Premium Member AtLaS Posted October 25, 2007 Premium Member Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 Quote: Okafor hasn't done crap all preseason. With his injury history he probably is just taking it easy. So why did he play 45 minutes? I also think Okafor will play better in the season, but it's not fair to discount a great Horford performance, but emphasize his bad ones. If you discount the game against Okafor, you have to discount his bad games as well. Quote: And he will be starting the season at the 4. But he will still play more 5 than 4. You didn't even see the game, noone knows what happened, so just give it a rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerrywest Posted October 25, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 Quote: Quote: Quote: Quote: Hilton got 14 rebounds, Horford 6. Pretty clear who won that battle. Hilton clearly won the battle but for what it is worth Horford did get 7 rebounds last night. I hope for his sake he doesn't get half the rebounds of his opponent very often. I doubt he will be outrebounded by a 2:1 ratio a lot (Armstrong) or that he will outrebound his opponent by a 6:1 ratio a lot (Okafor). He will more likely average 9+ rpg and hold his own in that stat category, IMO. Looking at Horford's pre-season stat next to Smoove's, it seems that he'll rebound as well as Smoove this year. Al played 10% more minutes and got 15%+ more rebounds. Top 20 in rebounds isn't too shabby for anybody let alone a rookie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exodus Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 Quote: but it's not fair to discount a great Horford performance but emphasize his bad ones I think you pretty much made my point for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member AtLaS Posted October 25, 2007 Premium Member Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 Quote: Quote: but it's not fair to discount a great Horford performance but emphasize his bad ones I think you pretty much made my point for me. Yeah because Horford has continually been abused defensively and done nothing on offense . I guess being #2 in rookie rankings isn't good enough, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerrywest Posted October 25, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 Did Horford really had a bad game? The five assists show a lot of his ability than his measly 7 rebounds(also leads the team). Those 5 assists probably came from posting up while double teamed or from fast breaks. How can you not be impressed about that? I wonder how many of Armstrong's rebounds came against Shelden. Shelden had 1 rebound in his last 15 minutes. Some of those 4 turnovers could have been someone else's fault. Without watching the game, and with such small sample size, you don't need to get carried away so much. We will find out much more about him soon. I'll value your comments much more after you see him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killa3312 Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 exodus doesn't like Horford, and never has. Despite his quality preseason (11/9/2.5/1 are pretty damn good stats for a first year player not yet acclimated to the game), he's going to have to prove his doubters wrong all season. That's fine, because he will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exodus Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 Quote: exodus doesn't like Horford, and never has. Despite his quality preseason (11/9/2.5/1 are pretty damn good stats for a first year player not yet acclimated to the game), he's going to have to prove his doubters wrong all season. That's fine, because he will. It isn't so much that i don't like him. It is just that i think he is overrated. And i don't think he can play C full time. maybe 15-20 minutes a game at C depending on matchups would be the max i would say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oiatlhawksfan Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 SMH. Anyways, the refs were giving Hilton alot of calls, and it wasn't Horford who was commiting all of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killa3312 Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 Quote: Quote: exodus doesn't like Horford, and never has. Despite his quality preseason (11/9/2.5/1 are pretty damn good stats for a first year player not yet acclimated to the game), he's going to have to prove his doubters wrong all season. That's fine, because he will. It isn't so much that i don't like him. It is just that i think he is overrated. And i don't think he can play C full time. maybe 15-20 minutes a game at C depending on matchups would be the max i would say. He was one of the best rookies in the preseason (yes, I know, it's only preseason). It could be worse... he could of looked like absolute garbage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exodus Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 Quote: Quote: Quote: exodus doesn't like Horford, and never has. Despite his quality preseason (11/9/2.5/1 are pretty damn good stats for a first year player not yet acclimated to the game), he's going to have to prove his doubters wrong all season. That's fine, because he will. It isn't so much that i don't like him. It is just that i think he is overrated. And i don't think he can play C full time. maybe 15-20 minutes a game at C depending on matchups would be the max i would say. He was one of the best rookies in the preseason (yes, I know, it's only preseason). It could be worse... he could of looked like absolute garbage. YOu haven't seen me say anything about him being the wrong pick, have you? If i felt that way (Childress, Shelden) you would know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member AtLaS Posted October 26, 2007 Premium Member Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 Quote: And i don't think he can play C full time. maybe 15-20 minutes a game at C Well it seems you've came around a little bit. Because that was my entire argument about Horford, I always thought he could play about 15-20 minutes there. Around draft time, you were saying something like he couldn't play there at all, or only "spot minutes". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exodus Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 Quote: Quote: And i don't think he can play C full time. maybe 15-20 minutes a game at C Well it seems you've came around a little bit. Because that was my entire argument about Horford, I always thought he could play about 15-20 minutes there. Around draft time, you were saying something like he couldn't play there at all, or only "spot minutes". Actually i was saying that he would be a backup and the 4 and 5. and i still think that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member AtLaS Posted October 26, 2007 Premium Member Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 I might have to go thread hunting on that one.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJlaysitup Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 Personally I'm not too worried about H.A. dominating us inside once the regular season starts...if anything I'm worried about CP3 against whoever we put out there at PG. Smoove/Zaza/Horford won't let H.A. take over a game inside...and Curry doesn't have the shots to do it. We'll be OK. That's not to dis Marvin or Chillz - they'll get their share of rebounds too. Smoove outjumped everybody for midrange rebounds last year and I expect he will do it again this year. Changing the subject a bit - I think it comes down to Woody selling team defense and selflessness to the bigs. Guys like Zaza and Shelden have to be tough inside and accept the fact that they can't work on personal stats and take fouls when they have to (deliver hard ones at that). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Walter Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 Quote: Walter, why do you only post when you want to hate on some body ? Just curious ? How is it "hate" to suggest Horford is not an NBA center? Long before the draft I was a BIG fan of Horford. I saw him as the prototypical NBA Pf. Just don't try and sell him to me as an NBA center, much less one next to Josh Smith at Pf. That [censored] don't work in the NBA! When the ref calls become less frequent, the games more important, the pace slower, we'll get hammered if we insist upon playing small ball. Frankly, please find the "hate" in the post you are responding to. I see more "hate" in your accusation than in my post. I don't want mediocrity for this franchise. It's the worst thing possible. I fear we have rebuilt for it. We were fortunate (and BK smarter with the Al trade than I and most predicted) and this past offseason was better than the previous two (couldn't be worse), but I think we still lack a superstar and center. While Law may not be a true Pg, with JJ that isn't the most important thing and given Law's leadership abilities it seems his intangibles could really make a difference. We'll see. I have never "hated" Horford AT ALL. I just do not believe he is a center and I do "hate" thruroughly undersized/wrong skilled lineups. I also believed this team needed a superstar which I see not only being less likely for Horford than Yi but any attempt with Horford more detrimental to JS than any attempt with Yi (who I saw as a great "Pf" compliment to JS "Sf" game). Anyhow, those who "love" their Hawks so much that they cannot see the pitfalls of such a small ball strategy (or the lack of two superstars, one preferably better than JJ) aren't doing anyone a service. MRHonline might represent a middle position indicating he doesn't think that a smaller lineup with Horford at C and JS at Pf could ever contend but could make the playoffs. I certainly can see playoffs happening for this massive amount of lotto talent, but few things doom a playoff team like a short, small, and underskilled post and we won't be able to afford all these lotto picks. W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJlaysitup Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 Quote: ...When the ref calls become less frequent, the games more important, the pace slower, we'll get hammered if we insist upon playing small ball. W... That's pretty much my concern too. A small ball lineup can certainly work (see PHX)...but I can't imagine Woody running a system like theirs (plus having Nash helps). If we drop back into a slow halfcourt game we may be in trouble in the post again. But hey...we went 7-1 in pre and we haven't lost a regular season game yet - so it's no time for pessimism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gray Mule Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 So. Hawks lost the battle. But remember, we won the war! Small, as in small lineup, as Walter points out, and the slow, deliberate game the Hawks are known to employ, doesn't compute. When the Hawks go to their small lineup, speed must be the mode of operation. They have the players to operate in the small, fast style. Hawks have no, none, nada of the huge, Shaq like players. We do have some beef we can use. Shelden Williams, 6'9" - 250 Lorenzen Wright, 6'11" - 255 Zaza Pachulia, 6'11' - 280 Al Horford, 6'10" - 245 If Hawks are to go slow, these are the players available. That mades Horford the lightest of the big four, but possibly, no probably, the most athletic of the bunch. Even with our big men in there, we're still not huge, either by weight or height. Still, we should be able to play the slow, plodding game ocasionally. Speed must be our game. Not necessarily always the fast break game, but moving with and without the ball, opening things up with fast movement of cutting, slashing and constant movement of the ball. Constant, high speed pressure. That's what this team is built for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Diesel Posted October 27, 2007 Premium Member Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 You have to have the shooters to play small ball. Unless we plan on playing Salim, JJ, and Chillz, there's no need to play Small ball. It's like giving the other team the paint and the post and saying: Hey, we will beat you in the midrange. Midrange can't beat post & paint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now