Hey Ex,

[drzachary]

Don't ever think of Horford as an undersized center. Think of him as an overathletic center!

[Lascar78]

You went out of your way looking for any center that would qualify, and yet if you cut the list to guys that are his size/weight or smaller/lighter, the list is reduced to:

big ben 6'9 240

The one guy who is always listed because he is a freak of nature. The fact that you could only find one guy who was not taller and/or heavier than him should tell you something.

[drzachary]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

and the guys who are 'undersized' centers yet play it anyway are the ones who are the top centers of the league

---

Yet somehow they don't have names.

---

al horford 6'10 245

amare 6'10 249

dwight 6'11 265

big ben 6'9 240

okafor 6'10 255

mourning 6'10 261

curry 6'11 285

camby 6'11 235

okur 6'11 263

magloire 6'11 265

etan thomas 6'10 260

duncan 6'11 260

dalembert 6'11 250

so amare/okafor/mourning/thomas are all same height; big ben is shorter; dwight/curry/camby/okur/magloire/duncan/dalembert are all 1 measley inch taller, yet horford's 35" vertical is better than almost all of those players...

only dwight/curry/magloire outweigh horford by 20+ pounds

he may or may not be able to play at center...but to say he's undersized is incorrect...he's right there in the range of top centers these days...so if he can ball, then he's good to go

---

St. Nick,

Find the heights/weights for these guys when they were Horford's current age, then you might be able to make your point better.

[Nicholasp27]

oh come on now

u are being ridiculous

amare is same height and FOUR pounds heavier

there is no difference in FOUR pounds

seriously

[exodus]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

and the guys who are 'undersized' centers yet play it anyway are the ones who are the top centers of the league

---

Yet somehow they don't have names.

---

al horford 6'10 245

amare 6'10 249

dwight 6'11 265

big ben 6'9 240

okafor 6'10 255

mourning 6'10 261

curry 6'11 285

camby 6'11 235

okur 6'11 263

magloire 6'11 265

etan thomas 6'10 260

duncan 6'11 260

dalembert 6'11 250

so amare/okafor/mourning/thomas are all same height; big ben is shorter; dwight/curry/camby/okur/magloire/duncan/dalembert are all 1 measley inch taller, yet horford's 35" vertical is better than almost all of those players...

only dwight/curry/magloire outweigh horford by 20+ pounds

he may or may not be able to play at center...but to say he's undersized is incorrect...he's right there in the range of top centers these days...so if he can ball, then he's good to go

---

Only two starting centers are close to Horford in size, Amare and Ben. Both are athletic freaks. The rest have big reach/weight advangages.

Howard is the same height as Horford but his reach is 4.5" higher. Howards reach is higher than Aldridge. Okafor has a reach 3" higher than Horford, and so on and on and on...

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

I am not saying Horford can't play center or that he can't do it better than Zaza. What i am saying is that i don't think the Hawks can be contenders with a Smith/Horford starting combo at the 4/5. That is just too small.

If the goal is to be an average team then sure Horford can play the 5. If the goal is to be contenders then i just can't see it working.

---

Some people simply accept "better than miserable" as "success". We need to quit redefining victory, stop moving the goal posts up and realize that we want to win an NBA championship and to do so requires far, FAR, F-A-R better than we have been and doesn't by all accounts rely upon a severely undersized and underskilled frontcourt. Everyone should agree on that point because historically it is inarguable.

W

[gsuteke]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I am not saying Horford can't play center or that he can't do it better than Zaza. What i am saying is that i don't think the Hawks can be contenders with a Smith/Horford starting combo at the 4/5. That is just too small.

If the goal is to be an average team then sure Horford can play the 5. If the goal is to be contenders then i just can't see it working.

---

Some people simply accept "better than miserable" as "success". We need to quit redefining victory, stop moving the goal posts up and realize that we want to win an NBA championship and to do so requires far, FAR, F-A-R better than we have been and doesn't by all accounts rely upon a severely undersized and underskilled frontcourt. Everyone should agree on that point because historically it is inarguable.

W

---

Did anyone catch the 2nd quarter of the Lakers/Sonics game last night? I saw some of it flipping back and forth between the South Florida game.

You have to have seen this because I can't do it justice in words. Sene gets fouled. He steps up to the line and shoots his first free throw with what had to have been a 25 foot arc on it. It went WAY up in the air and came down between the base of the rim and the backboard. Awful shot. What's worse is the 2nd free throw. He shot that one with a 12 foot arc and it wound up a foot short of the rim not even grazing the net. The Lakers bench was clowning him so bad you almost felt sorry for the guy. Bynum was clowing the guy on the other end of the court. Even Farmar hit a shot in the guy's face. The point is the guy can't play. Boxscores only tell you so much.

Yi has the opposite problem. He can shoot, however what good is a 7 footer that wants to play shooting guard when you need a Center?

Many of you continue to complain about the Horford pick but there simply wasn't a better option available in the Bigs department.

[jerrywest]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I am not saying Horford can't play center or that he can't do it better than Zaza. What i am saying is that i don't think the Hawks can be contenders with a Smith/Horford starting combo at the 4/5. That is just too small.

If the goal is to be an average team then sure Horford can play the 5. If the goal is to be contenders then i just can't see it working.

---

Some people simply accept "better than miserable" as "success". We need to quit redefining victory, stop moving the goal posts up and realize that we want to win an NBA championship and to do so requires far, FAR, F-A-R better than we have been and doesn't by all accounts rely upon a severely undersized and underskilled frontcourt. Everyone should agree on that point because historically it is inarguable.

W

---

Did anyone catch the 2nd quarter of the Lakers/Sonics game last night? I saw some of it flipping back and forth between the South Florida game.

You have to have seen this because I can't do it justice in words. Sene gets fouled. He steps up to the line and shoots his first free throw with what had to have been a 25 foot arc on it. It went WAY up in the air and came down between the base of the rim and the backboard. Awful shot. What's worse is the 2nd free throw. He shot that one with a 12 foot arc and it wound up a foot short of the rim not even grazing the net. The Lakers bench was clowning him so bad you almost felt sorry for the guy. Bynum was clowing the guy on the other end of the court. Even Farmar hit a shot in the guy's face. The point is the guy can't play. Boxscores only tell you so much.

Yi has the opposite problem. He can shoot, however what good is a 7 footer that wants to play shooting guard when you need a Center?

Many of you continue to complain about the Horford pick but there simply wasn't a better option available in the Bigs department.

---

I remember the air-ball. It was so funny and it reminded me of Walter's picture. Sene also had a silly offensive foul on a fast break when he had an easy dunk or assist, but he just run into the defensive man.

Critt is no Acie. He is very quick but you could tell that he doesn't see things in slow motion like good point guards need to see. Critt plays as if the shot clock will expire in 3 seconds.

Soon Walter will stop mentioning Critt and Sene like he has stopped mentioning UGA's Hayes for whom he wanted trade couple of first rounders for. That's called hind-sight artist.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

He steps up to the line and shoots his first free throw with what had to have been a 25 foot arc on it. It went WAY up in the air and came down between the base of the rim and the backboard. Awful shot. What's worse is the 2nd free throw. He shot that one with a 12 foot arc and it wound up a foot short of the rim not even grazing the net. The Lakers bench was clowning him so bad you almost felt sorry for the guy. Bynum was clowing the guy on the other end of the court.

---

LOL i would have liked to have seen that.

However to be fair he did have 6 pts and 3 rebounds in only 12 minutes. And he had 15 rebounds and 4 blocks in his previous game.

[jerrywest]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

He steps up to the line and shoots his first free throw with what had to have been a 25 foot arc on it. It went WAY up in the air and came down between the base of the rim and the backboard. Awful shot. What's worse is the 2nd free throw. He shot that one with a 12 foot arc and it wound up a foot short of the rim not even grazing the net. The Lakers bench was clowning him so bad you almost felt sorry for the guy. Bynum was clowing the guy on the other end of the court.

---

LOL i would have liked to have seen that.

However to be fair he did have 6 pts and 3 rebounds in only 12 minutes. And he had 15 rebounds and 4 blocks in his previous game.

---

I think Sene has the body for a very good player but he doesn't have the mind. He doesn't know what he's doing.

Kobe looks so cute when he tries to conceal his laugh.

[gsuteke]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

He steps up to the line and shoots his first free throw with what had to have been a 25 foot arc on it. It went WAY up in the air and came down between the base of the rim and the backboard. Awful shot. What's worse is the 2nd free throw. He shot that one with a 12 foot arc and it wound up a foot short of the rim not even grazing the net. The Lakers bench was clowning him so bad you almost felt sorry for the guy. Bynum was clowing the guy on the other end of the court.

---

LOL i would have liked to have seen that.

However to be fair he did have 6 pts and 3 rebounds in only 12 minutes. And he had 15 rebounds and 4 blocks in his previous game.

---

It was ugly though Ex. If you watch a game you can tell the guy can't play a lick of basketball. Luckily for the Sonics they'll be terrible for 3 more years so they can continue to let the guy stick around and pray for rain.

I'm not trying to clown Waldo here, I'm just pointing out quality Bigs haven't been available where we've been drafting as of late. When Hibbert pulled out of the draft this go around I immediately said to myself, "Well there goes our chance to get a Center again."

[gsuteke]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

He steps up to the line and shoots his first free throw with what had to have been a 25 foot arc on it. It went WAY up in the air and came down between the base of the rim and the backboard. Awful shot. What's worse is the 2nd free throw. He shot that one with a 12 foot arc and it wound up a foot short of the rim not even grazing the net. The Lakers bench was clowning him so bad you almost felt sorry for the guy. Bynum was clowing the guy on the other end of the court.

---

LOL i would have liked to have seen that.

However to be fair he did have 6 pts and 3 rebounds in only 12 minutes. And he had 15 rebounds and 4 blocks in his previous game.

---

I think Sene has the body for a very good player but he doesn't have the mind. He doesn't know what he's doing.

Kobe looks so cute when he tries to conceal his laugh.

---

He didn't look like the toothpick I thought he was but then again Durant didn't look tiny. He can't even bench 185 lbs. The TV camera must give off somewhat of a sense of optical illusion.

BTW Durant looked like the player I though he was last night, 8-20 from the field. He'll get better but he's a natural born chucker.

[jerrywest]

What did you think of Critt last night?

[gsuteke]

Quote:

---

What did you think of Critt last night?

---

Like I said I was flipping. The only play I remember Critt being in was when he made a good pass on a 3 on 1 break.

I believe that was about the time the announcers were talking about the Hawks almost trading for Ridnour and now they're hoping Acie Law can be the answer at the PG position.

[jerrywest]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

What did you think of Critt last night?

---

Like I said I was flipping. The only play I remember Critt being in was when he made a good pass on a 3 on 1 break.

I believe that was about the time the announcers were talking about the Hawks almost trading for Ridnour and now they're hoping Acie Law can be the answer at the PG position.

---

Yes I remember that. Critt was so fast that he lost the ball and when the ball was almost in the defenders hands, he jumped to poked the ball for a pass. I was impressed with his quickness there. Why would a PG lose the ball on a 3 on 1 break?

[Lascar78]

Quote:

---

oh come on now

u are being ridiculous

amare is same height and FOUR pounds heavier

there is no difference in FOUR pounds

seriously

---

Ok, throw Amare the freak in for the hell of it. When you have to stretch like hell to find 2 guys that are are not significantly bigger or heavier, you are only proving the point that he is undersized for the position. Not that he can't play C, but he's undersized.

Wouldn't the very definition of an undersized player be a guy who's smaller than almost everyone who succeeds at the position?

He's undersized, deal with it. He's very skilled and we run a loose system that will allow him to play as a PF even when he's at C, so I'm sure he can succeed. But the guy is clearly a PF. If I had to name the 2 guys on the team whose natural NBA positions are most clearly defined I would say JJ as a SG and Horford as a PF.

Additionally, I would certainly say that Amare's natural position in the NBA is closer to PF although he's more of a tweener. If you are building a team from scratch and Amare is the first guy on your team, 99% of people out there would pencil him in at PF and look for the 1-2-3-5 to put around him. The Phoenix system is perfect for him to get away with being C, not to mention that he is one of the 3-4 most athletic guys all-time to ever play at C.

[coachx]

We hear ya' Lascar.

Is your opinion that we should have taken Conley at #3 and taken what ever is left at #11 (meaning we wouldn't need Law) ? Maybe Thorton..though he fits no need at all and is already 24.

I remember that is what you were lobbying for up until about a week before the draft (I was out of the country during draft week).

I know you were not sold on Horford due to his reach from the begining of work outs and you never liked Law b/c you thought his high scoring at A&M meant he didn't have natural PG skills.

So in hind sight would you now take

Horford #3 and Law #11

or

Conley #3 & Thorton #11(or what ever non PG was left at #11)

Just curious if Law or Horford have proved enough yet to begin to change your mind.

[Nicholasp27]

ok, i can admit that he is "undersized" for center

but what i take issue with is people saying that he can't be a good/great starting c in nba just because of his size...they don't say because he doesn't have the skills/desire/etc...but just that he's 'undersized

but big ben and amare have been best centers in bball for the past 5+ years

[exodus]

During the summer i said Horford looked to be an average starting forward to me. Some might take that as dissing him but it isn't as negative as it appears.

This is what i said a few months ago.

Quote:

---

What you have to realize is that, if he becomes an average starting 4, that IS special. That means only 15 pfs are as good as or better than him. Considering how many players are drafted each year that is an elite group.

---

click

So if you think i was selling Horford short it is time you stepped up and say how good you think Horford will be.

Will he be better than..

Duncan? Dirk? Bosh? KG? Brand? Marion? Aldridge? JO?

See where i am going with this? The 4 position is stacked so saying he will be an average starter isn't really that negative.

An average starting 4 might be Odom who average 16/10 with 5 assits.

As far as playing center i don't have a problem with him getting backup minutes there as long as we have a defensive center with size to match up with guys like Duncan and JO.

When Colangelo took the Raps job one of the first things he did was get Rasho so Bosh wouldn't have to spend so much time at C. And this year apparently they plan on playing Bargnani there so Bosh will spend even less time at C.

[Lascar78]

Well first of all, I'm not saying this to try to say we shouldn't have drafted him. I really don't care about being proven right or whatever. I'm just saying, the guy is a PF. We can support him, and try to find how to best fit him in this team (it will have to be at C), but we shouldn't lie to ourselves and pretend that he actually is a natural C with legit NBA starting center size. At the very least you have to realize that he is undersized. I mean, that's basically a fact.

To answer your question, I probably would have taken Conley/Hawes if he fell, Conley/Stuckey otherwise depending on how things shake out if we take Conley. So far Law and Horford have proven to be exactly what I thought they were. Law was one of my favorite players in the NCAA last year, and Horford looks about as good as I expected, although I thought he would have more post moves.

I still think Horford/Law is the best total amount of talent we could bring in, but I would have taken Conley+Hawes/Stuckey. We would have gotten a real distributor, and either a C or a legit backup SG, filling 2 positions of need. Instead we got a PF that we will have to play out of position, and a flat out playmaker at PG who's not really a distributor. I understand both approaches, I just see a team that could REALLY benefit from a true distributor to get Marvin/Chill/Smith easy buckets all day long. Law will drive and dish, but other than that he won't really be setting plays up (unless we get a real coach in here).

To me it was do you want the most total talent with two pieces, or do you want two pieces that really fit even though the second player won't be as good as it would in scenario A. I understand both approaches, I just see a team that would really take off with a pure point. That being said, our interior D would still be even worse than it will be if we ended up with Conley/Stuckey.

Anyhow, I really thought we should have taken Conley, but I was pretty much over it the day after the draft. I liked what I saw out of Horford, and really liked Law a lot.

I see now I've written another novel, but honestly, I was not even trying to hint at any of this. All I'm saying is, forget who was drafted when, by who and for what, I hold the following truths to be self-evident:

In the NBA,

-JJ is a SG

-Chill is a SF

-Marvin is a SF

-Horford is a PF

-Smith is somewhat of a tweener but is much closer to being a very goof PF than he is a very good SF

-Speedy is not faking it

It doesn't mean they can't play well out of position.