MBB 2015-16 Official Roster Released with Heights, Weights, etc

[Troublemaker]

Duke M. Basketball ‏@Duke_MBB (https://twitter.com/Duke_MBB) 19h19 hours ago (https://twitter.com/Duke_MBB/status/621420540264325120)
Check out the @Duke_MBB (https://twitter.com/Duke_MBB) 2015-16 roster at http://goduke.us/1RzXeyL (http://t.co/47tlkskiXv) . Who are you most looking forward to watching play?

[Troublemaker]

I'm thinking Chase Jeter's weight, listed at 195 lbs, is very likely inaccurate here.

He was listed at 239 lbs at the Hoop Summit: http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Chase-Jeter-7262/

[OldPhiKap]

No cinder blocks?

[duke blue brewcrew]

I'm thinking Chase Jeter's weight, listed at 195 lbs, is very likely inaccurate here.

He was listed at 239 lbs at the Hoop Summit: http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Chase-Jeter-7262/

I tend to agree. I find it hard to believe that Grayson outweighs Chase by 10 lbs.

[CarmenWallaceWade]

Other measurements that stuck out to me:

- Amile is up to 225. That is impressive considering how Ingram-like thin he was as a freshman.
- Vrankovic (270) has 20 lbs on Plumlee. Don't know much about this kid. If that's muscle, he's a beast.

[budwom]

Our official Duke heights and weights have often been inconsistent. In a number of cases, I'd see references by K to a certain player gaining 10 or 15 lbs, only to find that
the official roster weights showed something completely different. I suspect they are self reported numbers, not get on the scale and look at the number numbers.

[Neals384]

Who is Brennan Besser?

[BD80]

Who is Brennan Besser?

Per Jason's post in another thread, the team's poet laureate

[BluePanda]

Was Brandon Ingram always 190? He's listed as 198 on ESPN and that's presumably from much earlier... hopefully he's not getting lighter/thinner.

[Saratoga2]

No cinder blocks?

Heights are with shoes on and even then often exaggerated, for instance Grayson is more like 6'2 1/2".

Weights seem wacko. Unless Grayson has gained a few he is more in the 190 range whereas Chase Jeter is clearly closer to 225.

My take is that these official roster heights and weights are not at all reliable. Why don't they just measure the kids with shoes off and weigh them so that the numbers will be of some value?

[Kedsy]

Why don't they just measure the kids with shoes off and weigh them so that the numbers will be of some value?

They don't play the game with their shoes off.

[BigWayne]

Who is Brennan Besser?

Unique enough name you can find him on google pretty easy. Few highlight videos and HS basketball stats show up.

[DukieTiger]

Heights are with shoes on and even then often exaggerated, for instance Grayson is more like 6'2 1/2".

Weights seem wacko. Unless Grayson has gained a few he is more in the 190 range whereas Chase Jeter is clearly closer to 225.

My take is that these official roster heights and weights are not at all reliable. Why don't they just measure the kids with shoes off and weigh them so that the numbers will be of some value?

What makes you think Grayson is closer to 6'2? Just curious. I've stood on a level plane with him and he seemed to be significantly (several inches) taller than me. But then, perhaps I'm exaggerating my own height of 6'0 :).

[lotusland]

Ingram is a G/F but Jones and Kennard are strictly Guards? This makes sense only if you count the wing position as a 3rd guard instead of a small forward.

Also somewhat strange, MP3 and Vrank are Centers while Jeter is a C/F but Obi and Amile are strictly forwards. So Obi will always share the court with either MP3 or Jeter (assuming Vrank red-shirts)? I know, I know - K doesn't have positions. So why post them and differentiate? What we have here is alist of players with unrealible weight and height figures and meaningless positions associated.

[drcharl]

Just nice to see more depth in view of last year's worry about bench shortage.

[timmy c]

Heights are with shoes on and even then often exaggerated, for instance Grayson is more like 6'2 1/2".

Weights seem wacko. Unless Grayson has gained a few he is more in the 190 range whereas Chase Jeter is clearly closer to 225.

My take is that these official roster heights and weights are not at all reliable. Why don't they just measure the kids with shoes off and weigh them so that the numbers will be of some value?

Grayson Measured 6' 4-1/2" in shoes at the Lebron James Skill camp in 2013. It seems plausible to round this to 6-5. I'd take the over if you set a wagering line at 6'2 1/2 in bare feet, but not by much.
5295

[BluePanda]

I'm thinking Chase Jeter's weight, listed at 195 lbs, is very likely inaccurate here.

He was listed at 239 lbs at the Hoop Summit: http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Chase-Jeter-7262/

Looks like they fixed Jeter's weight now to 240 lbs. Nice to see him putting on weight going into the season. Hope Ingram takes advantage of the S&C program.

[BD80]

Looks like they fixed Jeter's weight now to 240 lbs. Nice to see him putting on weight going into the season. Hope Ingram takes advantage of the S&C program.

Wow! He really put on weight FAST!

[BluePanda]

Wow! He really put on weight FAST!

All muscle, you know.

[mattman91]

All muscle, you know.

Thank God for Cookout.

[devildeac]

Thank God for Cookout.

And Backyard BBQ #1 and #2, 'Que Shack and, oh, wait, wrong thread:o.

[jimsumner]

Was Brandon Ingram always 190?.

Nah, he started out at around seven or eight pounds, I suspect. :)

Sorry, I couldn't help myself. But no, I don't think the plan is for Ingram to get lighter.

[Olympic Fan]

I talked to someone at Duke and he said not to pay much attention to the heights and weights listed on the roster -- especially for the freshmen.

They are not based on any recent measurements, but on the heights and weights the incoming frosh were listed by the high schools.

[Henderson]

No cinder blocks?


Our official Duke heights and weights have often been inconsistent. In a number of cases, I'd see references by K to a certain player gaining 10 or 15 lbs, only to find that
the official roster weights showed something completely different. I suspect they are self reported numbers, not get on the scale and look at the number numbers.

How much does a cinder block weigh? (More than a stone? Can you roll a cinder block? If so, does it gather moss? Seems like a complete unknown).

It sure would be convenient if we could use the SACB (Standard American Cinder Block) as a measurement of both height and weight.

[kAzE]

The most interesting piece of info to me here is that Grayson Allen is listed at 6'5"

He looked to me like he was barely 6'3" on the court last season, so if he has indeed sprouted another inch, that could mean big things for both his on court production AND his future as a pro.

EDIT: I'm glad to see that nobody took the #1 jersey . . . as it is well known that a certain Harry Giles III is quite partial to wearing #1 . . .

Still . . . Obi 1 would have been just awesome.

[Henderson]

I talked to someone at Duke and he said not to pay much attention to the heights and weights listed on the roster -- especially for the freshmen.

They are not based on any recent measurements, but on the heights and weights the incoming frosh were listed by the high schools.

How hard is it to put someone on a scale and up against a tape measure? That's what, 10 minutes for the whole team? If you care enough about those figures to post them on the website, why not take the time to get the information right? :::shrug:::

[Indoor66]

How much does a cinder block weigh? (More than a stone? Can you roll a cinder block? If so, does it gather moss? Seems like a complete unknown).

It sure would be convenient if we could use the SACB (Standard American Cinder Block) as a measurement of both height and weight.

You CAN roll cinder blocks but you always end up with dents in the floor. They (measuring cinder blocks) never gather moss. They roll too fast.

[Troublemaker]

Looks like they fixed Jeter's weight now to 240 lbs. Nice to see him putting on weight going into the season. Hope Ingram takes advantage of the S&C program.

Phew! Season saved! I'm only half-kidding. I feel much better about this roster with a 240-lb Chase Jeter than a puny weakling Chase Jeter.


I talked to someone at Duke and he said not to pay much attention to the heights and weights listed on the roster -- especially for the freshmen.

They are not based on any recent measurements, but on the heights and weights the incoming frosh were listed by the high schools.

That makes sense. I suspect Ingram is currently > 200 lbs, as well.


How hard is it to put someone on a scale and up against a tape measure? That's what, 10 minutes for the whole team? If you care enough about those figures to post them on the website, why not take the time to get the information right? :::shrug:::

Seriously. Plus, as far as I can tell, these numbers GoDuke puts up ends up being used by ESPN, Kenpom, etc. It'd be nice to get accurate ones.

[SilkyJ]

I talked to someone at Duke and he said not to pay much attention to the heights and weights listed on the roster -- especially for the freshmen.

They are not based on any recent measurements, but on the heights and weights the incoming frosh were listed by the high schools.


How hard is it to put someone on a scale and up against a tape measure? That's what, 10 minutes for the whole team? If you care enough about those figures to post them on the website, why not take the time to get the information right? :::shrug:::

Thanks, Oly and I share your frustration hendo. My only thought is that perhaps the staff is playing a bit coy with the numbers so that our opponents don't have 100% complete information. Similar concept to not discussing injuries, etc.

[Indoor66]

Thanks, Oly and I share your frustration hendo. My only thought is that perhaps the staff is playing a bit coy with the numbers so that our opponents don't have 100% complete information. Similar concept to not discussing injuries, etc.

Perhaps there was a feeling of need to publish prior to having the team together to measure?

[SilkyJ]

Perhaps there was a feeling of need to publish prior to having the team together to measure?

I interpreted Oly's comments to refer to not just this roster, but all rosters (OF- please correct if wrong). And clearly his comments referred to the whole roster, not just the freshman, so that tells me the staff is being coy for some reason...


I talked to someone at Duke and he said not to pay much attention to the heights and weights listed on the roster -- especially for the freshmen.

They are not based on any recent measurements, but on the heights and weights the incoming frosh were listed by the high schools.

[JNort]

Heights are with shoes on and even then often exaggerated, for instance Grayson is more like 6'2 1/2".

Weights seem wacko. Unless Grayson has gained a few he is more in the 190 range whereas Chase Jeter is clearly closer to 225.

My take is that these official roster heights and weights are not at all reliable. Why don't they just measure the kids with shoes off and weigh them so that the numbers will be of some value?

Hope you are referring to Grayson with shoes off cause in shoes he is most definitely somwhere from 6'4" to 6'5". Why would you want measurements without shoes anyway? Seems pointless

[Saratoga2]

Hope you are referring to Grayson with shoes off cause in shoes he is most definitely somwhere from 6'4" to 6'5". Why would you want measurements without shoes anyway? Seems pointless

Everybody is on the same basis if they are honest. That is why measurements at the NBA draft camp come both ways. Shoes can add from 1 inch to i 1/2 inches or so, but are the guys comfortable in thicker shoes. I am a proponent of measuring height with shoes off and weight (shoes off too) and just giving us the facts. As others have said, how hard can that be?

[JNort]

Everybody is on the same basis if they are honest. That is why measurements at the NBA draft camp come both ways. Shoes can add from 1 inch to i 1/2 inches or so, but are the guys comfortable in thicker shoes. I am a proponent of measuring height with shoes off and weight (shoes off too) and just giving us the facts. As others have said, how hard can that be?

But again it's pointless. They play in shoes so let them wear the shoes they play in so it can be accurate

[mo.st.dukie]

Everybody is on the same basis if they are honest. That is why measurements at the NBA draft camp come both ways. Shoes can add from 1 inch to i 1/2 inches or so, but are the guys comfortable in thicker shoes. I am a proponent of measuring height with shoes off and weight (shoes off too) and just giving us the facts. As others have said, how hard can that be?

The reality is that the 1/2 inch or so difference between one person's shoe and another isn't a big deal at all and doesn't make much of a difference. They play in shoes so when they are actually on the court that 1/2 or so difference actually does exist. We actually are getting the facts because that variation occurs in real life during real games. But again that variation based what shoe is being worn is negligible. If Kevin Durant is 6'9 in shoes, the guy guarding him is going to need a lot more than just an extra half inch in his soles to be able to stop Durant.

[Acymetric]

Cool that they list Marshall as "Gr." instead of "RSr"

[Olympic Fan]

We know now that Dean Smith was a dishonest cheat, but he did make a good point once about Sam Perkins.

A reporter was concerned that Perkins was "just" 6-9. He asked Smith if Perkins was big enough to play center.

Smith pointed out that Perkins had an extraordinary reaching height because of unusually long arms. Smith said height is greatly overrated: "You don't play basketball with the top of your head."

That reminds me of a story from Bill Russell's college days.

San Francisco was getting ready to play Oregon State in the NCAA Tournament and a photographer wanted a posed shot with Russell, listed as 6-8 at that time (he would later be upgraded to 6-9 and later still to 6-10), beside OSU center Swede Halbrook, who had been officially measured at 7-3. They used a lot of posed pictures in those days. The photographer asked Halbrook to hold the ball over his head and he would shoot the smaller Russell reaching for it.

To his amazement, Russell -- standing flatfooted -- reached up and put his hand on TOP of the ball Halbrook was holding at full extention. Russell's head was 5-6 inches below Halbrook, but his reach was longer.

That's why I'm not going to sweat whether Grayson Allen is 6-31/2 or 6-5 ... or any other height. It means nothing.

[jacone21]

One things for sure. Grayson's height sure didn't prevent him from taking it right up in Wisconsin's grill back in April!

[Troublemaker]

It's still the offseason, but I'm starting to get really excited thinking about this team, folks.

We're going for only the 3rd repeat championship since the UCLA dynasty, and we would own 2 of those 3 repeats.

Furthermore, this would be a repeat using a largely different team from the initial champion, the first time that would've happened since UCLA in '72, Walton's sophomore year.

[MChambers]

One things for sure. Grayson's height sure didn't prevent him from taking it right up in Wisconsin's grill back in April!
It was because of his shoes!

[Ichabod Drain]

Everybody is on the same basis if they are honest. That is why measurements at the NBA draft camp come both ways. Shoes can add from 1 inch to i 1/2 inches or so, but are the guys comfortable in thicker shoes. I am a proponent of measuring height with shoes off and weight (shoes off too) and just giving us the facts. As others have said, how hard can that be?

It's not that hard at the NBA combine where they get all the players together and have the same people use the same process to measure them. There's no real incentive for each individual college team to accurately measure and report their players measurements. Other than of course to assist in off season message board discussion.

[rocketeli]

It's not that hard at the NBA combine where they get all the players together and have the same people use the same process to measure them. There's no real incentive for each individual college team to accurately measure and report their players measurements. Other than of course to assist in off season message board discussion.

In fact there is an incentive to be not to accurate--why provide scouting material free of charge to opposing teams? And unless the DBR board is planning to knit the team warm woolen underthings for winter, we don't need to know either.

[brevity]

And unless the DBR board is planning to knit the team warm woolen underthings for winter, we don't need to know either.

Hey, we might. Before we had DBR Chat, there was a DBR sewing circle.

[BigWayne]

We know now that Dean Smith was a dishonest cheat, but he did make a good point once about Sam Perkins.

A reporter was concerned that Perkins was "just" 6-9. He asked Smith if Perkins was big enough to play center.

Smith pointed out that Perkins had an extraordinary reaching height because of unusually long arms. Smith said height is greatly overrated: "You don't play basketball with the top of your head."

That reminds me of a story from Bill Russell's college days.

San Francisco was getting ready to play Oregon State in the NCAA Tournament and a photographer wanted a posed shot with Russell, listed as 6-8 at that time (he would later be upgraded to 6-9 and later still to 6-10), beside OSU center Swede Halbrook, who had been officially measured at 7-3. They used a lot of posed pictures in those days. The photographer asked Halbrook to hold the ball over his head and he would shoot the smaller Russell reaching for it.

To his amazement, Russell -- standing flatfooted -- reached up and put his hand on TOP of the ball Halbrook was holding at full extention. Russell's head was 5-6 inches below Halbrook, but his reach was longer.

That's why I'm not going to sweat whether Grayson Allen is 6-31/2 or 6-5 ... or any other height. It means nothing.

I agree with your fundamental point. That being said, EVERYTHING is on the internet these days so it took me about 30 seconds to see you were close, but not quite 100% on your story.

At the risk of just throwing up fodder for more useless offseason debate.....
5304

[SilkyJ]

That's why I'm not going to sweat whether Grayson Allen is 6-31/2 or 6-5 ... or any other height. It means nothing.

That's an overstatement. What you're post is effectively saying is that standing reach is more important than height, but standing reach is a function of height (as well as arm length), so to say his height "means nothing" is an overstatement. NBAdraft.net shows that (http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Grayson-Allen-71570/) Grayson was measured in 2013 with a 6'6.5" wingspan, which is pretty average for a SG of his height. Of course wingspan is a function of both arm length and shoulder width, so you can't quite translate that to standing reach, but there's a correlation (http://www.nba.com/nuggets/news/2015-nba-draft-combine-recap-anthropometric-stats)


In fact there is an incentive to be not to accurate--why provide scouting material free of charge to opposing teams? And unless the DBR board is planning to knit the team warm woolen underthings for winter, we don't need to know either.

I agree with the first part, and said so upthread!


Thanks, Oly and I share your frustration hendo. My only thought is that perhaps the staff is playing a bit coy with the numbers so that our opponents don't have 100% complete information. Similar concept to not discussing injuries, etc.

As for the second sentence, we don't "need" to know 90% of what we know about the program anyway. Understanding how our team stacks up size wise versus other teams is a normal part of evaluating a matchup, so in that regard I think we do "need" to know.

[MarkD83]

Height, arm length, reaching height....None of that matters to me when you can do this...

5320

and this....

5321

and this...

5322

[Furniture]

https://instagram.com/p/5X_XkJRGbl/

That kid can jump....

[roywhite]

Look like Luke can jump, too.

Duke Basketball Posts Instagram Video Of Freshman Guard Luke Kennard’s Impressive Hops (http://collegespun.com/acc/duke/duke-freshman-guard-luke-kennard-shows-off-impressive-hops-dunk-duke-basketball-blue-devils-acc)

[gumbomoop]

Look like Luke can jump, too.

Duke Basketball Posts Instagram Video Of Freshman Guard Luke Kennard’s Impressive Hops (http://collegespun.com/acc/duke/duke-freshman-guard-luke-kennard-shows-off-impressive-hops-dunk-duke-basketball-blue-devils-acc)

Maybe worth noting, too - although he shoots lefty from outside and FT-line, going to basket he's amphibious. Here he tosses it up and dunks righty.

Haven't thought about it. Do many/most guys with hops dunk confidently with either hand?

If yes, forget it, it's not worth noting, amphibiousness is overrated, and Luke will struggle to see any PT whatsoever this season. If no, he'll probably score 22 ppg, make first-team All-American.

It was always gonna be feast or famine with Luke.

[roywhite]

Maybe worth noting, too - although he shoots lefty from outside and FT-line, going to basket he's amphibious. Here he tosses it up and dunks righty.

Haven't thought about it. Do many/most guys with hops dunk confidently with either hand?

If yes, forget it, it's not worth noting, amphibiousness is overrated, and Luke will struggle to see any PT whatsoever this season. If no, he'll probably score 22 ppg, make first-team All-American.

It was always gonna be feast or famine with Luke.

As we members of the Luke fan club know:
Luke can finish with his right hand or his left hand
Luke can finish from either side, or end a drive with a floater, or draw contact and go to the line, or dish it off.

[Indoor66]

As we members of the Luke fan club know:
Luke can finish with his right hand or his left hand
Luke can finish from either side, or end a drive with a floater, or draw contact and go to the line, or dish it off.

Look in the sky. Is it a man or a plane...

[Olympic Fan]

That's an overstatement. What you're post is effectively saying is that standing reach is more important than height, but standing reach is a function of height (as well as arm length), so to say his height "means nothing" is an overstatement.

Almost exactly 500 years ago, Leonardo da Vinci made a famous drawing that appeared to show that a man's reach equaled his height:

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://i.ytimg.com/vi/f5x3MaZ6fqQ/maxresdefault.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v%3Df5x3MaZ6fqQ&h=1200&w=1920&tbnid=hPn3dFlTIMkLFM:&tbnh=125&tbnw=200&usg=__JqbxqDq-F1npjF5mXfA0HgrNOhA=&docid=zLvVQLSFHfexiM&itg=1

While he was right in general, he's wrong in many particulars -- there are quite a few men and women whose arms are abnormally long or abnormally short (I've heard -- but don't know -- that Marshall's arms are shorter than you'd expect).

I repeat-- the height of the top of a player's head (whether wearing shows of barefoot) means nothing.

A player's wing span and reaching height mean a lot. Yes, as da Vinci pointed out, there is a relationship between height and wing span, but it's not -- a da Vinci drew -- 1 to 1.

If, as you yourself point out, Grayson's wingspan was measured at 6-6.5, that's the number than matters. Whether the top of his head is 6=-2, 6-3, or 6-5 -- with or without shoes -- MEANS NOTHING as far as basketball is concerned.

PS Thanks Big Wayne for posting the picture of Russell and Halbrook ... about a year ago, I spent several hours trying to find it on the internet with no success. I will say look at it closely and you'll see that Halbrook is the one at full extension -- Russell is more relaxed ... it was reported that he put his hand on top the ball ... but maybe the photographer preferred to shoot more balanced picture?

[Kedsy]

I will say look at it closely and you'll see that Halbrook is the one at full extension -- Russell is more relaxed ...

Perception is a funny thing. To me it looks exactly the opposite. The big white guys appears like he could raise the ball another several inches while Russell's arm seems almost fully straight. Since you see it the other way, I have no idea which of our perceptions is accurate.

I guess that's why we measure in cinderblocks round these parts.

[CDu]

Almost exactly 500 years ago, Leonardo da Vinci made a famous drawing that appeared to show that a man's reach equaled his height:

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://i.ytimg.com/vi/f5x3MaZ6fqQ/maxresdefault.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v%3Df5x3MaZ6fqQ&h=1200&w=1920&tbnid=hPn3dFlTIMkLFM:&tbnh=125&tbnw=200&usg=__JqbxqDq-F1npjF5mXfA0HgrNOhA=&docid=zLvVQLSFHfexiM&itg=1

While he was right in general, he's wrong in many particulars -- there are quite a few men and women whose arms are abnormally long or abnormally short (I've heard -- but don't know -- that Marchall's arms are shorter than you'd expect).

I repeat-- the height of the top of a player's head (whether wearing shows of barefoot) means nothing.

A player's wing span and reaching height mean a lot. Yes, as da Vinci pointed out, there is a relationship between height and wing span, but it's not -- a da Vinci drew -- 1 to 1.

If, as you yourself point out, Grayson's wingspan was measured at 6-6.5, that's the number than matters. Whether the top of his head is 6=-2, 6-3, or 6-5 -- with or without shoes -- MEANS NOTHING as far as basketball is concerned.

PS Thanks Big Wayne for posting the picture of Russell and Halbrook ... about a year ago, I spent several hours trying to find it on the internet with no success. I will say look at it closely and you'll see that Halbrook is the one at full extension -- Russell is more relaxed ... it was reported that he put his hand on top the ball ... but maybe the photographer preferred to shoot more balanced picture?

I disagree. The height matters almost exactly as much as the wingspan. The two measures work together to determine a player's value in terms of length (standing reach). If a player had a 6'4" wingspan but was 5'8"? That is still an effectively shorter player than a player with a 6'3" wingspan but is 6'3". Wingspan has value on its own (covering court laterally), but that doesn't mean that height means nothing. The two are almost equally important (with wingspan being slightly more important). Which is why folks measure both at the combine.

[CDu]

Perception is a funny thing. To me it looks exactly the opposite. The big white guys appears like he could raise the ball another several inches while Russell's arm seems almost fully straight. Since you see it the other way, I have no idea which of our perceptions is accurate.

I guess that's why we measure in cinderblocks round these parts.

I agree with you.

For one thing, it looks like Halbrook is reaching out to his right and has a slightly bent arm, whereas Russell really seems to be extending (notice the difference in his shoulders as compared with Halbrook whose shoulders look almost level). For another, it looks like the height difference is much less than 5-6" (i.e., Halbrook is probably not really 7'3", but probably more like 7'0"). And Russell's hand isn't on top of the ball either, but rather just even with Halbrook's.

[Olympic Fan]

I agree with you.

For one thing, it looks like Halbrook is reaching out to his right and has a slightly bent arm, whereas Russell really seems to be extending (notice the difference in his shoulders as compared with Halbrook whose shoulders look almost level). For another, it looks like the height difference is much less than 5-6" (i.e., Halbrook is probably not really 7'3", but probably more like 7'0"). And Russell's hand isn't on top of the ball either, but rather just even with Halbrook's.

Actually, Halbrook was celebrated because he was publically measured at 7-3 ... that was his height in the NBA too.

I admit tat perceptions differ, but it also looks to me like Halbrook is straight up, while Russell is bending away from Halbrook at the waist.

I admit that my perception might be shaped by the way the story was reported in 1955. As reported in the San Francisco Chronicle (14 March, 1955) and the Los Angeles Times and cited by author Aram Goudsouzian in King of the Court: Bill Russell and the Basketball Revolution:

"Upon arrival in Corvallis, Halbrook and Russell posed for a photographer. Halbrook held a basketball at the top of his outstretched arm. Then Russell reached up and his fingers cupped the top of the ball. 'And as our players later said, we had beaten Oregon State right there,' [San Francisco coach Phil] Woolpert told Goodsouzian.

[CDu]

Actually, Halbrook was celebrated because he was publically measured at 7-3 ... that was his height in the NBA too.

I admit tat perceptions differ, but it also looks to me like Halbrook is straight up, while Russell is bending away from Halbrook at the waist.

I admit that my perception might be shaped by the way the story was reported in 1955. As reported in the San Francisco Chronicle (14 March, 1955) and the Los Angeles Times and cited by author Aram Goudsouzian in King of the Court: Bill Russell and the Basketball Revolution:

"Upon arrival in Corvallis, Halbrook and Russell posed for a photographer. Halbrook held a basketball at the top of his outstretched arm. Then Russell reached up and his fingers cupped the top of the ball. 'And as our players later said, we had beaten Oregon State right there,' [San Francisco coach Phil] Woolpert told Goodsouzian.

Yes, Halbrook is standing straight up. That is precisely why I say he isn't reaching as high as possible. When you stretch your arm as high as possible with one arm, your body leans such that your right shoulder (if using your right arm to reach) is higher than your left shoulder. So you will look like you are leaning to your left.

In the picture, Russell is reaching to his full extent with his left arm, making it look like he is leaning to his right and away from Halbrook. Halbrook, who is not reaching up as high as he can (see the bent arm and not straight up reach), has shoulders that appear in line. If he was reaching as high as he could, his right shoulder would be higher than his left, and he would look like he was leaning away from Russell.

[tfk53]

Yes, Halbrook is standing straight up. That is precisely why I say he isn't reaching as high as possible. When you stretch your arm as high as possible with one arm, your body leans such that your right shoulder (if using your right arm to reach) is higher than your left shoulder. So you will look like you are leaning to your left.

In the picture, Russell is reaching to his full extent with his left arm, making it look like he is leaning to his right and away from Halbrook. Halbrook, who is not reaching up as high as he can (see the bent arm and not straight up reach), has shoulders that appear in line. If he was reaching as high as he could, his right shoulder would be higher than his left, and he would look like he was leaning away from Russell.

You nailed this perfectly IMO, CDu. Halbrook's upper arm is at about 60-70 degree angle from the horizontal while Russell's arm is about 80-85 degrees.

Talking about Russell brings back my youth when, as a young Celtics fan, watched Russell and the other Celtic greats play on Sunday TV - about the only time you could watch the NBA, at least if you were not in an NBA city.

One other point about a player's height - the part that really matters to a player is the height to their shoulders. Variations in neck height and head size occur but gaining an inch because of a bigger head does nothing for a player.

[OldPhiKap]

Look in the sky. Is it a man or a plane...

It's a frog.


(Not plane, or bird, or even frog. It's just little old me -- Underdog!)

[SilkyJ]

A player's wing span and reaching height mean a lot. Yes, as da Vinci pointed out, there is a relationship between height and wing span, but it's not -- a da Vinci drew -- 1 to 1.

If, as you yourself point out, Grayson's wingspan was measured at 6-6.5, that's the number than matters. Whether the top of his head is 6=-2, 6-3, or 6-5 -- with or without shoes -- MEANS NOTHING as far as basketball is concerned.


We're quibbling a bit, but I'm sorry, you're contradicting yourself. To say "there is a relationship between height and wing span" means that, by definition, height means something, when it comes to a player's reach. No one here said its 1:1, but even you said that there's a correlation.

If you take the data in the link I sent for the 2015 combine you'll see there is significant positive correlation between height and wingspan, as well as height and standing reach. Said differently, taller people tend to have longer arms and shorter people tend to have shorter arms. This isn't revolutionary news, and of course, some people always have shorter or longer arms than you expect, but I'm not sure why you're so insistent that height means nothing. Its certainly not the end all be all, but its a factor.

(I have no idea how to post charts from excel into this board, but if you graph height vs reach, the trendline is distinctly up and to the right)

[NovaScotian]

EDIT: I'm glad to see that nobody took the #1 jersey . . . as it is well known that a certain Harry Giles III is quite partial to wearing #1 . . .

Still . . . Obi 1 would have been just awesome.

this deserves some more love

[kAzE]

Actually, Halbrook was celebrated because he was publically measured at 7-3 ... that was his height in the NBA too.

I admit tat perceptions differ, but it also looks to me like Halbrook is straight up, while Russell is bending away from Halbrook at the waist.

I admit that my perception might be shaped by the way the story was reported in 1955. As reported in the San Francisco Chronicle (14 March, 1955) and the Los Angeles Times and cited by author Aram Goudsouzian in King of the Court: Bill Russell and the Basketball Revolution:

"Upon arrival in Corvallis, Halbrook and Russell posed for a photographer. Halbrook held a basketball at the top of his outstretched arm. Then Russell reached up and his fingers cupped the top of the ball. 'And as our players later said, we had beaten Oregon State right there,' [San Francisco coach Phil] Woolpert told Goodsouzian.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=257270

Here's a very interesting post on another hoops message board with detailed measurements for some of the NBA's greatest players. Bill Russell's "actual" height was 6-9.63, but his wingspan was 7-4, and his hand length was 10.5 inches, the largest of anyone listed there with the exception of Shaq.

I really wish they had tracked the blocked shot statistic for the entirety of Bill Russell's NBA career. Not that I was around when he played, but I have a strong hunch that he would have challenged for the career leader in blocks per game and total blocks, despite playing 255 fewer career games than the all-time leader in blocks, Hakeem Olajuwon. The main reason being that the athletes in the NBA were quite inferior during those days. (Exhibit A: Bill Russell averaged 22.5 rebounds for his CAREER) I would not be surprised if it were determined that Bill Russell had 4000+ career blocks. He was a force of nature for that era in the NBA.

[SilkyJ]

Ingram is a G/F but Jones and Kennard are strictly Guards? This makes sense only if you count the wing position as a 3rd guard instead of a small forward.

This point was largely overlooked in this thread, and at the risk of turning this into a minutes debate focused on Kennard, I think its potentially meaningful that Ingram is listed as a G/F. He really does look rail thin in the recent DBP video and just about every other photo/video we've seen, so it wouldn't surprise me if we use him on the wing and backcourt, and never in the post. He seems more likely to play the 2 than the 4 from what I've seen. Reminds me a bit of Shaun Livingston who was 6'6/180, but played PG. Maybe Ingram is just a really long & light 2-guard, who can also play some SF. He has the handles and skills of a guard afterall. Maybe he doesn't need to bulk up that much like we are all clamoring for--even today Livingston is only 190lbs. Of course, as has been discussed ad nauseum, if Ingram does not play at the 4 at all, this puts the squeeze on big time on at least one of Grayson/Jones/Kennard.

[SilkyJ]

Also, Ingram's DBP intro interview (with some highlights), was posted over in the 2015 Recruiting thread (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYMEY1orR8A). Go to 2:10 and check out the vertical! Cinder blocks aside, how high is one of those tools/machines? 12 feet? He got to the tippie-top!

[Bay Area Duke Fan]

I really wish they had tracked the blocked shot statistic for the entirety of Bill Russell's NBA career. Not that I was around when he played, but I have a strong hunch that he would have challenged for the career leader in blocks per game and total blocks, despite playing 255 fewer career games than the all-time leader in blocks, Hakeem Olajuwon. The main reason being that the athletes in the NBA were quite inferior during those days. (Exhibit A: Bill Russell averaged 22.5 rebounds for his CAREER) I would not be surprised if it were determined that Bill Russell had 4000+ career blocks. He was a force of nature for that era in the NBA.

Bill Russell was the greatest winner in team sports ever. 11 NBA championships in 13 years and two NCAA championships.

The only American athlete close to that record was quarterback Otto Graham, who led the Cleveland Browns to 7 championships in 10 years.

[luburch]

Bill Russell was the greatest winner in team sports ever. 11 NBA championships in 13 years and two NCAA championships.

The only American athlete close to that record was quarterback Otto Graham, who led the Cleveland Browns to 7 championships in 10 years.

I know it's an individual sport, but Michael Phelps has had a similarly impressive events to wins ratio.

[lotusland]

This point was largely overlooked in this thread, and at the risk of turning this into a minutes debate focused on Kennard, I think its potentially meaningful that Ingram is listed as a G/F. He really does look rail thin in the recent DBP video and just about every other photo/video we've seen, so it wouldn't surprise me if we use him on the wing and backcourt, and never in the post. He seems more likely to play the 2 than the 4 from what I've seen. Reminds me a bit of Shaun Livingston who was 6'6/180, but played PG. Maybe Ingram is just a really long & light 2-guard, who can also play some SF. He has the handles and skills of a guard afterall. Maybe he doesn't need to bulk up that much like we are all clamoring for--even today Livingston is only 190lbs. Of course, as has been discussed ad nauseum, if Ingram does not play at the 4 at all, this puts the squeeze on big time on at least one of Grayson/Jones/Kennard.
Actually I think the wing position is considered a guard on this list so G/F means 3/4. Likewise Jones is listed strictly as G but that likely means 2/3.

[SilkyJ]

Actually I think the wing position is considered a guard on this list so G/F means 3/4. Likewise Jones is listed strictly as G but that likely means 2/3.

Um, no. According to that logic, guards would play 1-3, fowards would play ONLY the 4, and centers would be 5s. There's a reason there is a traditional Small Forward (what I believe you are referring to as the "wing position" and often known as the 3) and a Power Forward (or 4). As a quick example, Justise was listed as a forward last year and started at the 3 for the first few months, while Amile started at the 4. According to your logic he should have been listed as a G or G/F, but he wasn't.

[Kedsy]

This point was largely overlooked in this thread, and at the risk of turning this into a minutes debate focused on Kennard, I think its potentially meaningful that Ingram is listed as a G/F. He really does look rail thin in the recent DBP video and just about every other photo/video we've seen, so it wouldn't surprise me if we use him on the wing and backcourt, and never in the post. He seems more likely to play the 2 than the 4 from what I've seen. Reminds me a bit of Shaun Livingston who was 6'6/180, but played PG. Maybe Ingram is just a really long & light 2-guard, who can also play some SF. He has the handles and skills of a guard afterall. Maybe he doesn't need to bulk up that much like we are all clamoring for--even today Livingston is only 190lbs. Of course, as has been discussed ad nauseum, if Ingram does not play at the 4 at all, this puts the squeeze on big time on at least one of Grayson/Jones/Kennard.

This is a good point. To complicate it further, I think whether Brandon plays the 3 or the 4 will largely depend on who is most ready among Luke, Chase, and Sean. I think at least one and probably two of those three guys might not play very much. If the 8th and 9th guys are Chase and Sean, though, then Brandon will be defending PFs a lot more than you're suggesting (also possibly a lot more than may be wise, but I suppose that remains to be seen).

[lotusland]

Um, no. According to that logic, guards would play 1-3, fowards would play ONLY the 4, and centers would be 5s. There's a reason there is a traditional Small Forward (what I believe you are referring to as the "wing position" and often known as the 3) and a Power Forward (or 4). As a quick example, Justise was listed as a forward last year and started at the 3 for the first few months, while Amile started at the 4. According to your logic he should have been listed as a G or G/F, but he wasn't.

OK but Jones, Allen and Kennarrd, along with Thorton, are listed strictly as guards so, by your logic, only 2 of those guys will play at any one time and Ingram will also get some of those minutes. My position is that, like the heights and weights listed, not a lot of consideration was given to what is listed. If I had to take these pre-season listings as written in stone then Ingram as 3/4 and Allen, Jones and Kennard as 2/3 is more viable. I'd still be puzzled that Obi is strictly a 4 instead of 4/5. Instead I'm just going with K doesn't have positions and these labels are meaningless😊.

[BD80]

Look like Luke can jump, too.

Duke Basketball Posts Instagram Video Of Freshman Guard Luke Kennard’s Impressive Hops (http://collegespun.com/acc/duke/duke-freshman-guard-luke-kennard-shows-off-impressive-hops-dunk-duke-basketball-blue-devils-acc)

There go all the Jon Scheyer comparisons swirling down the drain ...

For those obsessing over measurables, y'all are ignoring a rather critical stat: Shoe Size.

No, not how thick the shoe soles are, but how long are the feet? A player rarely stands flatfooted when reaching to shoot, block or rebound, he will rise up on his toes.

Further, top of the head height does matter, particularly when obstructing the line of sight of a player with the ball. Which brings in the "returning to prominence" HOH (height of hair) measurement.

And for those of us old enough to remember Thurman's last-minute 3-pointer over Antonio Lang, the manicure gradient can be crucial. I understand the more progressive teams are gauging the results of team manicurists to maximize effective reach.

[SilkyJ]

OK but Jones, Allen and Kennarrd, along with Thorton, are listed strictly as guards so, by your logic, only 2 of those guys will play at any one time and Ingram will also get some of those minutes....I'd still be puzzled that Obi is strictly a 4 instead of 4/5. Instead I'm just going with K doesn't have positions and these labels are meaningless😊.

No, that's not my logic. You said the 3 spot is basically "guard only," I'm not saying its "forward only," I'm saying it can be flexible. Which we all know is true, b/c K loves 3 guard lineups, but last year also played Justise at the 3. Obi is another great example: he's listed as a Forward, but I expect he'll play most of his time at the 5. The landlord was listed as a F, but obviously collected his rent exclusively from the 5 spot.


This is a good point. To complicate it further, I think whether Brandon plays the 3 or the 4 will largely depend on who is most ready among Luke, Chase, and Sean. I think at least one and probably two of those three guys might not play very much. If the 8th and 9th guys are Chase and Sean, though, then Brandon will be defending PFs a lot more than you're suggesting (also possibly a lot more than may be wise, but I suppose that remains to be seen).

That's true, its all a bit of a circular reference, though I see it more as a function of Chase & Sean's readiness:

One on hand: If Brandon can/can't play the 4, then one of Sean/Chase (or maybe Marshall) will/won't be playing as much
On the other hand: If Sean/Chase are/aren't ready to play, then Brandon won't/will spend meaningful time at the 4

I'm not sure which hand is the dominant one (bad pun...sorry), i.e. will we press Sean/Chase into service even they aren't ready b/c Brandon can't handle the 4 or might we press Brandon into service b/c Sean/Chase simply aren't ready. My hope is that Chase is just ready to go. He seems to be the only one on the team that's truly comfortable scoring with his back to the basket. Amile has some moves, but isn't a natural back to the basket scorer.

[flyingdutchdevil]

No, that's not my logic. You said the 3 spot is basically "guard only," I'm not saying its "forward only," I'm saying it can be flexible. Which we all know is true, b/c K loves 3 guard lineups, but last year also played Justise at the 3. Obi is another great example: he's listed as a Forward, but I expect he'll play most of his time at the 5. The landlord was listed as a F, but obviously collected his rent exclusively from the 5 spot.



That's true, its all a bit of a circular reference, though I see it more as a function of Chase & Sean's readiness:

One on hand: If Brandon can/can't play the 4, then one of Sean/Chase (or maybe Marshall) will/won't be playing as much
On the other hand: If Sean/Chase are/aren't ready to play, then Brandon won't/will spend meaningful time at the 4

I'm not sure which hand is the dominant one (bad pun...sorry), i.e. will we press Sean/Chase into service even they aren't ready b/c Brandon can't handle the 4 or might we press Brandon into service b/c Sean/Chase simply aren't ready. My hope is that Chase is just ready to go. He seems to be the only one on the team that's truly comfortable scoring with his back to the basket. Amile has some moves, but isn't a natural back to the basket scorer.

This post sums up exactly how I feel about the upcoming season: I know very little about the line-ups, the personnel, the readiness of our freshman, the readiness of Obi, the style of play, the defensive intensity, etc etc etc.

The question marks are piling up. I love the summer (you love it more when you live the in the Northeast), but I'm also looking forward to November to get these questions answered.

[yancem]

This point was largely overlooked in this thread, and at the risk of turning this into a minutes debate focused on Kennard, I think its potentially meaningful that Ingram is listed as a G/F. He really does look rail thin in the recent DBP video and just about every other photo/video we've seen, so it wouldn't surprise me if we use him on the wing and backcourt, and never in the post. He seems more likely to play the 2 than the 4 from what I've seen. Reminds me a bit of Shaun Livingston who was 6'6/180, but played PG. Maybe Ingram is just a really long & light 2-guard, who can also play some SF. He has the handles and skills of a guard afterall. Maybe he doesn't need to bulk up that much like we are all clamoring for--even today Livingston is only 190lbs. Of course, as has been discussed ad nauseum, if Ingram does not play at the 4 at all, this puts the squeeze on big time on at least one of Grayson/Jones/Kennard.

I agree that he is rail thin but I remember people were saying that Jon Henson was rail thin and wouldn't be able to play the 4 as a freshman. Ol'Roy either thought so also or promised Henson perimeter minutes because he played (ineffectually btw) the 3 the first half of the season. It wasn't until Ol'Roy finally moved him to the 4 that he started to thrive. Now I realize that Ingram has much better perimeter skills than Henson which voids part of my comparison but my point is that both are very skinny but very springy. I think that Ingram may struggle defensively holding position in the post against some 4's but he will be an absolute match-up nightmare at the other end of the court for most 4's. Actually, after watching several youtube videos (you the end all be all of scouting information) the player he reminds me most of is Anthony Davis. Ingram isn't as tall and is certainly thinner but they are both have guard skills with forwards height. Both are very athletic and have great defensive timing for blocking shots. Ingram really has some good post moves, the only question is will his quickness allow him to overcome his strength limitations.



No, that's not my logic. You said the 3 spot is basically "guard only," I'm not saying its "forward only," I'm saying it can be flexible. Which we all know is true, b/c K loves 3 guard lineups, but last year also played Justise at the 3. Obi is another great example: he's listed as a Forward, but I expect he'll play most of his time at the 5. The landlord was listed as a F, but obviously collected his rent exclusively from the 5 spot.

That's true, its all a bit of a circular reference, though I see it more as a function of Chase & Sean's readiness:

One on hand: If Brandon can/can't play the 4, then one of Sean/Chase (or maybe Marshall) will/won't be playing as much
On the other hand: If Sean/Chase are/aren't ready to play, then Brandon won't/will spend meaningful time at the 4

I'm not sure which hand is the dominant one (bad pun...sorry), i.e. will we press Sean/Chase into service even they aren't ready b/c Brandon can't handle the 4 or might we press Brandon into service b/c Sean/Chase simply aren't ready. My hope is that Chase is just ready to go. He seems to be the only one on the team that's truly comfortable scoring with his back to the basket. Amile has some moves, but isn't a natural back to the basket scorer.


I think Ingram's abilities are kind of mute as to if he plays the 3 or 4. I think his position will be almost entirely dictated by the readiness of the other players. If Kennard is more ready than Jeter/Obi or Jefferson doesn't expand his offensive game, he plays more 4. If Jeter/Obi are more ready or Jefferson develops a consistent 10-15' shot, then he will play more at the 3. I guess my point is he will get his minutes, we just have to see who steps up to claim theirs before we know where he will play.

[NSDukeFan]

I agree that he is rail thin but I remember people were saying that Jon Henson was rail thin and wouldn't be able to play the 4 as a freshman. Ol'Roy either thought so also or promised Henson perimeter minutes because he played (ineffectually btw) the 3 the first half of the season. It wasn't until Ol'Roy finally moved him to the 4 that he started to thrive. Now I realize that Ingram has much better perimeter skills than Henson which voids part of my comparison but my point is that both are very skinny but very springy. I think that Ingram may struggle defensively holding position in the post against some 4's but he will be an absolute match-up nightmare at the other end of the court for most 4's. Actually, after watching several youtube videos (you the end all be all of scouting information) the player he reminds me most of is Anthony Davis. Ingram isn't as tall and is certainly thinner but they are both have guard skills with forwards height. Both are very athletic and have great defensive timing for blocking shots. Ingram really has some good post moves, the only question is will his quickness allow him to overcome his strength limitations.

I think too much is being made of Ingram's size. The guy can play, is going to play and will get bigger and stronger as he gets older, as we all do. I don't see the Davis comparison that well because of the defensive freak that Davis was and is, but agree that while Ingram's weight may allow him to be pushed around some down low until he gains some more strength, his length can certainly be an asset defensively.




I think Ingram's abilities are kind of mute as to if he plays the 3 or 4. I think his position will be almost entirely dictated by the readiness of the other players. If Kennard is more ready than Jeter/Obi or Jefferson doesn't expand his offensive game, he plays more 4. If Jeter/Obi are more ready or Jefferson develops a consistent 10-15' shot, then he will play more at the 3. I guess my point is he will get his minutes, we just have to see who steps up to claim theirs before we know where he will play.
I agree with most of this post, but (along with Newton_14 and a couple others, I believe) feel that Amile doesn't even need to add a jumper (though that would be great) to be an effective offensive player. He has some nice post moves, nice moves on the baseline, can drive a bit, can make good decisions from the elbow and/or high post and tends to choose a very high percentage. I believe that if he looks for his offence more, he can be a very good offensive player, whether he adds a jumper or not. Improved free throw shooting would be more important for his success this year, IMO.

[Saratoga2]

I think too much is being made of Ingram's size. The guy can play, is going to play and will get bigger and stronger as he gets older, as we all do. I don't see the Davis comparison that well because of the defensive freak that Davis was and is, but agree that while Ingram's weight may allow him to be pushed around some down low until he gains some more strength, his length can certainly be an asset defensively. I agree that he is going to play a lot provided he doesn't get injured along the way. Which position makes the most sense for him and the team is the discussion. With about 800 pounds of centers available, we will probably see Sean as the primary, Marshall as the secondary and Antonio in limited segments. Amile is very good defensively and has decent inside moves so is probably going to see the most time at PF although Chase has a size advantage and seems to have somewhat better moves around the basket, so will get his time as well. Since Derryck will be the primary PG with perhaps backup from Grayson and Luke, that really leaves only the 2 and 3 spots for Brandon by my way of thinking. Clearly Brandon needs to fill out and gain strength, but that will no doubt take at least this year to accomplish. We have Matt, Luke and Grayson who also fit the 2, 3 so they can share the 10 minutes that Brandon is not in the game plus the 40 minutes availaable at the 2 slot.



I agree with most of this post, but (along with Newton_14 and a couple others, I believe) feel that Amile doesn't even need to add a jumper (though that would be great) to be an effective offensive player. He has some nice post moves, nice moves on the baseline, can drive a bit, can make good decisions from the elbow and/or high post and tends to choose a very high percentage. I believe that if he looks for his offence more, he can be a very good offensive player, whether he adds a jumper or not. Improved free throw shooting would be more important for his success this year, IMO. I also believe that Amile will be very valuable this year on both ends of the floor. He and Matt Jones are probably the best defenders on the Duke team and both can and do make solid contributions on offense.

[yancem]

I think too much is being made of Ingram's size. The guy can play, is going to play and will get bigger and stronger as he gets older, as we all do. I don't see the Davis comparison that well because of the defensive freak that Davis was and is, but agree that while Ingram's weight may allow him to be pushed around some down low until he gains some more strength, his length can certainly be an asset defensively.

I agree that it is unlikely that Ingram has quite the impact on the defensive end as Davis (he lacks the size and Davis is just that good) but in watching videos (again the best if not only way to judge skill and ability :D) he seems to have excellent defensive anticipation and timing and some of the plays he makes (obviously against HS talent, I understand) are reminiscent of, to me at least, of Davis.



I agree with most of this post, but (along with Newton_14 and a couple others, I believe) feel that Amile doesn't even need to add a jumper (though that would be great) to be an effective offensive player. He has some nice post moves, nice moves on the baseline, can drive a bit, can make good decisions from the elbow and/or high post and tends to choose a very high percentage. I believe that if he looks for his offence more, he can be a very good offensive player, whether he adds a jumper or not. Improved free throw shooting would be more important for his success this year, IMO.

I think that is a fair point. Jefferson doesn't necessarily have to develop an outside shot but I do think he does have to be more aggressive offensively or he risks becoming somewhat lost in the shuffle. He'll be a senior captain so he will get rotation minutes at the least, but his minutes went down as Winslow demonstrated that he could play the 4 defensively while also being an offensive mismatch. I think that Ingram could end up doing the same thing. At least if Kennard is ready defensively and offers more offense than Jefferson.

[Indoor66]

I agree that he is rail thin but I remember people were saying that Jon Henson was rail thin and wouldn't be able to play the 4 as a freshman. Ol'Roy either thought so also or promised Henson perimeter minutes because he played (ineffectually btw) the 3 the first half of the season. It wasn't until Ol'Roy finally moved him to the 4 that he started to thrive. Now I realize that Ingram has much better perimeter skills than Henson which voids part of my comparison but my point is that both are very skinny but very springy. I think that Ingram may struggle defensively holding position in the post against some 4's but he will be an absolute match-up nightmare at the other end of the court for most 4's. Actually, after watching several youtube videos (you the end all be all of scouting information) the player he reminds me most of is Anthony Davis. Ingram isn't as tall and is certainly thinner but they are both have guard skills with forwards height. Both are very athletic and have great defensive timing for blocking shots. Ingram really has some good post moves, the only question is will his quickness allow him to overcome his strength limitations.





I think Ingram's abilities are kind of mute as to if he plays the 3 or 4. I think his position will be almost entirely dictated by the readiness of the other players. If Kennard is more ready than Jeter/Obi or Jefferson doesn't expand his offensive game, he plays more 4. If Jeter/Obi are more ready or Jefferson develops a consistent 10-15' shot, then he will play more at the 3. I guess my point is he will get his minutes, we just have to see who steps up to claim theirs before we know where he will play.

I don't think this means what you think it means. You might try moot, then the sentence makes sense.

[Dukehky]

Brennan Basser, kid out of Chicago. I assumed his parents were really rich, since I know he didn't have an older sibling on the team.

I secretly hate every walk on under the age of 30, because of the pipe dream that I had once upon a time that I could ride the pine pony for the Devils if I had worked super hard. But, I did not. That kid would wipe the floor with me... and I thought I was hot **** because I scored some in high school games.

Still though. Jelly is as jelly does.

[NSDukeFan]

I don't think this means what you think it means. You might try moot, then the sentence makes sense.

He might sneak up on some people.