list of weaknesses

He is a player who is below average in running the floor

He is a player who is below average in passing

He is a player who is below average in fluidity and very robotic in nature

He is a player who has not at all spontaneous in nature and needs set plays to succeed.

These qualities are the COMPLETE OPPOSITE of Al Horford

Horford is PRAISED for his ability to run the floor

Horford is PRAISED for his ability to pass as a post player.

HOrford is PRAISED for his fluidity in the post

Horford is PRAISED for his ability to create in both an uptempo and half court setting.

If you can't take these factors into account, then you are a lost cause.

[BusBoyIsBack]

Quote:

---

You list a "profile" on Shelden and only take it from the weakness section. Could you be any more of a biased douchebag? The answer, no.

http://www.draftexpress.com/viewprofile.php?p=18

---

Instead of petty insults, look at the point that I BOLDED in the first profile and have BOLDED IN EVERY PROFILE.

I only BOLDED the negative for Horford.

The point is that when you look at Horford's negatives there are no physical limitations listed on any profile, even the most critical profile.

However when you look at Shelden Williams they say

1)He's robotic in nature

2)Can't create outside set plays

3)He is poor at running the floor

4)He's a ROLE PLAYER in every sense of the road

Whether you admit it or not that is a pretty big difference from that of Horford

[bfwolf]

Are you trying to convince us or yourself?

[archie_otu]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

You list a "profile" on Shelden and only take it from the weakness section. Could you be any more of a biased douchebag? The answer, no.

http://www.draftexpress.com/viewprofile.php?p=18

---

Instead of petty insults, look at the point that I BOLDED in the first profile and have BOLDED IN EVERY PROFILE.

I only BOLDED the negative for Horford.

The point is that when you look at Horford's negatives there are no physical limitations listed on any profile, even the most critical profile.

However when you look at Shelden Williams they say

1)He's robotic in nature

2)Can't create outside set plays

3)He is poor at running the floor

4)He's a ROLE PLAYER in every sense of the road

Whether you admit it or not that is a pretty big difference from that of Horford

---

I agree completly Busboy...you guys are crazy for trying to compare Shelden Williams to Horford. Williams was the one of the greatest defensive centers in college basketball and very solid low post player coming out of Duke (18 ppg, 10 rpg, 3.8 blg, first team All American). However he was a very undersized C prospect which is why he was just the 8th or 9th top prospect in a very weak draft. So the Hawks tried to stick him at PF. It took Woodson the whole season to figure out that Williams is naturally a C so you can't expect him to play a PF once he made it to the NBA.

However, Horford is the third best prospect out of a very strong draft because he's the protypical PF. He can run the floor, he's a big body, has a nice perimeter game, etc. He's not the best in the paint or with his bag to the basket, however his speed, agility and athleticism makes him the perfect PF to compliment a potent low post scorer. Look for Woodson to play Horford at C and take a whole season to figure out that his natural position at PF.

Completely different situation...one guy is a natural C who was drafted to play PF...another is a natural PF who was drafted to play C

[bfwolf]

I don't take him seriously. Who does?

[Diesel]

I think as a PF, Horford is just mediocre. The truth is that he doesn't have a strong perimeter game. He shoots 64% from the FT so:

1. He's a foul target.

2. His midrange game is crap.

His athleticism will help him run, but if we didn't get him to be a post defender, post scorer, why do we need him? I agree, that they are different players, but our purpose for each of them are the same.. That being the case, there was no need for Horford.

[BusBoyIsBack]

Quote:

---

So then instead of bolding the weaknesses, why didn't you just post the weaknesses? Clearly you wanted to tout his strengths because on every profile of Horford you have listed his strengths. If that isn't important then why do you list it in the first place?

---

And maybe you wouldn't have looked past the point.

The point is still that there are several physical limitations in the profiles of Shelden Williams and some of these several weaknesses are STRENGTHS of Al Horford.

When that is the case how can two players even be compared other than the fact that they are both post players?

Should Greg Oden be compared to Shelden because they are both post players?

The fact that Horford and Shelden are both post players who stayed in school for a considerable amount of time does NOT make them similar pro prospects. Not even close

And the list of the players weaknesses show just that.

For Horford nobody hints at a single weakness that will hinder Horford's potential

[killa3312]

Quote:

---

I think as a PF, Horford is just mediocre. The truth is that he doesn't have a strong perimeter game. He shoots 64% from the FT so:

1. He's a foul target.

2. His midrange game is crap.

His athleticism will help him run, but if we didn't get him to be a post defender, post scorer, why do we need him? I agree, that they are different players, but our purpose for each of them are the same.. That being the case, there was no need for Horford.

---

Horford's midrange game is not crap. In fact, it's quite good. FT percentage is misleading, and hardly means anything when translating to mid range jump shots. Case in point: Lee Humphrey was one of the best pure shooters in college basketball history, and was as mediocre as it gets from the FT line.

[BusBoyIsBack]

Quote:

---

Horford's midrange game is not crap. In fact, it's quite good. FT percentage is misleading, and hardly means anything when translating to mid range jump shots. Case in point: Lee Humphrey was one of the best pure shooters in college basketball history, and was as mediocre as it gets from the FT line.

---

Once again logic doesn't work around here.

If you aren't a great FT shooter it means you don't shoot well from the field either.

Never mind the fact that players like Tim Duncan debunk that logic