Bleacher Report ranks NBA teams starting Line-ups

[Guest]

1. Warriors

2. Clippers

3.  Cavs

4. Spurs

5. Raptors

6. Seltics

7. Jazz

8. Grizzlies

9. Atlanta Hawks

Presumed Starting Five: Dennis Schröder (PG), Kent Bazemore (SG), Kyle Korver (SF), Paul Millsap (PF), Dwight Howard (C)

Signing Dwight Howard before figuring out the Al Horford situation was a mistake by the Atlanta Hawks. Attempting to sell Horford on playing next to Howard and Paul Millsap was an even bigger one. (Millsap. Is. Not. A. Small. Forward.)

Fortunately for Atlanta, and Big Al himself, Horford chose the Celtics. The Hawks aren't better off overall, but a starting five built around Kent Bazemore, Howard, Kyle Korver, Millsap and Dennis Schröder has its advantages.

Those four incumbent Hawks notched a net rating of 9.9 in 103 minutes together last season, posting offensive (110.3) and defensive ratings (100.4) that would have ranked among the NBA's four best in either category. Howard can enhance those results.

The Hawks won't lose anything on defense with him. He and Horford found identical success protecting the rim during 2015-16, holding opponents to sub-50 percent shooting. Getting Howard to ditch the post-ups for more pick-and-rolls, while making room in the offense for said possessions, will be the real challenge.

Injecting more pick-and-rolls into the offense shouldn't be too complicated. Millsap can set up shop behind the three-point line, clearing a path to the basket, and Howard is far more comfortable than Horford at diving toward the bucket.

Howard, mind you, ranked in the 71st percentile of roll-man efficiency during his last season with Houston. Those touches just represented less than 10 percent of his total possessions. Call his number more, almost solely for screen-and-rolls, and the Hawks will have themselves a top-10 starting lineup.

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2651614-ranking-every-nba-teams-presumed-starting-5-post-2016-free-agency/page/23

[Guest]

So Boston is at #6.....this caught my eye:

" The double coverage Horford draws will drive up the number of uncontested triples launched by Bradley and Crowder."

[macdaddy]

I don't have too much of an issue but the C's continue to be overrated.   It'd be interesting to see where we fell in this list last year when we had Teague and Horford.   I'm still not a fan of the Grizz but i guess what do i know.   Other than they never do much.  

[Gray Mule]

That center that once played for the Hawks wasn't so highly thought of by the national

media until he signed with all those fantastic fans in Boston.  Then, look at the national

media and D8, who will now patrol the center for Atlanta.  He wasn't so thought of as so bad

until he came home.

"Great big mistake to sign D8, who wanted to be here and let former center go to Boston,

where he will be worshiped by their wonderful fans - -  because Atlanta's fans wouldn't."

[SalvorMallow]

32 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

" The double coverage Horford draws will drive up the number of uncontested triples launched by Bradley and Crowder."

 

[macdaddy]

Quote

Switching out Sullinger with Al Horford infinitely increases the lineup's curb appeal. Horford is a better passer and rim protector, and his 34 percent three-point clip over the last three seasons is an upgrade from Sullinger's 27.7 percent success rate.

Well Al did shoot 34% from 3 last season so the point is valid.   Why they said the last three season is beyond me as he attempted a total of 40 3s  the previous two seasons.   I guess it makes it sound like he's a consistent 3 point threat.   

[AHF]

Al is clearly a big upgrade on Sullinger on both ends of the floor.  He likewise clearly doesn't draw or need double-team attention.

[macdaddy]

I did find a picture of Al drawing a double team.   As usual he couldn't pass out of it.   

 

[AHF]

Figures they would be content to guard him with a pair of wings.

[Guest]

54 minutes ago, macdaddy said:

I did find a picture of Al drawing a double team.   As usual he couldn't pass out of it.   

 

I tried "liking' this about 5 more times  - wouldn't let me. Lol.

[Wretch]

I'm almost afraid to speak, because seemingly...whenever I do, the exact damn opposite of my logic and reasoning seems to happen/be the case.  However...
Disclaimer: I loved Horf for what he was while he was here.  He's dead to me now lol

People have really been overselling Horford since the day we drafted him.  I was always cautiously optimistic about his game, but as the seasons came and went, it was fairly apparent what Horf's ceiling was.  I don't mean to take anything away from him and I'm not trying to say that he isn't a difference maker.  But Horf has never been "that dude."  He is a very good complimentary player that is consistently good, but inconsistently great.  More often than I'm comfortable with, he was also underwhelming - not ALWAYS and certainly not consistently underwhelming...but certainly disappointing often enough to keep him out of that "elite" discussion.

If the Celts do live up to the hype, it will be because Horford is a great compliment to an already solid team - not because he is such a central and vital piece to the game plan.  Horford was a great system fit for us and we succeeded because he was a very solid piece of the machine as a whole.  

As for replacing our "star" (OMG........), Millsap is everything Horford was and better in the post.  If (big ol' if) Howard can return to form, this is a better team IMO and at the very least, is marginally worse off without Horf's mid range (the one consistent thing about him).

Personally, I'm anxious to see that team sputter around the upper-middle of the pack - to silence the hype, to laugh at Whoreford, and just because I hate Boston green.

[Dejay]

3 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

So Boston is at #6.....this caught my eye:

" The double coverage Horford draws will drive up the number of uncontested triples launched by Bradley and Crowder."

 

[Guest]

I think we are 4-6 but whatever. Told ya them Clipps going to the finals @JayBirdHawk 

[hazer]

4 hours ago, Dejay said:

 

[RWF]

[pimp]

Horford drawing double teams...


They probably think he's a tenacious rebounder too.

[Thomas]

19 hours ago, macdaddy said:

Well Al did shoot 34% from 3 last season so the point is valid.   Why they said the last three season is beyond me as he attempted a total of 40 3s  the previous two seasons.   I guess it makes it sound like he's a consistent 3 point threat.   

The writer's knowledge of Al is based on a minimum of surface knowledge I believe. People who watched him play more than one game on the road know that his three was a bigger problem of subtraction of time in the paint than a beneficial addition of quality shooting from three no matter the 34%. He already was a pretty deadly shooter from mid range and could get to the paint for rebounds in the past. His play in years before were a better scheme for a center at any level than his play last year. 

[hazer]

Whorefart may play less soft now that he's not trying to protect his body for the big payday. But I doubt it...

[AHF]

Horford may step up some this season.  Attention will be focused on him and he is a guy who has some pride and work ethic.  That could give a real boost to rebounding but his drawing a double is about skill set and nothing is going to lead him to start drawing doubles.

[Vol4ever]

On 9/19/2016 at 2:21 PM, Wretch said:

I'm almost afraid to speak, because seemingly...whenever I do, the exact damn opposite of my logic and reasoning seems to happen/be the case.  However...
Disclaimer: I loved Horf for what he was while he was here.  He's dead to me now lol

People have really been overselling Horford since the day we drafted him.  I was always cautiously optimistic about his game, but as the seasons came and went, it was fairly apparent what Horf's ceiling was.  I don't mean to take anything away from him and I'm not trying to say that he isn't a difference maker.  But Horf has never been "that dude."  He is a very good complimentary player that is consistently good, but inconsistently great.  More often than I'm comfortable with, he was also underwhelming - not ALWAYS and certainly not consistently underwhelming...but certainly disappointing often enough to keep him out of that "elite" discussion.

If the Celts do live up to the hype, it will be because Horford is a great compliment to an already solid team - not because he is such a central and vital piece to the game plan.  Horford was a great system fit for us and we succeeded because he was a very solid piece of the machine as a whole.  

As for replacing our "star" (OMG........), Millsap is everything Horford was and better in the post.  If (big ol' if) Howard can return to form, this is a better team IMO and at the very least, is marginally worse off without Horf's mid range (the one consistent thing about him).

Personally, I'm anxious to see that team sputter around the upper-middle of the pack - to silence the hype, to laugh at Whoreford, and just because I hate Boston green.

Horford not much more than a 6-10 jump shooter last year.  Why you want your starting center shooting 3s is beyond me.   He didnt rebound or defend last year imo.