Originally Posted by
flyingdutchdevil
Weight is a weird thing. It is solid measure of strength and readiness.
But players can have very minimal muscle development and still weight a lot. It's in the bones. Bone density is ~ 1.75 g/cm3 while muscle is only 1.06g/cm3. And looking at Ingram, he's got a solid bone frame (those shoulders are pretty broad. And that's a product of bone formation, not muscle).
Unfortunately, there isn't a measurement for players that measures muscle mass. We can only use weight (which is a combination of muscle, bone, fat, organ size, etc) and visuals. Weight-wise, Ingram is on the light-side but it's not shocking. Visually, he is the skinniest basketball player I've ever seen. But, muscle length is more important than muscle thickness (he's got a ridiculous 7'3" wingspan), so maybe Ingram is much stronger than he looks.
Biebs, Et al.,
this has the makings as a serious contender to the cinder block discussion from years past....what else is there to discuss on hot summer nights.
"I wanted it to be in my hands," Roach said of his game-sealing drive. "I wanted to take—I wanted that moment."
"Definitely was a bit personal for me," Roach added. "I mean, what happened last year, obviously, but just wanted to come out here and do anything I can to get this win, and we did that." Duke-Carolina, Cameron Indoor, Feb. 4th 2023