After seeing Sullinger's new listed height which is 6'10 folks have been raving. I would like to know why is it these listed measurements make you too small for your position.
- PG 6'0''
- SG 6'3''
- SF 6'6''
- PF 6'8''
- C 6'10''
These listed measurements make you a stud for your position
- PG 6'3''
- SG 6'6''
- SF 6'7''-6'8''
- PF 6'11''
- C 7'0''
I've been wondering this for a while too, I can understand if two players have equal skill levels at the same position but one is 3 inches taller, take the taller one. But when there's so much nitpicking over whether a player is a lottery pick or not because he's 6'7 and not 6'8 is kinda dumb... If they can play they can play
Yeah, its true. Crazy how an inch can change the entire perspective of a player.
I understand your point, but I'd say it has to do with defensive match-ups more than anything else. That being said I agree, if a guy can play he can play, and players like J.J. Brea and Chuck Hayes keep proving that size doesn't matter as much as people want to believe.
With pg it's all about being able to see over the D and the taller you are the better vision you can have. With C position and PF it's all about strength and intimidation. Length is needed as well. It's not always about the height as a pg who's 6'1 with a 6'9 wingspan is more attractive to some than a 6'4 pg with a 6'5 wingspan as sometimes it's more important to be able to play bigger than yourself. Height is important when the rest of your measurements stack up as in Sullinger's case.
The NBA is a game of inches I couldn't tell you how many times guys were an inch away from getting a block, steal, rebound, or score. Every single inch matters in this game
^^^^ I know what you mean, the feeling when you go up for a block and miss, and you think in the back your mind..man if only extended my arm a little more i would sent that shot flying.
an inch can really go a mile just look at the best players thaat have played the game and the average height of a player at there position
MJ is 6'6 and the average height for a shooting guard is 6'5 yeah its only inch but that could help alot
Wilt Chamberlain 7'1 and the average height for a C is 6'10
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar is 7'1 and once again the average height of a Cis 6'10
Magic Johson I dont even need to say anything about is height
Bill Russel is the first guy on this list that is below average height at 6'9 but back in his day you could say he wsa above the average height
Larry Bird was 6'9 at sf the average height for sf is 6'7
Oscar Robertson was 6'5 and 2 inches taller then the average height for a pg
Lebron is 6'8 and taller then the average sf by a inch
Kobe is 6'6 and taller then the average height by only an inch also
the difference between a 6,7 guy to 6,11 is more of a difference than most people realize If you are 4 inches taller tecnicly it makes your wingspan 4 inches longer and you standing reach 2 inches taller so 4 inches ends up being 6 or 7 after you add it all up.
Muggsy Bogues was 5'3, 'nuff said.
you cant teach height
But, it just so happens that a majority of the games best players had some sort of advantage, usually with length or height. rileymchsea3 actually does bring up some good ones. If you talk about smaller guards, you usually think of Isiah Thomas (The one who played on the Pistons, whose name does not have the extra "a"), John Stockton and Allen Iverson, maybe throwing in Steve Nash and Chris Paul. But, after that, Jason Kidd and Gary Payton both were taller PG's with good length.
As IndianaBasketball pointed out to me many a time (with good reason), Eric Gordon may be a smaller guard, but he has a lot of length. When you tend to look at teams that win championships, they usually have a length advantage somewhere. Dallas had some smaller guards make a big difference, but they had two 7 footers starting next to each other. Dwyane Wade may be only 6'4, but his length is even greater than Eric Gordon's. If you took into account the heights of Boston's starting 5 in 2008, you would have NO idea that wingspan is supposed to be about equal to your body length.
This is a league full of the worlds best basketball players, and you tend to take whatever advantage you can get. People like to name heights and say "well, what difference does it make?". Well, the thing is, you can name heights, but why not name players who are these heights that build evidence towards your case? My point is, their may be a few, but there are not very many. Bill Russell being 6'9 back in his time was not the same as being 6'9 now. Wilt Chamberlain was much taller than most people he faced until Lew Alcindor came into the league. For all of these people talking about Ben Wallace, realize that he was on a team where every other starter had amazing length and size for their position. I am sure you can give me examples to the contrary on a few smaller players being better players, but when it comes down to winning, where are these examples? That is my biggest issue with these posts that are supposedly pointing out that size is overrated.
I dont think ive hurd a scout knocking a small forward for being 6'6...........
Kenneth Faried is maybe 6´6 but his Reach is 9´0
Blake Griffin is listed 6´10 but his reach is 8´9 (three inchs shorter) basically the same reach as Tyreke Evans who plays both guard positions.
I am not comparing them skillwise, because its a skill abyss beetween, but for real, who is truly undersized?
That is for sure. But, Blake Griffin's athleticism and strength are on a different level than even a beast like Faried. It is indeed something I have learned through studying players that all can not be measured on height, and you can see that Faried makes up for his apparent lack of height with an insane reach. However, Griffin has much broader shoulders, and weighs 40 pounds more. I do not care if he only did 6 more reps on the 185 bench press than Faried, Blake Griffin is on another level as far as strength is concerned. These little things all play factors as well. Dennis Rodman was "undersized" for a PF, but he had many things that offset, particularly his length and athletic ability, not to mention that he worked out non stop. DeJuan Blair is someone in a very similar situation to Faried, just also happened to not have any ACL's which lead to injury concerns. But, length is taken into accout, for sure. It just so happens that many of the longer players are also tall.
You can not name me many NBA players without a wingspan longer than their body. You can name me even fewer who have maintained their success that was cast on them as far as where they were picked in the draft whos wingspans were equal to or less than their height. Still, with all things considered, Blake Griffin's standing reach and wing span might be an inch less than average (at least by combine measure), but Faried is 10 pounds lighter than average. Now, the guy is a work horse, and his athletic measurements are similar to Griffin, but, you are going to take the guy who weighs 40 pounds more and dunks on people with wreckless abandon. I like that you used an example, and it brought up a good point, but there are reasons why someone who is 6'3 may indeed be undersized. Give me examples of these slept on "undersized" players, and there is usually a reason behind it. You do not measure ONLY based on height, but you tend to notice trends of what is more and less successful. Besides PG's, many positions are dominated by players with distinct advantages, some of which include length and height, with strength and athleticism playing a part. If you look through the games best players, you will notice things that make them stand out, and you will also notice that many of the winning teams have distinct advantages that usually, in some way, include size.
I wonder how someone like Charles Barkley could dominate the league in rebounding the way he did. If Rodman wasn't in his era, he'd be the best rebounder in that time. I think height is overrated.
My god! I wish I had a faster and longer arm, cause I was littlerally a milisecond away from sending that motherf**ker flying!