Is the Magic's Ryan Anderson better than Horford?

[Atlantaholic]

Horford's TS% was over 3% higher than Anderson and .6% lower than Bass.

Yeah, I noticed after I posted. I'm not Horford's biggest fan by any means, but it is pretty obvious he is better than Anderson/Bass

[Atlantaholic]

They had to include Anderson to get out of Carter's contract. If they can get Lebron or any superstar next season I doubt they'd shed too much of a tear over Ryan.

True. Though they probably could have included a lot worse players in that deal. I'm sure more than just Orlando was interested in Carter, and Orlando was desperate to fill Turks void so I definitely think the Nets had the negotiating advantage.

[exodus]

The fact Anderson and Bass couldn't get minutes in a New Jersey and Dallas front line isn't really a big endorsement Exodus.

They might have higher Ts% but if you think the Nets and Dallas wouldn't have trade Bass or Anderson for Horford you are smoking some bad hash. Orlando would trade both of them for Horf if they could afford it.

Having said that Bass and Anderson have potential to be very decent players. I, frankly, was a little shocked that the Nets included Ryan in the deal... They must have not thought too highly of him I suppose. If he turns out to be a good starter the Nets will look really stupid. Horf won't be Karl Malone, but he can definitely average 10 and 10, (he virtually did his rookie year) and that is something that very few players in the NBA can do, and something that Anderson and Bass will very likely never get close to doing.

If you think Horford would play 33 minutes per game in Dallas you are smoking some good stuff as well. Anderson went to a team with more forwards then they knew what to do with, not to mention the fact that he was a rookie.

Who was Horford competing with for minutes when he got here? Zaza was the guy the Bucks let go over Dan Gadzuric which should tell you something.

Orlando already has Howard and Gortat, both of whom are better rebounders and defenders than Horford. They want shooters to spread the floor to make things easier inside for Howard. Putting Horford next to Howard would make it much easier for teams to defend Howard.

Guys who score 11 ppg in 33 minutes are a dime a dozen. Horford is a better than average rebounder that struggles to defend players much bigger than him. He gets pushed around routinely. His offensive game is lame. The reason he scored as much as he did is that the defense leaves him wide open all the time from 15-18 feet and he gets a lot of easy baskets underneath that are set up by someone else.

Anderson and Bass can actually score on their own. They don't have to be spoon fed.

[MaceCase]

True. Though they probably could have included a lot worse players in that deal. I'm sure more than just Orlando was interested in Carter, and Orlando was desperate to fill Turks void so I definitely think the Nets had the negotiating advantage.

Economy, age, length of contract played major roles in it also. Only teams Carter would have made sense for were the contenders and they all went different directions (Artest, Daniels, Parker/Moon, his former teammate Jefferson) leaving the Nets with very few options that would not only give them some talent but also still maintain 2010 capspace in return.

NJ had a list of actually better talented PFs in Boone and Williams especially considering at the time the trade was made Gortat was out the door but Orlando's offense is predicated on guys that can spread the floor thus why Anderson and then Bass were their pickups rather any list of traditional bigs that were available all summer.

[Atlantaholic]

If you think Horford would play 33 minutes per game in Dallas you are smoking some good stuff as well. Anderson went to a team with more forwards then they knew what to do with, not to mention the fact that he was a rookie.

Who was Horford competing with for minutes when he got here? Zaza was the guy the Bucks let go over Dan Gadzuric which should tell you something.

Orlando already has Howard and Gortat, both of whom are better rebounders and defenders than Horford. They want shooters to spread the floor to make things easier inside for Howard. Putting Horford next to Howard would make it much easier for teams to defend Howard.

Guys who score 11 ppg in 33 minutes are a dime a dozen. Horford is a better than average rebounder that struggles to defend players much bigger than him. He gets pushed around routinely. His offensive game is lame. The reason he scored as much as he did is that the defense leaves him wide open all the time from 15-18 feet and he gets a lot of easy baskets underneath that are set up by someone else.

Anderson and Bass can actually score on their own. They don't have to be spoon fed.

Both Yi and Boone missed like 25 games each last year and both were pretty bad. Horford would have started for that team at PF and gotten 30 minutes a game easily. Maybe a little less, between 25-30 just due to the fact that Yi was forced to play due to the pressure to justify the trade that brought him there. But he would have taken Josh Boone's minutes for sure, and would have backed up Brook Lopez as well which is something that Anderson didn't really do too much. I'll give you that he probably wouldn't have played 30 minutes in Dallas though.

Anderson and Bass are better 1 on 1 than Horf, but they aren't even close in the rebounding department, which is the most important thing.

[Atlantaholic]

Economy, age, length of contract played major roles in it also. Only teams Carter would have made sense for were the contenders and they all went different directions (Artest, Daniels, Parker/Moon, his former teammate Jefferson) leaving the Nets with very few options that would not only give them some talent but also still maintain 2010 capspace in return.

NJ had a list of actually better talented PFs in Boone and Williams especially considering at the time the trade was made Gortat was out the door but Orlando's offense is predicated on guys that can spread the floor thus why Anderson and then Bass were their pickups rather any list of traditional bigs that were available all summer.

Yeah, this makes sense... Good move by the Magic.

[exodus]

Both Yi and Boone missed like 25 games each last year and both were pretty bad. Horford would have started for that team at PF and gotten 30 minutes a game easily. Maybe a little less, between 25-30 just due to the fact that Yi was forced to play due to the pressure to justify the trade that brought him there. But he would have taken Josh Boone's minutes for sure, and would have backed up Brook Lopez as well which is something that Anderson didn't really do too much. I'll give you that he probably wouldn't have played 30 minutes in Dallas though.

Anderson and Bass are better 1 on 1 than Horf, but they aren't even close in the rebounding department, which is the most important thing.

When i look up at the scoreboard i see points, not rebounds.

If rebounds are really more important than points you should probably inform the people who vote for the MVP and pick the All-Stars. They have been getting it wrong for a long time.

[Atlantaholic]

When i look up at the scoreboard i see points, not rebounds.

If rebounds are really more important than points you should probably inform the people who vote for the MVP and pick the All-Stars. They have been getting it wrong for a long time.

You want rebounding from your forwards. 7 ppg and 10 rebounds > 10 points and 7 rebounds from a pf any day. Why did Dennis Rodman have an NBA career? He was the worst scorer in the history of the NBA possibly.

Also, of the last 10 MVPs only two (Shaq in 1999-2000 and Iverson in 2001) led the league in scoring, so obviously there is more to the game than PPG.

Edited October 27, 2009 by Atlantaholic

[exodus]

You want rebounding from your forwards. 7 ppg and 10 rebounds > 10 points and 7 rebounds from a pf any day. Why did Dennis Rodman have an NBA career? He was the worst scorer in the history of the NBA possibly.

That is exactly the type of ridiculous comparison that i was just talking about. Rodman was one of the best rebounders in NBA history. He is not even remotely a legit comparison for Horford. Not to mention that Rodman played with some of the best scorers of his era (Isiah, Dumars, Robinson, Jordan, Pippen). When you have Jordan and Pippen as your top two scores you don't need points from Rodman.

Last season Orlando got 1.1 more rebounds than their opponents which is better than average but hardly stellar. However they made it to the finals due to their hot shooting. They made 8.4 three pointers per game in the postseason. Denver is the only team that got close to them at 8.1 per game.

Last year Portland outrebounded their opponents by 5.4 a game.

[exodus]

You want rebounding from your forwards. 7 ppg and 10 rebounds > 10 points and 7 rebounds from a pf any day. Why did Dennis Rodman have an NBA career? He was the worst scorer in the history of the NBA possibly.

Also, of the last 10 MVPs only two (Shaq in 1999-2000 and Iverson in 2001) led the league in scoring, so obviously there is more to the game than PPG.

:laughing5:

How many points did Lebron average last year? How about Kobe the year before?

Howard has dominated the rebounding numbers the last few years and hasn't gotten any mention as a possible MVP even with his 20 ppg. Camby has put up big rebounding numbers for years and i don't think he has gotten too many MVP votes.

Edited October 27, 2009 by exodus

[Atlantaholic]

That is exactly the type of ridiculous comparison that i was just talking about. Rodman was one of the best rebounders in NBA history. He is not even remotely a legit comparison for Horford. Not to mention that Rodman played with some of the best scorers of his era (Isiah, Dumars, Robinson, Jordan, Pippen). When you have Jordan and Pippen as your top two scores you don't need points from Rodman.

Last season Orlando got 1.1 more rebounds than their opponents which is better than average but hardly stellar. However they made it to the finals due to their hot shooting. They made 8.4 three pointers per game in the postseason. Denver is the only team that got close to them at 8.1 per game.

Last year Portland outrebounded their opponents by 5.4 a game.

You need players who can rebound. Why is this a debate??? Is there one good team who doesn't have at least one really good rebounder?

I was not comparing Horf to Rodman, just bringing up the importance of rebounding. Just responding to you bringing up MVPs and All stars to the discussion (which was even more ridiculous since Horf is closer to Rodman than Ryan Anderson is to an MVP.)

If we had either Bass or Ryan instead of Horford we would be in serious trouble. We already get killed on the boards with Horf + Smoove. Smoove+Anderson would be catastrophic.

Edited October 27, 2009 by Atlantaholic

[Atlantaholic]

Also Horfs TS% that you posted WAS higher than Anderson's and virtually the same than Basses so I don't even know what your point is. We don't need Horf to shoot threes, we need him to rebound and run the floor, something he is much, much better at than either of these guys.

[exodus]

Also Horfs TS% that you posted WAS higher than Anderson's and virtually the same than Basses so I don't even know what your point is.

My point is that this post of yours that i was responding to

Sorry bro but your post was garbage.

Career Fg%

Anderson= 39%

Bass= 48%

Horford = 51%

PPG

Anderson = 7.4

Bass = 6.9

Horford = 10.8

RPG (per 36 minutes)

Anderson = 8.5

Bass = 7.2

Horford = 10.6

Horford is easily the better player. By far.

was totally lame. You use ppg which doesn't take into account that Horford plays far more minutes. You also use fg% which doesn't take into account that anderson takes a lot of 3s and Bass actually gets to the foul line. Then you use your bogus stats to proclaim that Horford is better by far which he definitely isn't.

We don't need Horf to shoot threes, we need him to rebound and run the floor, something he is much, much better at than either of these guys.

Just because he rebounds and runs the floor better than they do doesn't make him a better player.

We need more from Horford than just rebounding and running the floor. We also need him to score inside and get opposing bigs in foul trouble.

[Atlantaholic]

My point is that this post of yours that i was responding to

was totally lame. You use ppg which doesn't take into account that Horford plays far more minutes. You also use fg% which doesn't take into account that anderson takes a lot of 3s and Bass actually gets to the foul line. Then you use your bogus stats to proclaim that Horford is better by far which he definitely isn't.

Just because he rebounds and runs the floor better than they do doesn't make him a better player.

We need more from Horford than just rebounding and running the floor. We also need him to score inside and get opposing bigs in foul trouble.

I have no idea where to get TS% stats, or even how they are calculated. Usually Fg% gives you a pretty good idea about scoring efficiency, especially for post players. It's not like your coveted stat proved me wrong much anyway. Bass is marginally better, Anderson is worse.

We need rebounding a lot more than we need scoring IMO. We are 10th in offensive rtg according to basketball reference and we were in the 20's as far as rebounding I believe. Josh Smith should be the guy giving us points in the paint since he is the one that has a plague like aversion to rebounding. IMO as long as Horf takes care of cleaning up the boards his offense is a bonus.

Also he doesn't only rebound and run better than Anderson he also scores better (which you yourself proved). Bass is statistically the better offensive player of the three but his rebounding is HORRIBLE. 7.2 rebounds per 36 is what you expect out of a small forward. We would not have won 35 games with that type of production from our Center last year.

[MaceCase]

That is exactly the type of ridiculous comparison that i was just talking about. Rodman was one of the best rebounders in NBA history. He is not even remotely a legit comparison for Horford. Not to mention that Rodman played with some of the best scorers of his era (Isiah, Dumars, Robinson, Jordan, Pippen). When you have Jordan and Pippen as your top two scores you don't need points from Rodman.

Last season Orlando got 1.1 more rebounds than their opponents which is better than average but hardly stellar. However they made it to the finals due to their hot shooting. They made 8.4 three pointers per game in the postseason. Denver is the only team that got close to them at 8.1 per game.

Last year Portland outrebounded their opponents by 5.4 a game.

You need to look at both teams defenses also to see why one was worlds better than the other, not just rebounding or shooting.

Edited October 27, 2009 by CrawfulToCrawesome

[exodus]

I have no idea where to get TS% stats, or even how they are calculated. Usually Fg% gives you a pretty good idea about scoring efficiency, especially for post players. It's not like your coveted stat proved me wrong much anyway. Bass is marginally better, Anderson is worse.

We need rebounding a lot more than we need scoring IMO. We are 10th in offensive rtg according to basketball reference and we were in the 20's as far as rebounding I believe. Josh Smith should be the guy giving us points in the paint since he is the one that has a plague like aversion to rebounding. IMO as long as Horf takes care of cleaning up the boards his offense is a bonus.

Also he doesn't only rebound and run better than Anderson he also scores better (which you yourself proved). Bass is statistically the better offensive player of the three but his rebounding is HORRIBLE. 7.2 rebounds per 36 is what you expect out of a small forward. We would not have won 35 games with that type of production from our Center last year.

Uhh... what? Anderson played limited minutes as a rookie and still scored more per 36 than Horford at a slightly worse percentage. Looking at FG% only and ppg gave a completely distorted view of their scoring ability. Plus Anderson actually spreads the floor, improving spacing in the half court set. Horford is ignored by the defense when he is more than 15 feet from the rim.

TS% is a much better measure of scoring efficiency because it includes 3 pt shooting and foul shooting. You can find them on ESPN under Hollinger stats as well as other places.

Bass is a worse rebounder but score over 3 pts more per 36 than Horford. he also played with guys who were very good rebounders (Damp and Dirk). Horford plays next to Josh Smith.

And i think it is pretty clear that your statement " Horford is easily the better player. By far." has been proven wrong.

Edited October 27, 2009 by exodus

[hawks21]

If you think Horford would play 33 minutes per game in Dallas you are smoking some good stuff as well. Anderson went to a team with more forwards then they knew what to do with, not to mention the fact that he was a rookie.

Who was Horford competing with for minutes when he got here? Zaza was the guy the Bucks let go over Dan Gadzuric which should tell you something.

Orlando already has Howard and Gortat, both of whom are better rebounders and defenders than Horford. They want shooters to spread the floor to make things easier inside for Howard. Putting Horford next to Howard would make it much easier for teams to defend Howard.

Guys who score 11 ppg in 33 minutes are a dime a dozen. Horford is a better than average rebounder that struggles to defend players much bigger than him. He gets pushed around routinely. His offensive game is lame. The reason he scored as much as he did is that the defense leaves him wide open all the time from 15-18 feet and he gets a lot of easy baskets underneath that are set up by someone else.

Anderson and Bass can actually score on their own. They don't have to be spoon fed.

Big Al does get timid at times if he is alone with the basketball and in 'big' moments he seems to treat the ball like a hot potato. A few of the big moments was during a Game 7 in Boston (yes, he was a rookie) and last year in the Cleveland series he was a complete no-show. We hope Big Al has grown more comfortable with his back to the basket and has more confidence in shooting from 15 ft, because that will his big test for 2009.

I think its fair to expect more production, and on-court production offensively for Horford.

Can Big Al be good as Buck Williams, formerly of the New Jersey Nets of the 1980's and early 1990's? Or a Thurl Bailey who played for the Jazz or even mimic the offensive skillset of Antione Carr, formerly of the Hawks...

For older Hawk fans: Would you rather have Antione Carr in his prime or Al Horford in his third year?

[exodus]

Big Al does get timid at times if he is alone with the basketball and in 'big' moments he seems to treat the ball like a hot potato. A few of the big moments was during a Game 7 in Boston (yes, he was a rookie) and last year in the Cleveland series he was a complete no-show. We hope Big Al has grown more comfortable with his back to the basket and has more confidence in shooting from 15 ft, because that will his big test for 2009.

I think its fair to expect more production, and on-court production offensively for Horford.

Can Big Al be good as Buck Williams, formerly of the New Jersey Nets of the 1980's and early 1990's? Or a Thurl Bailey who played for the Jazz or even mimic the offensive skillset of Antione Carr, formerly of the Hawks...

For older Hawk fans: Would you rather have Antione Carr in his prime or Al Horford in his third year?

Horford will never be comparable to Buck Williams. When i was growing up i used to watch a lot of college basketball and Buck was my favorite player on my favorite team. I kept following him after he came to the NBA. i would be stunned if Horford ever averages what Buck averaged as a rookie, 15.5/12.3 shooting 58%. He averaged at least 11.9 rebounds per year for his first 7 seasons. He averaged 18 ppg 3 different seasons. He was nasty.

[Atlantaholic]

Anderson scored more per 36 because he took more shots per 36. Two more shots per 36 minutes (11.5 shots for Anderson 9.5 for Horf). If you think a 3% difference in scoring% is slight (if three percent is slight than the .6% difference between Bass and Horford must be virtually non existent right?) than that is your opinion but I disagree.3% throughout a season is very considerable... a difference of 5% would be massive. Both Bass and Anderson played mostly with the second unit of their respective teams which in turn played against the second units of their opposition. If anything, it makes their very luckluster rebounding numbers look worse. A difference of two rebounds per 36 minutes (over Anderson) and of 3.5 rebounds (over Bass) is also not slight. It is huge. If you don't think the difference in value between Horf and Bass/Anderson is huge then you are in a very small minority of basketaball fans. We could get a lottery pick back for Horford easily if we shopped him. Any team that gave up a first rounder for either Bass or Anderson would be ridiculed. Anderson was so valuable to the Nets included him as a throwaway in a deal where they gave up an allstar. If you think Al would ever be in that position you are just wrong.

[Atlantaholic]

Ryan Andersons Efficiency rating (NBA.com) was 8.9 last year and Brandon Bass was at around 11. Horford was at 18.9.

I couldn't find Hollingers per for Anderson and Bass but Horford was 18th in the league (for Centers) and neither Bass nor Anderson were in the top 20.