I wish him good luck unless we meet them in the Tourney next year.
well that's just, like, your opinion, man
I wish him good luck unless we meet them in the Tourney next year.
Why would it be hilarious? The guy gave us four awesome years and, despite not being in love with our scheme, has spoken of Michigan in nothing but loving terms. If he wants to use his one remaining year elsewhere, best of luck to him.
2010-11 - Scored 58 pts in 29 games.
2011-12 - 9 games played. 24 points. (injured and got a RS)
2012-13 - 2.2 rpg and 2.7 ppg.
2013-14 - 4.2 rpg and 3.8 ppg.
He was one of 3 team captains this last season, and I have no idea how he was in practice or off the court. Awesome though? I don't think so.
Meant awesome in terms of the way he represented the program, which was, by all counts, excellent.
Horford's "I've got to do what's best for me" and "show people how I can play" stuff was just a little off-putting. It wasn't the system that kept him off the court. Morgan was significantly more limited in terms of offense and athleticism.
Tell me why he shouldn't have done what's best for him and his future?? This is what I can't stand about some people, they think that because he plays for your team there is no way another situation could benefit that player in the long run vs the situation here. We are talking about a young man with a Michigan degree under his belt.
This was a decision HE had to make therefore HE should look for the best possible situation.
"Hurt big man recruiting." What are you basing that off of? Just because he said he wanted to go somewhere else and show off his abilities? Has any big man recruit actually said that Jon Horford's statements are negatively impacted their perception of Michigan? It would seem to be baseless speculation that it will actually impact any recruit. I really doubt it makes much of a difference. I think Mitch McGary's draft position is going to be far more important for our big man recruiting efforts.
Plus, it's pretty well known that Beilein's offense doesn't feature big men posting up. He has really embraced new offensive schemes. So what if he wants to go to an offense that features more opportunities for big men. Horford is more of a back to the basket player. According to MHoops front page post on the transfer, Michigan only featured 2.7% of the offense to post-up changes whereas Florida had about 10.8% (citing Synergy Sports, and yes that is contingent on both Donovan's and Beilein's evaluations of their talent on the team and who can actually post-up).
Jordan Morgan was great and it was a great story that he came back. I will always appreciate him that much more for it. But he is not going to get drafted in the NBA (could sign as a free agent though). Additionally, his style fit the Michigan offensive and defensive scheme much better than Horford's: he was a more mobile pick-and-roll type player than thrived with our various PG's/Stauskas. He didn't post-up much. Also, just because Morgan made the decision to come back doesn't mean we should value Horford's dedication to the team over the last four years any less. You can appreciate Morgan more but don't castigate Horford for making a decision that he thought and honestly might be the best decision for himself. He doesn't need to give up his chances for our fan allegiances.
He has a degree in engineering , probably a master's . He will do well in life even if he's not in the NBA.
That's fine. Don't get so angry.
He can certainly do whatever he thinks is best for him. I think what he said was not reality (that he needs a different system to play the way he does) and didn't need to be said (doing what's best for me? no shit...).
The guy was a 2* recruit with Providence and Cal providing competition in his recruitment. He's had a 2-3* career as an individual, but he thinks it's someone else's fault that he's not climbing draft boards.
If he somehow turns into an NBA player, then I'll buy his jersey. Good luck, Mr. Horford.
To an extent, you're probably right. I don't know if he can be an NBA player in a system that suits him. But we won't know until he tries. I wouldn't hold his explanation for leaving against him because he's right. If he wants a shot at the NBA, he needs a system that allows him to do what he is good at. Michigan might not be the best place for that. McGary is going pro because he has the physical tools and abilities that Horford lacks. Thus, Mitch could play in Michigan's system and still be an NBA player. Horford needs a system that shows he has developed into more than a 2-3 star recruit and can offer NBA or other pro teams something other players dont' offer.
how does your saying he sucked further any discussion? All conclusions; no facts. And just needlessly mean from someone who almost certainly can't play.
Not only did Horford give Michgan four years, he did it while his entire family was apparently pressuring him to transfer. Horford deserves gratitude, not derision.
His comments were a negative for Michigan and Beilein. No one cares and has any issue with his right to do what he believes is best for him but he should have kept his mouth shut. The other issue is hyperbolic descriptions as "Awesome" and overstating his contributions. He was not very good, borderline worthless beginning at the Big Ten tournament when he was moping around the court and was called out by Beilein. There was a big blowup. If anyone thinks Horford wasn't taking shots at Beilein, you are mistaken.
But conversely he left when Michigan needed him the most. Plus, the way things turned out, it looks like he really screwed himself over for playing time, I doubt he'll get anymore minutes than he averaged while here.
Did you miss Horford taking semi-veiled shots at Michigan and Beilein? He didnt have to say anything but he's mad about playing time. This was never about system, look at Mcgary and Morgan they did very well in this system. Horford was mad because he didnt play more.
Daniel Feldman @danfeldman31 · Apr 10 When I spoke to Horford's trainer and "best friend," Larry Turnbow, he had some choice words about Beilein and RE: Horford's playing time.
Mark Snyder @Mark__Snyder · 2h Horford on Florida: "I believe in the coaching staff and they believe in me."
"Mcgary and Morgan they did very well in this system"
As high posts, facing the basket, setting ball screens. It's certainly possible for a big man to do well in Beilein's system and in McGary's case it was even possible to showcase himself for the NBA, but if the skill you want or need to showcase, or just feel you need to develop, is your low-post offense, it's the wrong place.
That's no more a "knock on Beilein" than saying RR's offense is probably the wrong place for a traditional tight end or iso-blocking fullback.
Did well posting up during the Final Four run, as well as the other elements you mentioned. The bigs get plenty of post touches but unfortunately Horford and Morgan just didn't convert much when posting. Horford turned the ball over at an unprecedented rate when given the ball in the post.
The fact is that blaming the system is an excuse when in reality Horford was upset over playing time.
See my comment below for some data. Michigan went low post almost twice as often this year as last, and they still had fewer low-post touches than any other team in the conference. Michigan's bigs get half the low-post touches of an average team's, and that's in a year of relatively heavy usage. Last year they got a quarter of the average, about two touches per game total. Adreian Payne gets triple that by himself.
And efficiency on those touches was up over last year, despite the loss of McGary.
Relative to the league, Horford and Morgan got the fewest touches by far and were above average converting them.
It's mistaking effect for cause.
Michigan went to the post very little BECAUSE they lacked talented post players.
The lack of post touches didn't cause Horford's poor play -
Horford (and Morgan) lacking post talent is the cause of the lack of post touches.
Michigan goes to the post very little because Beilein is the head coach and his teams have never, in three plus decades of coaching, gone to the low post very often. If you look at his base sets it's not hard to figure out why that might be.
If the supposedly poor play of Horford and Morgan are the reason for the small number of low post looks, why were there twice as many this year as last when McGary was playing? Why is the efficiency on low post plays up over last year? Why is the efficiency on low post plays higher than 9 of the 11 other B1G teams?
Michigan goes to the post very little because Beilein is the head coach and his teams have never, in three plus decades of coaching, gone to the low post very often.
Belein in three plus decades hasn't gone to the post often because he has NEVER in those three decades had a good post player.
McGary WAS NOT a good post player.
Have you ever looked at his sets? They're available on line--he's been running the same stuff, refining it over time, for over thirty years.
Your argument is precisely parallel to, and just as silly as, somebody saying that Rich Rodriguez runs read option because he never had a talented fullback.
He went out with class, to an envrionment that he perceives to be a better fit for him. He did not try to burn the program down on the way out the door like Justin Boren did. He actually set a good example of how to do what he did.
He's going to play soooooo much... (-_-)
you really think his parents, his brother would advise Ro go there if he didn't have the opportunity to play? and how do we know this is about playing time as much as it is about Donovans work with big men. He's produced Noah, Horford, David Lee and now Young. And no I'm not saying Horford is better than any of those guys. And I don't think Donovan is just throwing him a bone.
Donovan will have to work wonders. Horford is NOT his brother. He could have stayed and been a starter at the 5. Best of luck to him, and we will miss him, but Jon needs a lot of work on his game, and needs to get stronger.
But get no touches, won't be able to show off any skills..
He's his HALF-BROTHER.
How people continually miss this (not saying you are), is beyond me.
But Jon and Al have totally different bodies, because, you know, different sets of genes.
Best of luck to him, but if he thinks Billy Donovan is going to give him some sort of leash to work things out in most games, I think he's mistaken.
Donovan is an intense dude. It's certainly worth a shot for Jon, but I hope he has no illusions about what he's stepping into (and it kind of sounds like he does).
Being from the same parents would maybe make it slightly more likely he may be a star too but it certainly wouldn't make it automatic.
Jon's mother was a pretty woman that Tito wanted to marry.
There's a difference.
Look at the pictures of young Tito Horford with Arelis Reynoso. Those are two athletic people.
I had always wondered that. Why is Al so athletic compared to Jon. Makes sense now. Thanks
out of the whole back and forth. Good to hear.
It was something I was definitely aware of during his recruitment and always had in the back of my head wrt to JH.
this is not about whether or not someone with the same genes will automatically be as athletically successful as his brother. This is about someone with only 50% of another person's genes automatically not having the same genes as that other person!
This shouldn't be complicated.
You're right, it is not complicated. Regardless of what percentage of Jon Horford's parents are athletic does not guarantee anything (within reason). Which is why I'm asking what difference does it make?
let's even take an NBA team deciding whether or not to devote any scouting resources to Jon Horford down at Florida next year (moot point, as they will be there for Walker, but work with me here).
If Jon, at 6'10", but not remotely on their radar, was headed down to play for Donovan, as Al Horford did, do you honestly think it wouldn't make a difference to them whether Jon was Al's full or half brother???
You don't think that the former would be more likely to create interest for them and lead them to giving Jon a second look?
"You don't think that the former would be more likely to create interest for them and lead them to giving Jon a second look? "
Well if that was your basis for pointing out that they were half brothers then yes, we were not understanding each other. So to answer your question, you are probably right, I guess it would make a difference, but I wouldn't think it would make that big a difference. But if Jon was as good as Al, then it would not matter if they were full, half or not brothers.
seeing as Jon is 6'10" and not a terrible basketball player, I would have always been looking for something more out of him and always thought something more was possible.
Knowing he only had half of the genes that helped make Al such a great player, and being able to see that Jon is slight in the hips (Al's not huge there, but he's bigger than Jon) and much more narrow up top, I wasn't quite as optimistic.
It was also possible to wonder if Jon's injuries were what made him so stiff, when Al is such a fluid athlete, but knowing that they have a different genetic makeup makes me think that Jon has been slowed by injuries, but just isn't going to bring that fluidity to the table.
In summary, I would have had higher hopes for Jon's potential if they were full brothers, and I think an NBA exec would look at things similarly.
"How people continually miss this (not saying you are), is beyond me."
Why does this even matter? Having the same parents as a sibling that is a great athlete does not guarantee success, it only suggests potential.
definitively increases the odds that you have different genes than your half-sibling. Your logic chain seems to come at this from the completely wrong direction.
If you look at Al and Jon together, you see two different body types. Jon is much more straight up and down - he's a tall kid who is not unathletic, but Al is a tall kid who is very athletic.
Seeing as there's a difference, one might imagine that having approximately 50% of one's genes coming from another source might have real world implications.
"Your logic chain seems to come at this from the completely wrong direction."
My logic chain? When did I ever suggest that Al and Jon had similar physical traits? If anything, your logic chain is wrong. Genes are not the determining factor in success. Yes it is a factor, but not the factor. Which is why I asked what difference does it make if they are full brothers or not.
on this conversation.
I have seen plenty of people suggest, hey, look what Donovan did for Al, there's reason to think he could do the same for Jon.
Jon is not nearly the fluid athlete that Al is - Jon is reasonably mobile for his height, but is a very stiff player/athlete.
Genes are determinative of body type. And I'm suggesting the fact that they have different mothers is reason enough to take a second look at how Jon's body differs from Al's - an examination that shows that one is very narrow and up and down, and the other looks more like a classic NBA front court player.
He'll have the opportunity to play, but it will completely rely on him showing value to Donovan. He had lots of potential minutes at UM and couldn't get on the court. I think this is a good option for him, but I'll be honest and say i would be surprised if he had a career renaissance this year.
Couldn't get on the court? What team were you watching? He was basically a co-starter for half the season. You missed the whole Morford/Horgan meme I guess.
Oh yeah, there totally wasn't a trend in his minutes that led people to believe that perhaps he was being phased out somewhat. And even with being a "co-starter", he averaged 14 minutes a game despite there being nobody to really man the 4 and 5 except an out-of-position GRIII, Morgan, and a bunch of first-year players.
Morgan averaged about 8 more minutes a game, and in the end Bielfeldt was getting more minutes on average. Just because Brian created a meme at some point in the season doesn't mean it is applicable throughout and alters reality. Heck, he once said Chad Lindsay was going to be transfer and we all saw how that played out.
Nice defensive backtrack. "Totally wasn't a trend in his minutes that led people to believe that perhaps he was being phased out somewhat" and "couldn't get on the court" are very different statements. For one thing, he was getting less minutes because Morgan improved. And Beilein doesn't play a 2-big system; that's why he wasn't playing at the 4.
And again, I don't think you were watching this team considering you actually said Bielfeldt was getting more minutes. In 4 tourney games, Bielfeldt had 5 minutes total. Horford played 38.
Seriously. It's sad how many fans have turned on a guy who worked hard here for 4 years and used the grad transfer rule for what he thinks is a better opportunity for him.
What does anyone have to be confident in his family's ability to be objective about Jon? They think Jon should have been playing over Morgan which is laughable.
can anyone please explain what is debatable in what he just said?
be able to provide some post minutes. I don't think I'd take it any further than that.
Well, Patric Young is graduating, there are no bigs in Florida's 2014 class, and the other guys vying for the center position are transfers or inexperienced.
But where do you think he would get more minutes?
I honestly don't know. I don't know a thing about Florida other than they have one guy who hasn't played since 2011-12 and a freshman who averaged 4.8 minutes/game last season. And I don't know enough about Donnal and Doyle to know if they'll be better than Horford by next year, and it's entirely possible that they would be because I'm not a fan of Horford's skills.
So...yeah...I don't know.
Fair enough, but if I were to guess (which is what I implicitly asked you), I would say Horford would get ~25 minutes a game at Michigan and ~15 at Florida.
I was actually going to ask that question somewhere in this thread in the hopes that somebody with good information on Florida could inform us. I truly don't know what Florida's expectations are for the center position next year. It looks like a huge question mark to me.
I based my guess on a report from the world leader in sports:
I know some dont really want him to succeed because of what he said about the beilein system for big man but I hope he does and takes advantage of his opportunity at another high level school.
The big man position here is non existent...that's the reason we can't recruit good big men
Mitch got post touches because he could catch a post feed, pass out of a double, had a couple of post moves an was good at basketball. God bless JMo but he struggled with taking care of the ball in the post but he played more than Jon because he was a lot better defender and all around basketball player. Jon has a very limited game. It is a shame that Mitch had his issues this year. He would have nuked the Beilein had no use for bigs meme.
Mcgary and Morgan did just fine, but they are actually talented. There is no system that can make up for lack of talent and being soft. Why attack Michigan and Beilein?
I hope he finds his happiness. Good luck to him and a thanks for his 4 years of hard work.
He stayed (for undergrad at least) and was a champion. Wish him nothing but the best. Hopefully Florida will give him the best opportunity to showcase his abilities.
I have no ill will against Horford at all. I hope he succeeds. I just don't think Florida is going to present him with some crazy opportunity to have a basketball career renaissance.
But the thought did cross my mind, I wondered if Horford should look into Nevada. I read Huff wanted out because they had him playing back to the basket. Well, with Huff ' s departure, Nevada would have minutes available for a big guy....
It's kind of unfortunate if you think about it. If we never had Horford and he announced he was transfering from another school for his Senior season Michigan would be all in on landing him - except the exact opposite is happening.
Good luck to him. Maybe going to Florida will let him become the player he thinks he should be.
For him. I can't see another coach being more willing to forgive mistakes and give chances than Beilein but sometimes you need fresh scenery. I understand this may mean he has more big help underneath. Hope it works out.
Here's to Jon Horford getting 30 post touches a night.
Go Horford. Even when you play Michigan, I hope you score 30 points and 10 rebounds and yet Florida still lose to Michigan by 10 points.
Best of luck to him!
I just don't like how he blames the system. If you are good you will succeed in any system. I think he has unrealistic expectations of his talent and career. Good luck to him
Not really true in basketball. Back to the basket types won't be good in JB's offense because that isn't what he is looking for. He wants spacing that allows dribble drive lanes for easy dumpoff's and kick outs.
Horford just isn't a set a screen and roll to the basket type of guy. For his game this is a bad system for him to feel comfortable and maybe he wants a chance to get touches on the block instead of a lot of screen and rolls.
His explanation for not fitting into the offense is actually a rather good one.
He may not be a good back to the basket type guy but won't find out until he suits up for Florida. It just wasn't going to happen here.
I agree. I actually really disliked him as a fit for Michigan (not as a person or anything). He disrupted the flow and couldn't finish. He was the Steve Threet of Michigan basketball - an okay player, but not a good fit.
Back to the basket types won't be good in JB's offense because that isn't what he is looking for.
I somewhat agree.
...of course that ignores the other side of the ball - where Horford wasn't a good defender, wasn't a good rebounder, wasn't a good finisher, and rarely blocked a shot.
Talented post guys, even in a offense that features no post play, will still exhibit their talent in other ways.
So receivers are going to succeed in Air Force's triple option? RBs are going to excel in a passing spread?
The two best receivers in the nfl played in the triple option in college.
I assume you're talking about Calvin Johnson as one of them.
And no, he didn't. He played under Chan Gailey at Georgia Tech.
Yep Johnson left before Paul Johnson's first year. I'm not sure who the second best receiver in the NFL, pretty debatable but I can't think of one who is in the debate who played in a triple option.
I'm assuming he means Demaryius Thomas, who has put up good numbers, although I'm not sure that I agree he's one of the top two receivers in the NFL...
His numbers we're good in college -- he led GT in receiving but sitll lagged behind other receivers in terms of pure numbers. His production could have been much higher. Also doesn't hurt that he's a freak of nature athletically is catching balls from Peyton Manning. Point is if you wanna show off you're skills as a receiver, the triple option probably isn't the best option. If you wanna play with your back to the basket, Beilein's system isn't the best option. There's no harm in saying that -- every system has its strength's and weaknesses. He's not doing anything wrong people are just childish and immature, as if Horford owed them something.
I'm on your side, but it seems like you're downplaying Thomas's work at Georgia Tech. He had over 1,100 yards in his last year and averaged 25 yards/catch. He did excel at GT. Your main point still stands, though.
My bad didn't mean to downplay him but they even talk about how the system affected his numbers on his Wiki page. I'm just saying his numbers could have been even higher.
...but that doesn't seem like a good comparison to Horford. Thomas was an elite athlete who didn't need big numbers to be noticed--it was obvious he could run a route and catch a ball and the fact that he did it half as often as he might have somewhere else didn't hurt him all that much. Maybe it even helped him a bit to be in an offense that had such heavy blocking responsibility, as opposed to, say, Indiana or Leach's TT..
A parallel (though I think he's at a higher level) would be if you try to imagine Anthony Davis playing for Beilein. He'd have been great--he's got point guard skills to go with his post game and when he got the ball at the top of the circle, like Michigan's 5 routinely does when the ball's swinging sides after the first set of cuts, he'd be a threat. Nobody'd care that he wasn't getting to use his low-post game, they'd assume a guy that freakishly athletic either had one or could be taught one, and even if he couldn't play with his back to the basket he'd still be a great pro.
That's not Horford. Horford's a middling talent who's going to be off the radar entirely if he doesn't do something to distinguish himself. That something could have been perfecting his screen/roll game and developing some perimeter skills, but maybe after four years it was clear to all that that those skills were never going to come?
Good luck Zen Master!
Jon was a great teammate and is seemingly a fantastic person. A great basketball specimen, however, he is not. I can't remember watching a guy with worse hands.
worn out his welcome.
On the one hand, he was elected captain before last year, but on the other hand, things definitely went sour, and the decision for him to leave was apparently mutual. I can understand his frustration, considering what he thinks he is (I don't, but that's just my opinion), but let's not go overboard with the teammate stuff.
on the mutual part
because unlike Jon, some people would never take shots as someone is walking out the door.
You can take my word for it, or don't, that's up to you, but people who have reason to know have told me this is the case.
Apparently, his unhappiness over how he saw himself and how he saw himself being used or succeeding/not succeeding had become an issue by the second half the season. He looked dour in those pictures not because he's zen or some nonsense, but because he was unhappy.
and mine says it was Jon's call....period. Plus I have the public record on my side.
lol, to support the idea that he just might have been a malcontent.
I know, crazy talk.
came out and said that he'd been told for 4 years by his entire family that he was getting a raw deal.
That's what's known as the horse's mouth.
Still think you have the public record on your side?
How does that say anything about his decision to leave being mutual? All it says is that Horford and his entire family were unhappy with his role at Michigan. You've posted nothing to indicate that the Michigan coaches encouraged him to leave.
the idea that he was unhappy.
It's circumstantial, but it certainly supports a version of events where he was a malcontent the latter half of the year, which is something I have heard from very credible sources.
I'm not pretending I have proof(!) they told him to leave or anything, but I maintain they were not unhappy to see someone unhappy try his luck elsewhere, and the things I've pointed to certainly pass the evidentiary "more likely vs. less likely" test of relevance.
his last few games, particularly Kentucky when besides his weak defensive effort he couldn't even be bothered to set a decent screen. Then he claims BA told Beilein not to stand in his way? Right. That was either a good cop, bad cop orchestration or the goodbye to a player whose sense of value didn't comport with his coach.
Not to mention his sister saying that bacari said that coach B told bacari not to try to stop him
Because it would kind of end the argument for all these people giving me static for claiming that the decision was pretty mutual.
"What makes him think he will do better at florida?"
It sounds like the answer to that question would be "his family."
Al Horford had so much success at Florida, maybe his family is 100% convinced that Donovan can work magic on Jon.
He already has an undergrad degree from Michigan, so he did at least earn a degree at a "non-shit" school.
Here we go again.
Yup. All UM General Studies majors just don't care about school. You got me there. I don't have any witty retorts to out-logic your blanket statement about General Studies students. Now please crawl back into bed and have sweet dreams about diversified liberal arts education issues.
Actually Florida is a pretty good school, and he already has a degree from Michigan.
Honestly, school is what you make of it. Most liberal art's programs are roughly equivalent and there usually aren't curves in most of those classes.
this particular part of any Horford discussion is silly, but all liberal arts programs are roughly equivalent?
I took classes in the best History department in America, and resent your inaccurate statement. You know, we did learn stuff - like how to properly use apostrophes.
I hate to break it to you but unless you went to Princeton, you didn't. I assume you're referring to Michigan and I took history classes there too -- it wasn't anything too challenging if you just went to class and did nothing else. If you pushed yourself, wrote a thesis, were in honors, got invovled -- then yes it was but nothing outrageous. Most of these rankings are based on the quality of research and the PhD programs. There's not much differentation among the undergrad programs at flagship public research universities when it comes to the liberal arts (for the record, I'm a liberal arts major so I'm not just needlessly bashing on them, it is what it is).
It's a typo -- get over yourself.
go to Michigan, and for the record, Princeton was not the best history department in the years I attended undergrad.
It probably was the best history department within about five years of my graduation (my school lost a heavy slate of legends in the field and was a little slow in replacing them).
You may be right about the publics (I didn't go to one), but our history department was regarded as the finest because we had the best damn scholars and professors in the country. With that said, I resent your comment less if it doesn't come from the perspective of an engineer who thinks anything other than an engineering degree is worthless.
Did you ? I graduated from Michigan ann arbor in 93. Its the QUALITY of the student and professor that makes the true difference. Keeping up with them was brutal. Dont give me that at msu is even close. Msu was high school
my best friend in college, who also taught History at Princeton - and had a stint in East Lansing - would share your opinion about MSU.
ain't a shit school. Public schools per US News & World Report---Michigan #4, Florida #14
Plus he'll already have a degree from Michigan.
[edit: somehow missed someone saying almost the same thing already--sorry--though it may bear repeating twice to this myopic dude]
I don't like it. It's not like our offensive scheme has changed and now it doesn't fit his skill-set. He was going to get pt next year. He had opportunities and didn't take advantage. You may get less opportunities but they are there. Oh well, he really wasn't for me anyways...
Horford transfers to florida giving up 30mins of playing time for a... Wait for it... A whopping 15ish mins... Off the bench. Smart.
You are assuming Donovan is actually at Florida. There is a very good chance he will be in the NBA.
How could you possibly know that? Minnesota is looking at him and Golden Stated and Houston look like they will also be looking for a coach. He already left for Orlando once. Donovan has always been seen as a guy would would end up in the NBA.
Like you said, he already said no to the association once.
Chip Kelly said not and we seen how that ended. Guessing Brad Stevens said not to lots of teams as well.
Oh and Donovan didn't really say no either. He actually took the job and then backed out. If he has a choice between a rebuilding Florida team and coaching Steph Curry its an easy decision. Golden State. Indiana could also open if they go down to the Hawks. Those jobs are better than the Florida job and Donovan has clearly shown he wants the NBA. There are not going to be many years where this many good NBA jobs open.
Take a lot of grief for this, but (conspiracy theorists unite) what if he was the one that offered Mitch the joint? Knew he was in trouble so skipped town.
Not even I believe that. The mind is a devious thing sometimes......
Okay, I'm here.....but where's the conspiracy?
I wonder if he was ever tested.
Florida had no interest in him coming out of high school (no other major programs did). The only reason he has the opportunity to do this is because he was injured for a year. Michigan supported him during his rehab so I feel like he owes the school that missed season and shouldn't quit on the team and go to a program that never wanted him in the first place. The whole idea of transferrring to a grad program at another school without sitting out a year is ridiculous. I won't be rooting for Horford.
So Michigan supported him while he was injured; therefore, he should remain at Michigan when he apparently doesn't think they give him the best opportunity to succeed in basketball?
Every school supports injured basketball players. That shouldn't change anyone's mind or glue any player to a school.
If you're of the mind that no player should ever transfer, that's one thing. I understand that to an extent, even though I don't agree. But "Michigan helped him rehab, so he should stay forever and ever!" is kind of a silly thing. There are paid staff members to help their athletes rehab, and EVERY player gets injured to some extent (a rolled ankle, a broken finger, a torn ACL, a bad back, etc.).
I just think he's using loopholes to make a selfish, misguided move. This really should have been his last year. He actually played the year he got injured and was probably close to not getting a redshirt (played in 9 out of 34 games, 26%). It seems like he should be excited to make up for that year rather than ditching the team. The comments he made during that interview don't sit well with me either. If I see Florida play Kentucky next season I'll tune in to watch him get destroyed if Donovan even puts him in the game.
I'm no insider, but I'm further not sure that every school supports all injured players equally (as I recall, isn't that one of the issue raised in the unionization push?). Regardless, that does not diminish your point that Horford does not owe Michigan his last year of eligibility if he wants to move on just because he was supported while injured.
From what I gather, there's a marked difference between basketball and football. With limited scholarships, the early signing period, and the accelerated pace of basketball recruiting, it seems like basketball is much more supportive of injured players. If Michigan had let Horford go (I don't know the exact circumstances, so perhaps I should say that if Team X had let Player Y go because of injury), then Michigan/Team X would have probably had a very difficult time finding someone decent on late notice to take Horford/Player Y's scholarship and playing time the next year. It behooves the team to help players recover.
It's a different story with football because there are 85 scholarships and you have kids flip-flopping back and forth up until the first week of February in their senior year. There are numerous examples of kids (especially in the SEC, it seems) getting injured and then getting dumped.
Every team in every sport is going to provide support for injured stars. But if you're a mediocre 6'10" backup center, you're still more difficult to replace than a mediocre, 6'2", 230 lb. linebacker who plays only on punt coverage.
You are a douchebag. He literally owes you or the University nothing.
Actually, I think he does. He wasn't heavily recruited and Belein gave him a chance. No other schools wanted him, especially a team like Florida. Beilein put together a team that allowed him to showcase his skills at the highest level and it would be nice if he showed some loyalty instead of sneaking out the back door because of some loophole. I would love to know what BS grad program he's taking at Florida.
that McGary owes us. Jon gave us 4 years (of which he actually played 3) and Mitch gave us 2 years (of which he actually played 1 1/2. Jon got to showcase his talent for schools to transfer to and Mitch got to showcase his talent for the NBA.
I don't have any problem with a player going pro or transferring if they sit out a year. I just don't like the grad school rule. What if someone like Lewan graduated and decided he wanted to transfer to Alabama to make a run at a National Championship? What if Horford transferred to Ohio State? Hell, If Horford had a good reason to transfer I probably wouldn't care. He blames his lack of development on everyone but himself.
1) Who is hurt by that and why do you care what other people want to do?
2) I haven't heard him say that.
Michigan got something out him too. Jesus, you think by signing up to play college basketball, he's signing up to be an indentured servant or something.
us exactly what we owe him. And since he took parting shots on the way out the door, however passive aggressive, it would seem those so inclined can have their word too.
Oh really.... then he should shut his and his family mouths, because it is very disrespectful so far. if the gratitude were real then I can assure you he would have behaved differently on the exit. So maybe you are the douche bag.
Burke, THJ, GRIII, and Stauskas for being selfish and going for millions instead of staying at Michigan for 4 years? If not, your statement makes no sense. If so, you are going to face a lot of disappointment because this is college basketball now.
Horford is doing what is best for himself to pursue his dream which is no different than the stars.
AMEN!!!!! thank god there are still some real Michigan fans left in these parts, instead of all the sob sister types.
I will now "transfer" my support to players who want to play at Michigan
opinion, but one I share.
I have little against him - although I strongly resent the shots he took on his way out the door - but I wish him no ill will. And I totally respect his decision - it's his last year to play college ball - why shouldn't he see if he can find what he's looking for? I get that.
But I also feel free to make my own decision which says that he was a malcontent the second half of last season, is unlikely to break through what I think is a hard ceiling on his potential (but again, he damn well might as well try), and that I just don't care that much about him one way or the other.
I hope he has success in life. I'm sure he's a good guy - who among us hasn't had a time they felt slighted on one athletic team or another - but I'm not going to go out of my way to root for him down in Florida.
How often did Young score on post ups because in the games I've watched Florida it wasn't often. He mainly scored on put backs and transition like most big men these days. Maybe Donovan can get more usage out of Horford's post game than he did Young. Good luck to Jon hope he gets what he wants.
as he Liked to bat the ball around rather than rebound, Why didn't he just transfer somewhere like Stanford to play mens volleyball. I really dont see him playing more than 10 min a game next year at Florida.
Best of luck to Jon. It would be nice to have another M player in the NBA. Only downside is that Gainsville is the armpit of Florida, but he only has to live there a year. Good luck!
It is what it is.
Good luck to him. Hopefully he works on his defense and layup technique.
"It's a system that, if given the minutes, any big could have success. I could have had success," Horford said. "I feel like in the games that I was given good minutes -- 16, 17 minutes and up -- I always had success in the system. It's just that those kind of opportunities were so limited."
"I don't think my skill development was limited," Horford said. "What was limited was my opportunity to have experiences crucial to players to gain the confidence and the feel that they need to have success on the highest level.
"The one thing I'm truly lacking, and I can admit it, is experience. From a skills development standpoint, the coaches have done an excellent job preparing me."
So everyone is telling me that Jon, knowing Mitch was leaving and he would get the bulk of minutes at Center, is leaving because he thinks the system isn't right for him? He literally said himself that if given the minutes, any big could have success in this system. Let's get real folks, Jon either didn't like Beilein, didn't like the way he was treated, or probably both. He is taking thinly veiled shots at Beilein and the program because he thinks he is better than he is. Either that or he didn't think he was going to get a lot of time playing this year, even though he said he already knew McGary was leaving. I'm sorry, but just because someone sticks it out on the team for 4 years doesn't mean I need to cheer for him. He left the program and could have kept his mouth shut, but he didn't. He decided to take shots at the program and the coach.
an option...maybe the staff was cool to his return. That might sound as crazy as subs but Beilein has absolutely no patience with moping or bad attitudes.
We're not negging you for not going along with most.
why don't you shoot for just no ill will and not caring either way?
what kind of illusions Horford has but if he thinks he will have a better shot at the next level if he shows a post offense I think he's crazy. His best shot would be to become a dominant rebounder and decent defender. If he could hit a short jumper and become adept at put backs...he'd get a look. These are all things he could have accomplished in Beilein's system.
Saw Horford this afternoon, around 12 PM, walking north on Maynard Street. He looked happy.
Now he gets to get to get dunked on by Dakari Johnson and Willie Cauley Stein at least twice next year.
Yeah I didn't like the way he left or the way he played late last season.
He's not Al Horford. Not even close.
Yeah that's it, you need to be in Gainesville with Billy Donovan coaching you...then you'll be your brother. Lol.
Good luck to him. If he left us, at least he chose a solid program with a good coach as well.
Wow go away Leet. Post haste, be light on your feet..
6 min a game. Not getting much considering he had to pay 3 PTs on his new mortgage.
For those claiming that Michigan offers plenty of low-post touches, here's a story from UM Hoops with a scatterplot of B1G teams' percentage of plays where the ball goes to a low post, and the efficiency on those plays.
Michigan nearly doubled the number of low-post touches from 2012/3 to 2013/4, and they were still last in the league. The low-post efficiency was much higher this year than last, too, and ranks third in the league, although it's well below the offense's efficiency overall.
Note that these numbers were as of late January. Final numbers are presumably available behind the Synergy Sports paywall; I don't subscribe.
Plays in the low post
Low post efficiency
That's despite the loss of McGary (or possibly even because of it? my sense was that he was much more effective up high than down low, but others here had a different take). It'd be interesting to see how the 2013 tournament numbers differed from the regular season.
Of course some of the increased efficiency is because these were midseason numbers and efficiency is lower in conference play because the defenses are better. 50%'s a pretty big improvement though--I doubt it would go away if these were schedule-adjusted.
League average is a little over 8%, with an average efficiency somewhere around .9 or a little under (depends on whether you weight the average by how often it was run, it's higher if you do because there's more Kaminsky and Payne that way); Wisconsin and Purdue are in the low-post 13-14% of the time. Kaminsky was the most efficient individual low-post player at 1.20.
On its face, that seems both to support the proposition that Morgan and/or Horford were better low post players than they were given credit for, and that the coaching staff was right not to emphasize it because even though it was a good play, the rest of the offense was better.
To Florida? Do they coach hands?