Post by Rog on Apr 24, 2017 4:02:39 GMT
The 79th nominee of the NBN Hall of Fame, Al Horford, was never quite a superstar but he was as good on the boards and defensively as you could ask for. Was he good enough offensively to give him a good enough case for enshrinement, or does he go the way of most defensive/rebounding bigs and not quite garner enough support? Lets take a look.
Career Stats
34.9 MPG, 13.2 PPG, 12.5 RPG, 3.4 APG, 2.9 BPG, 1.0 SPG, 1.6 TOPG on 41.8% from the field, 75.5% from the line, and 21.4% from three
Best Season
Kings(2016) - 14.9 RPG, 14.0 RPG, 4.0 BPG, 3.1 APG, 1.3 SPG, 1.6 TOPG on 41.7% from the field, 74.2% from the line, and 18.2% from three
Career Highs
Points: 34
Rebounds: 28
Assists: 13
Steals: 6
Blocks: 13
Achievements
Championships: 2
Player of the Game: 103
Player of the Week: 2
Player of the Month: 0
Double Doubles: 649
Triple Doubles: 7
Awards
2007 - All-Star Rookie Game Participant
2007 - All-Rookie Second Team
2013 - All-Star Game Participant
2014 - All-Star Game Participant
2015 - All-Star Game Participant
2015 - All-League Third Team
2016 - All-Star Game Participant
2016 - All-League Second Team
2016 - All-Defensive Team
2017 - All-Star Game Participant
2017 - All-League First Team
2017 - Defensive Player of the Year
2017 - All-Defensive Team
2018 - All-League Second Team
Arguments For Induction
- Horford played in 5 All-Star games, was named to two All-Defensive First teams, and one All-League Third teams, two All-League Second teams, and one All-League First teams.
- Horford was a pretty damn good defensive player, averaging 3.9 stocks a game for his career. His career numbers are brought down by first first three years. In his prime he averaged 3.5 blocks or better and 1.2 steals a game, for a fantastic number of 4.7 stocks a game, at minimum. He also carried an 'A' defensive rating his entire career, proving he wasn't just statistics as well. He also showed up on almost every Best Defenders list that was posted during his prime.
- On top of being a fantastic defender, Al Horford was also a near elite rebounder during his prime in the league. He averaged 12.5 rebounds a game for his career, a good number but again dragged down by first three years. He averaged over 13 rebounds a game for 7 years of his career, even topping 14 at times.
- Horford wasn't a great offensive player, but he was a good enough scorer and a fantastic passer. He averaged 13.2 points per game for his career, reaching above 14 for quite a bit of his career. He did only shoot 42% for his career, but was efficient at the line shooting 75% from the line. Again, he was an absolutely fantastic passer out of the post, as good as just about anyone when he was in his prime, averaging 3.4 for his career, but over 4 for three times. He only also averaged 1.6 turnovers a game for his career.
- Overall, Horford was a fantastic overall player, near elite rebounder, elite defender, and a good enough offensive player. He did everything you could ask for him. He also won two titles as key cogs in the Kings machine. You have to admire a guy who can give you 14 points, 14 rebounds, 4 assists, 3.5 blocks, 1.2 steals while playing great fundamental defense night in and night out. That is a Hall of Famer in my opinion.
Arguments Against Induction
- Had a seriously short career. He was worthy of more awards, but didn't play nearly long enough to justify a Hall of Fame career, did he? Eliminating the first three years and the last year, he only gave you really 11 years of good basketball and about 7 years of "elite" basketball. Just didn't add up to enough awards or enough time.
- Also, "elite" basketball includes shooting just over 40% from the field and taking way too many threes hitting only 21.4% of them. He took way too many shots that could have went to better players at actually shooting the ball well. Its hard to say he was a Hall of Famer when he had a huge flaw in his game like this.
- You can't say he was elite at anything really, maybe for 6 or 7 years, but overall hes "just" a 12.5 rebound, and "just" a 2.9 shot blocker who may have had good post defense, but what proof do we have that he was an actual good defender. Two awards? Its tough to elect someone into the Hall of Fame who flat out wasn't even elite at anything in particular.
- Horford is a really grey area type player to me. He has some good cases, some awards to prove his case, and a good chunk of great, elite years of basketball. On the other hand, it just doesn't feel like enough time and it doesn't feel elite enough, if that makes any sense. He also won his two titles on the downside of his career where he might have been the worst starter on the team as well. Just a hard case to make definitively either way. Your decision.
Vote carefully, and remember to throw out arguments regardless of which side you're on. This should be a discussion that eventually gets the league to the proper decision on him. Your vote can also be retracted after it's been cast if you feel like switching to the other side based on the arguments that have been made. To be inducted, a player needs 70% and to be considered in a later class they need 50%. Vote carefully.
***BONUS - Don't forget that everyone who votes gets $25 and the person that makes the best argument or contributes to the discussion the best will be awarded an extra $25***
*
