Hey Ex,

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Nic, I just think that people are afraid to really BELIEVE in Horford. That's natural for a fan base that isn't used to winning, especially not in recent times.

Horford projected draft slot, by me, in previous drafts:

2006: #1 ( ahead of both Aldridge and Bargnani )

2005: #1 ( no doubt he goes before Bogut, Paul, or Marvin )

2004: #2 ( ahead of Emeka but behind Howard )

2003: #2 ( Detroit would've taken him, instead of taking a chance on Darko. Not to say that Horford is the 2nd best player in this draft, because I'd have him behind Melo. )

2002: #2 ( ahead of Jay Williams )

2001: #1 ( Kwame Brown went #1 that year )

2000: #2 ( behind Kenyon Martin, only because K-Mart was an athletic freak at Cincinnati)

1999: #3 ( behind Steve Francis and Elton Brand. Vancouver still would've taken a guard )

1998: #1 ( Olowokandi went #1 that year )

1997: #2 ( behind Tim Duncan )

So in the past 11 drafts, Horford probably goes #1 in 4 of them, and no lower than 2 in every one except the 1999 draft. Regardless if he plays C or PF, we might have a special player here regardless.

As far as the sizes of centers that you listed, when they first came into the league . . . here they are: courtesy of databasebasketball.com:

Amare: 6-10 . . 245

Howard: 6-10 . . 240

Wallace: 6-9 . . 240

Okafor: 6-10 . . 257

Mourning: 6-10 . . 240

Curry: 6-11 . . 285

Camby: 6-11 . . 220

Okur: 6-11 . . 249

Magloire: 6-11 . . 259

E. Thomas: 6-9 . . 256

Duncan: 7-0 . . 248

Dalembert: 6-11 . . 250

Seems to me that Horford's 6-10 . . 245 frame, fits right in line with these guys. And if he adds 10 - 15 pounds, like some of these guys have, he'll be just the right size for center in this league.

Think of Horford as a Chris Webber type. The ideal size for a PF, that can play center.

The only question with Horford playing center is this: does he have the mentality to play the position?

If he doesn't mind one bit mixing it up on the inside, and is willing to battle with any size player, then Horford playing center won't be a problem at all. And in those 15 - 20 minutes a night he plays PF, we might be able to rest JJ during that period, and make Horford the #1 option, if he's good enough offensively to handle it.

This isn't even an issue to me. I'm MUCH MORE concerned about Josh Smith's mentality as our PF and I am about Horford playing center.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

Seems to me that Horford's 6-10 . . 245 frame, fits right in line with these guys.

---

Unfortunately you play basketball with your hands not your head.

Sheldens lack of reach really makes it tough for him to be effective in the NBA. Horford's reach is 3" higher but still far below many of the players you listed.

Horfords standing reach is 8'11". Now look how that compares to the '04 draft class.

http://www.draftexpress.com/measurements.p...&draft=15&sort=

3.5" shorter than Okafor. 4.5" shorter than Howard. Keep in mind that they are all the same height.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Seems to me that Horford's 6-10 . . 245 frame, fits right in line with these guys.

---

Unfortunately you play basketball with your hands not your head.

Sheldens lack of reach really makes it tough for him to be effective in the NBA. Horford's reach is 3" higher but still far below many of the players you listed.

Horfords standing reach is 8'11". Now look how that compares to the '04 draft class.

http://www.draftexpress.com/measurements.p...&draft=15&sort=

3.5" shorter than Okafor. 4.5" shorter than Howard. Keep in mind that they are all the same height.

---

Come on now Ex. You know that there is more to basketball, than just physical attributes. Intelligence and fundamentals plays a HUGE role as well.

If we just went by physical attributes, how in the world did a player like Larry Bird average 10 rebounds for his entire career? He was only 6-9 . . in the 220 - 230 range. Yet, he was one of the best rebounding small forwards ever to play the game.

You know why he was able to do that? Because he was so much smarter than the vast majority of players on the court. He knew how to use his body. He knew when and where the ball was coming off the rim. And he didn't mind putting a body on people either. The same goes for Dennis Rodman, who consistently battled PF's and C's, even though he had the body of a SF. He might be THE best rebounding small forward to ever play the game.

You're putting all of your stake on mere inches in reach, wingspan, and vertical, like that has always been the determining factor of greatness in this league. You know better than that Ex.

Then you got guys like Kwame Brown and Eddy Curry, who have the bodies and physical attributes to dominate everybody, but can't.

All of these 7 footers in this league, that have standing reaches well above Horford, should be able to dominate him. LOL . . you and I both know that is a lie.

With Shelden, I think it's all about desire. Chuck Hayes, who is 2 inches shorter than Shelden, had a much better year than he did last year. But anybody that watched Chuck at UK, knows that he was one of the smartest players in college basketball in those days. And Chuck played PF for the Rockets last year, in spot minutes, at a level much higher than Shelden.

But I guess Chuck's .5 standing reach advantage, is all that he needs, in order to outplay Shelden? Come on now. Chuck is just a smarter player, and has more desire than Shelden, right now.

Melvin Ely had a 9-3 standing reach. By your assessment, he should be at least an average center right now. And Diop's 9-5 standing reach, should make him just a dominant rebounder right now, instead of the part-time defensive stopper that he really is. And that kid really doesn't rebound or block shots as well as he should. All he does, is get in the way of people.

[AtLaS]

For some reason exodus puts way too much stock into standing reach, when it actually has nothing to do with your basketball skills whatsoever.

The only thing that reach REALLY makes a difference is blocking shots, which does not necessarily mean good defense.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

For some reason exodus puts way too much stock into standing reach, when it actually has nothing to do with your basketball skills whatsoever.

The only thing that reach REALLY makes a difference is blocking shots, which does not necessarily mean good defense.

---

Last i checked you use your hands to shoot and rebound. Why couldn't our players challenge LMA's shots? Because his standing reach is 9'2".

[exodus]

Quote:

---

You're putting all of your stake on mere inches in reach, wingspan, and vertical, like that has always been the determining factor of greatness in this league. You know better than that Ex.

---

In addition to being wrong this argument is dumb.

Sure a smaller player can succeed in the NBA. Mugsy was 5'2". Barkley was 6'4" and played power forward.

However ALL OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL the taller players have the advantage. it isn't that difficult a concept to grasp.

If a 6'4" guy was trying to guard JJ the first thing you would be thinking is "JJ has a big height advantage so he should take this guy down low".

That is why there are so few starting centers at Horfords size, and the ones that are just so happen to be extremely athletic multiple All-Stars.

[AtLaS]

Quote:

---

Last i checked you use your hands to shoot

---

So why didn't Okafor dominate Horford on defense? And why did Horford have 4 blocks?

Quote:

---

and rebound.

---

Obviously standing reach helps rebounding, but it's only 1 of about 5 factors, and we've been through this before. Strength, position, being able to read the ball, desire, boxing out, and hustling are all JUST as important. There have been HUNDREDS of players who are good rebounders without having a good reach.

[AtLaS]

Quote:

---

However ALL OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL the taller players have the advantage.

---

But all other things are NOT equal, because every player has different instincts, talents, and abilities.

Quote:

---

If a 6'4" guy was trying to guard JJ the first thing you would be thinking is "JJ has a big height advantage so he should take this guy down low".

---

JJ is almost 6'8 in shoes. That's a 4 inch difference. That's like Horford facing a 7'2" center which happens RARELY. In reality, he will be facing players who are 1 and 2 inches taller than him.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

JJ is almost 6'8 in shoes. That's a 4 inch difference. That's like Horford facing a 7'2" center which happens RARELY

---

No it isn't. It is like Horford facing Howard, Okafor and Adridge.

Explain something to me. Why is 4" in height a big deal but 4" in standing reach isn't a big deal?

*crickets*

[exodus]

Quote:

---

So why didn't Okafor dominate Horford on defense? And why did Horford have 4 blocks?

---

I didn't see the game and neither did you so we would just be speculating.

Quote:

---

Strength, position, being able to read the ball, desire, boxing out, and hustling are all JUST as important.

---

So if Howard had a standing reach of 8'11" instead of 9'3.5" he would still lead the league in rebounding. Right?

[AtLaS]

First of all, someone who has a 4" height advantage will usually have a bigger than 4" standing reach advantage. Horford will also have an athletic advantage over 85-90% of centers in the NBA.

I just put more stock into basketball ability rather than what a yard stick measures.

[AtLaS]

Quote:

---

So if Howard had a standing reach of 8'11" instead of 9'3.5" he would still lead the league in rebounding. Right?

---

So how did Rodman and Barkley become such great rebounders?

[exodus]

Quote:

---

Obviously standing reach helps rebounding,

---

Lets look at the top rebounders in the league last year.

Garnett

Chandler

Howard

Boozer

Camby

Okafor

Jefferson

Bosh

Duncan

Ben

I know that Chandler, Jefferson, Okafor and Howard have standing reaches of at least 9'2". It is pretty safe to assume that Duncan, Camby, and Garnett do as well. Boozer and Bosh have a standing reach of 9'1".

No telling what Bens is.

Is standing reach the only factor in rebounding? of course not. However it is obviously a big help.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

First of all, someone who has a 4" height advantage will usually have a bigger than 4" standing reach advantage. Horford will also have an athletic advantage over 85-90% of centers in the NBA.

I just put more stock into basketball ability rather than what a yard stick measures.

---

I knew you couldn't answer the question. Predictable as sunrise.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

So if Howard had a standing reach of 8'11" instead of 9'3.5" he would still lead the league in rebounding. Right?

---

So how did Rodman and Barkley become such great rebounders?

---

Because they had so many other attributes that made up for their lack of height. But they are the RARE exceptions to the rule.

While you are in college you may want to take a class in probability.

If i have a pair of aces and you have pair of kings and there is one card coming you can still win but the odds are heavily against you. Just like the odds were heavily against Barkley doing so well on the boards at his height. How many guys Barkleys height have rebounded like him? Very few but you take the exception to the rule as if that proves something.

It doesn't prove anything other than it is possible. But it DOESN'T prove that it is even REMOTELY likely and that is a concept you are unable to grasp.

[AtLaS]

Quote:

---

I knew you couldn't answer the question. Predictable as sunrise.

---

How is that wrong? A difference in standing reach is usually bigger than the difference in height. Josh Smith was 6'7.25 (without shoes) in the predraft combine and has a 8'10.5" standing reach. Are you telling me that most 6'3.25" will have an average standing reach of 8'6.5?

[exodus]

Quote:

---

A difference in standing reach is usually bigger than the difference in height

---

but standing reach doesn't matter anyway so what is the difference? Only height matters.

[AtLaS]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

A difference in standing reach is usually bigger than the difference in height

---

but standing reach doesn't matter anyway so what is the difference? Only height matters.

---

Please show me where I said standing reach doesn't matter.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

A difference in standing reach is usually bigger than the difference in height

---

but standing reach doesn't matter anyway so what is the difference? Only height matters.

---

Please show me where I said standing reach doesn't matter.

---

This look familiar?

Quote:

---

The only thing that reach REALLY makes a difference is blocking shots

---

[AtLaS]

Quote:

---

This look familiar?

Quote:

---

The only thing that reach REALLY makes a difference is blocking shots

---

---

Maybe I wasn't being clear, but I meant the only thing that it PRIMARILY effects, that's why I stressed the word "really".

I also said this in the same thread.

Quote:

---

Obviously standing reach helps rebounding, but it's only 1 of about 5 factors

---

But since you are claiming reach is such a factor in rebounding, and that Horford will have that disadvantage against centers, are you saying Horford will be a poor rebounder at the center position?