Is the Magic's Ryan Anderson better than Horford?

[jy23]

If Horford had been a rookie last year he wouldn't have been mentioned as a possible ROY either. Horford wasn't going up against Rose, Mayo and Beasley when he came out.

Horford has also benefited by the fact that he has been playing big minutes from day one. Give Anderson those minutes for 2 years and let Horford play less than 20 for 1 year and I am sure Anderson would look like the better player hands down.

If Anderson had come out with al or any other class he wouldn't get mentioned. Yea al didn't deal with rose n Mayo but he dealt with Durant so what's ur point? And horford played more bc he EARNED it. Its not like Anderson was on the Lakers n had to compete with pau and Odom for pt, he played for the Nets! Al is very efficient n does so much for this team, he came in as a rookie n averaged a double double, how many players in the league let alone rookies average double doubles? Anderson can shoot, Ok...................

If Horford had been a rookie last year he wouldn't have been mentioned as a possible ROY either. Horford wasn't going up against Rose, Mayo and Beasley when he came out.

Horford has also benefited by the fact that he has been playing big minutes from day one. Give Anderson those minutes for 2 years and let Horford play less than 20 for 1 year and I am sure Anderson would look like the better player hands down.

If Anderson had come out with al or any other class he wouldn't get mentioned. Yea al didn't deal with rose n Mayo but he dealt with Durant so what's ur point? And horford played more bc he EARNED it. Its not like Anderson was on the Lakers n had to compete with pau and Odom for pt, he played for the Nets! Al is very efficient n does so much for this team, he came in as a rookie n averaged a double double, how many players in the league let alone rookies average double doubles? Anderson can shoot, Ok...................

[Joker]

Seriously? Anderson v. Horford? I will take Horford all day, have you seen Anderson play Center? It was not pretty, I remember seeing that in a couple LP games the Nets played last year. He is a nice player, Austin Choshere type talent. He is no Al Horford, Horford is one of the best young PF's in the game.

[Atlantaholic]

I'll add that when I said that Brandon Bass wouldn't net a first rounder I was probably exaggerating. He would net a top 20 pick maybe IMO.

Seriously? Anderson v. Horford? I will take Horford all day, have you seen Anderson play Center? It was not pretty, I remember seeing that in a couple LP games the Nets played last year. He is a nice player, Austin Choshere type talent. He is no Al Horford, Horford is one of the best young PF's in the game.

I wouldn't even go that far. He is certainly better than Anderson and Bass though.

[exodus]

Anderson scored more per 36 because he took more shots per 36.

You have to shoot to score. Horford can't or wont take players off the dribble and passes up open jumpers routinely.

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

Speaking of massive Bass scored 29% more ppg per 36 than Horford. Anderson scored 8.8% more per 36 than Horford.

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

That is because Horford played more minutes. Efficiency isn't a per minute stat. If i break it down per minute Horford would be at 11.45 per 20 minutes.

Bass' PER is 16.49. Horfords is 17.06.

Edited October 28, 2009 by exodus

[Joker]

I'll add that when I said that Brandon Bass wouldn't net a first rounder I was probably exaggerating. He would net a top 20 pick maybe IMO.

I wouldn't even go that far. He is certainly better than Anderson and Bass though.

I am not even quoting myself, I seen NBA analysts say that. I feel that way too. I like Al at PF, he's really good at that position. He's too weak and not athletic enough to compensate for it at Center v. solid Centers. He can dominate tweeners and Centers who lack talent but struggles v. better skilled Centers. If Atlanta could find a Center who could match Horford weaknesses, he could be special. Maybe not a superstar but an All Star talent. That's easier said than done. At Center, he is an adequate player, which is good enough for us.

[Atlantaholic]

I am not even quoting myself, I seen NBA analysts say that. I feel that way too. I like Al at PF, he's really good at that position. He's too weak and not athletic enough to compensate for it at Center v. solid Centers. He can dominate tweeners and Centers who lack talent but struggles v. better skilled Centers. If Atlanta could find a Center who could match Horford weaknesses, he could be special. Maybe not a superstar but an All Star talent. That's easier said than done. At Center, he is an adequate player, which is good enough for us.

I don't really agree with that personally. His offensive game is disgusting. I'd still take him over Bass and Anderson though.

As for Exodus. Fair enough. We'll see at the end of the year who has the bigger impact.

[Joker]

I don't really agree with that personally. His offensive game is disgusting. I'd still take him over Bass and Anderson though.

As for Exodus. Fair enough. We'll see at the end of the year who has the bigger impact.

Not really, he's actually good on offense, he cannot create his own offense and is the 4th/5th option. Not a lot of shots for him to really measure anything. He can shoot the 15 footer as well as anyone and is an excellent pick and roll player. He has solid post moves when confident. I believe in his ability, but he's too far on the options sheet to really get any shots with the Hawks. Send him to New Orleans and watch him become a superstar. Talent around you plus team setting has a lot to do with a player's production.

Edited October 28, 2009 by nbasuperstar40

[BusBoyIsBack]

Not really, he's actually good on offense, he cannot create his own offense and is the 4th/5th option. Not a lot of shots for him to really measure anything. He can shoot the 15 footer as well as anyone and is an excellent pick and roll player. He has solid post moves when confident. I believe in his ability, but he's too far on the options sheet to really get any shots with the Hawks. Send him to New Orleans and watch him become a superstar. Talent around you plus team setting has a lot to do with a player's production.

Well not a bad start for a "4th or 5th option". LOL at Horford being a role player who has no upside in his 3rd year in the league.

[AHF]

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.

TS% is a much better measure for scoring efficiency than FG%. You can find TS% and PER at:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/

[exodus]

Well not a bad start for a "4th or 5th option". LOL at Horford being a role player who has no upside in his 3rd year in the league.

Please point out where anyone has said Horford has no upside.

[Atlantaholic]

TS% is a much better measure for scoring efficiency than FG%. You can find TS% and PER at:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/

Yeah I have seen it been used before but I never really understood exactly where to find it or what it truly meant.

Thanks for the link

[AHF]

Yeah I have seen it been used before but I never really understood exactly where to find it or what it truly meant.

Thanks for the link

You can look the formula up online but basically TS% weighs shooting from 2pt range, the 3pt line and the FT line to come up with a combined number that represents the total efficiency of someone's scoring. Players are rewarded for shooting good %s from the line and the 3pt line and it is tailored so that it accounts for the number of shots taken by that player.

If a player takes an equal number of 3's and 2's and shoots 40% from both areas then they will have a 50% TS%. You can see how that plays out more accurately than FG%.

Player A - 100 shots - 20/50 from 3pt range, 20/50 from 2pt range = 40% FG%, 50% TS%

Player B - 100 shots - 50/100 from 2pt range = 50% FG%, 50% TS%

Player A produces 100 points per 100 shots.

Player B produces 100 points per 100 shots.

Accordingly, TS% more accurately measures the two players scoring efficiency than FG%.

The same goes when you factor in free throws but the math starts getting more complex.

[coachx]

Bass' PER is 16.49. Horfords is 17.06.

Bass is a 6'8'' PF and Horford is a 6'10'' center.

We all know that playing the center position increases the value of a player.

[Atlantaholic]

You can look the formula up online but basically TS% weighs shooting from 2pt range, the 3pt line and the FT line to come up with a combined number that represents the total efficiency of someone's scoring. Players are rewarded for shooting good %s from the line and the 3pt line and it is tailored so that it accounts for the number of shots taken by that player.

If a player takes an equal number of 3's and 2's and shoots 40% from both areas then they will have a 50% TS%. You can see how that plays out more accurately than FG%.

Player A - 100 shots - 20/50 from 3pt range, 20/50 from 2pt range = 40% FG%, 50% TS%

Player B - 100 shots - 50/100 from 2pt range = 50% FG%, 50% TS%

Player A produces 100 points per 100 shots.

Player B produces 100 points per 100 shots.

Accordingly, TS% more accurately measures the two players scoring efficiency than FG%.

The same goes when you factor in free throws but the math starts getting more complex.

Cool

[exodus]

So far Horford has a PER of 17.58 which is slightly better than last years number of 17.05. Horfords Roland Rating of 10.8 is best on the Hawks so far. Realistically though it is a little early to put much stock on Roland Ratings. Generally you need a bigger sample size for those stats to have much meaning.

Anderson has a PER of 21 and a Roland Rating 16.5.

Just sayin

[MaceCase]

Anderson must be important because without him the Magic are losing by 30 to the Thunder!

[exodus]

Anderson must be important because without him the Magic are losing by 30 to the Thunder!

LOL I hadn't even looked at the scoreboard today. The Magic have definitely been hurting this season. First Lewis, then Vince and now Anderson.

[HawkFoLife]

No, i like Anderson's game a lot but he is a different type of player and the comparison is unfair actually, but is Anderson better than Horford?? I'm going to have to go with >> (Not so fast my fair friend)

[High5]

So far Horford has a PER of 17.58 which is slightly better than last years number of 17.05. Horfords Roland Rating of 10.8 is best on the Hawks so far. Realistically though it is a little early to put much stock on Roland Ratings. Generally you need a bigger sample size for those stats to have much meaning.

Anderson has a PER of 21 and a Roland Rating 16.5.

Just sayin

Marreese Speights has the 7th highest PER in the entire NBA right now. Anderson has never and will never be on the same level as Horford.

[exodus]

Marreese Speights has the 7th highest PER in the entire NBA right now. Anderson has never and will never be on the same level as Horford.

Speights had a higher PER than Horford last year as well as a rookie.

Edited November 9, 2009 by exodus